You are right, should not be so selfish because I can just GE out of a default missile when others actually have to grind out an inferior missile.
1 Like
As long as you see the potantiel problem then its fine.
Because most of them doesnt like to see it.
1 Like
I don’t know that many people would agree… the R-60M has been a universal constant for the most part. Easily one-flared and chases afterburners from F-14s or Phantoms pretty well from 10 degrees rear aspect.
Pretending I suddenly lose all concept of the “meta” because I have only done a couple dozen matches in the newest top tier (of which the only new addition is the R-73)… is … interesting
1 Like
Perhaps I remember incorrectly, but this is a manual for students and novice MiG-29 pilots and it does not tell us about the technical capabilities of the aircraft, but only instructs us on the correct implementation of piloting techniques.
I respect that, but the R60 has probably been the most touched missile in the history of WT and will continue to be as newer more capable jets are added to the lower BRs.
I just would like the option for the Mig29s capable that’s all. They carried them with R73s for a reason. They can’t be all that useless right? Even the Russians after the fall of the Soviet Union.
no, it’s just Mig-29 9-13 who can carry R-77
I thought the Zhuk of the SMT can fire R77s at two differing targets at a time?
4 targets. 2 targets on N019M Topaz
So the 9-19 can carry them, cool. I thought you meant only the 9-13 can carry the R-77.
These maneuvers are not the limitations of the available performance of course, but they give us datapoints for testing purposes. We can see if it is losing speed properly, or holding on to it when it shouldn’t in more dynamic maneuvers. Doesn’t hurt to test.
Of course, I’m unbothered because I understand the FM is already as accurate as it will get for the foreseeable future.
1 Like
Also keep in mind team that though a model may perform on point to how they flew or behaved in Irl. it does not mean they are not still underperforming when looking at the grand scheme of things in the game. As they face other models that may be overperforming in certain aspects such as flight performance or weaponry etc. and vice versa.
That is why I believe gameplay is crucial in determining these discrepancies. GJ definitely monitors win rates and model efficiency and will go in and alter as they see fit and never say a word or make changes to the matchmaker.
FM underperforming =/= performing less than stellar in the current meta. Two separate things… both were claimed…
yes, that is true.
I as well as many believe both in the case of the SMT. Not by a large margin, but enough to continue investigating.
Why can’t it be both? SMT is underperforming because of the “UFO” F-16 you claimed it to be and unfinished modelling of the SMT?
Can anyone show the actual differences in fuel economy between the Mig29s and SMT if there was any modelled. I feel it’s not as good as it was when it went live and is exactly the same as the G at 30min.
SMT just can’t carry R-60.
Uhm… no?
Ah yes, the daily mig 29 thread argument.
1 Like
The FM isn’t underperforming so far that I’ve seen. All testing done thus far has shown it (the 9-12) is accurate. There is nothing to suggest the 9-19 is disproportionately performing thus far either. Further testing is of course, welcome.
It is true, the F-16’s are overperforming. It is not such a serious concern in air RB because instructor already limits AoA at the speeds most of these noobs are flying.
You’re right, it is only re-targeting angles +/- 4 degrees not a reduction in FoV post-capture. Thanks.
I just wanna drop this here since it is relevant because it is a weapon the MIG uses. This has not changed at all since the publishing of this video in dev server, the missiles are still the same. If 9M IRCCM is supposed to be this good why can’t gaijin buff R-73 IRCCM? Either nerf the 9M irccm somehow or make the MAGIC 2 and R-73 irccm better.
It is not enough the F-16C beats the Mirage 2K and MIG-29 in 1 circle turn with UFO FM (when it should not), they get better missiles as well.
4 Likes
Launching the AIM-9M precisely at targets that would be harder for the R-73 to hit and impossible for the AIM-9M not to is not indicative of good testing.
Any target flying straight and just dropping flares will eat an AIM-9M. Colder, smaller targets dropping a lot of flares will likely decoy the R-73… This is horrible testing. In fact, I’m confident there is no 100% guaranteed kill scenario on a target dropping flares, maneuvering, and at 80% throttle against AIM-9M… whereas the R-73 can be fired from rear and is a guaranteed kill on such a target.
The issue is, in game in terms of actual matches and situations the IRCCM of the 9M is better 8/10 times. No matter how much better the seeker of R-73 is technically, it does not matter if in most situations it is like a R-60 SUPER.
Which is more often? You getting very close and directly behind an enemy to fire a missile or side/ half side aspect mid-long range shots? The latter. The situations in which R-73s advantages are good and used are not that common to be used, unlike 9M.
Also to flare 9M you need time and methodical approach, you do not always have the necessary time and distance/energy to flare 9M, but you can 1 tap flare the R-73 in many cases.
Also the 9M was fired at a colder target and the R-73 was fired at a afterburning 25040509 C* F-14 so i do not understand what you mean by the test is bad in that sense. R-73 didnt hit 9M did hit a colder target.
The current post launch FOV of R-73 and MAGIC 2 are currently 0.75 degrees. If they were made to be 0.70/0.65 degrees it would be a much needed improvement and would not be an extreme buff either that would cause imbalance.