Of course you cite the most OP 13.7 in the game when its literal twin is 14.0. XD
Mig-29SMT is among the fastest jets combined with R-77s is a lethal combination.
Even running R-73 as backup to scare a furball is potent.
I cant imagine someone claiming seriously that 120 is worse vs 77-1
especially when even worst 120 platform does air kills better compared on su30 (Harrier)
1 Like
77 and 77-1 has same problem on both, they lose so much energy when enemy just turns 90 on left or right, that you dont even need chaffs to get rid of em.
You right, sorry, it is worse than the F-16C, worse than the Su-27SM, than the Gripens, J-10A, M2K-5F, F-16AM, maybe even worse than the Su-34. But sure, lets rise one of the worst FOX-3 carrier to 13.7
In 13.7 there is no furballs
1 Like
If you want to see every 120A upgraded to a 120B and the Bs to C-5S, sure.
But they are, for close range it turns better, and for BVR it is faster
120A and 120B are the same missile btw
1 Like
yeah, in paper it should “turn” better, still it is a lot more easyer to get rid of compared to 120 on close range.
yeah faster on bvr range where they are still lacklusters while they lose so much energy and feels like they got chute behind em , compared on 120’s
Only threat still on 20km+ ranges is 120 while playing, if you dont fly dead straight ignoring rwr
I do not believe that adding R-77-1s to the SMT would push it to 14.0.
Mainly due to the fact that in the Su-30SM, you can shoot off HALF your missiles, and still have MORE than the SMT at spawn…
3 Likes
It does turn better, try it yourself against a buddy of yours, 120 is easyer to get rid bc it will not turn in on time.
On pure BVR they are the best at the moment, you can argue that if the enemy is not braindead he will evade it, but that applies for every missile in game
Thats just blatantly wrong
2 Likes
I have, and I do 120’s perform a lot better and consistent vs 77-1
77-1 and 77 poses no threat even on su 30 over 20km away.
last 3 days , 2 times killed by 77-1 and 1 time 77 ( what was when I got first struck by 120 and that finished me off :D )
It’s fun what they should be on paper, but they are still from different universes on game.
77-1 still loses to 120 even when both fired on 10km and both planes turn 90 and chaff. f16 lived and su30 was burning wreck
1 Like
True I forgot that Chinese fox 3 SD-10
They are on paper and in the game, the last part is just an stupid quote, i can show you if you have time
And AAM-4, and MICA the first 20km
No. R77 is fun.
I swear to god people complaining about aim 120 have never touched the missile.
1 Like
Pl12, mica, r77-1 qnd aam4. All of these are more maneuverable whilst having comparable range, with the exception of mica which is the hardest to notch missile and the most maneuverable but its range is quite a bit worse.
Range is not as good as maneuversbility when you have this much range already, 90% of fights happen 25< at which these missile outperfom amraam imo.
1 Like
Did I complain?
I just noted, that if that 77-1 is 14.0 missile so is 120.
Ingame it performs still better VS 77-1 , no matter what “paper” stats say.
77-1 still loses energy just like 77 , when enemy you are shootin turns 90 on left.
and in 20km shots , you dont even need chaffs to get rid of that 77-1 while turning hard left or right , now try same against 120.
77 and 77-1 is still a missile having a parachute installed them. Works wonder when enemy is just flying straight and doing nothing to avoid it.
finally, someone with sense
because people here act like AMRAAM are undefeatable compared to R-77-1 when its reality it all the same.
2 Likes
This
That’s because 90% of the people on the forum are forum warriors, and very few do the exhausting work of actually opening the game and testing it themselves.
1 Like
There’s also a nice lil charts and breakown on your superior 77-1 and why 120 is still better.
And no wonder why it feels like pulling chute behind that missile.
And after testing some people on russian bias glasses are trying to say it is better in game performance vs 120
1 Like