Mirage 2000 Thread : Variants, performance, characteristics and sources

Dude, you’re implying Soviet [NOT RUSSIAN] vehicles are intentionally held back by Gaijin… That’s a dumb take.
Gaijin has never once did weapon characteristics for balancing purposes, only ever with evidence.
Soviet [NOT RUSSIAN] vehicles aren’t inferior because Gaijin hates them, they’re inferior because real-life Soviet Union didn’t create thermal pods for Su-25s or any aircraft for that matter.
Commander thermals is only on T-90M & T-14.
And only their most modern helicopters get thermals, but still no laser guided missiles.

Oh right, Mirage 2000 thread. My bad, I’ll stop that there then. If you wish to talk further my DMs are open.
You shouldn’t have brought that up here to begin with.

bruh AGM-65 can not overpressure , spike can not lock after launch, even aim-54 is being held back ,not to mention missiles missing from helicopters like AH-1Z and AH-64 that makes them irl .

Thats not what I’m implying… at all. Im stating Russian vehicles have a habit of being unbalanced

I was talking about balancing regarding missiles like the MICA, you’re the one who went on a nutcase tangent about Russian vehicles in the Mirage thread. Stop accusing others for the derailing you are doing.

AGM-65s overpressure just fine for me.
However, this is Mirage 2000 thread.
AS-30Ls and guided bombs work flawlessly for me.
Aim-54 isn’t being held back at all, it’s implemented within the facts Gaijin knows and will be improved as they figure out more details & code those in.
AH-1Z & AH-64 have their correct missiles without being uncounterable.
ARHs are never coming to helicopters until there is a ground counter, for which there currently is none.
And the difference between AGM-112B & K isn’t enough to warrant complaints, especially since tandem isn’t simulated in WT currently.


PL-12 was already confirmed to be coming with equivalent missiles, which includes MICA RF, AMRAAM C, AAM-4 [which likely won’t come same patch as that’d be on an F-15 which would make it a higher BR than max on introduction], and R-77-1.

not going to argue with you here ]

1 Like

Yep, you can see the missile is just randomly oscillating like it can barely see the head-on F-14 even though it’s a sub 7km launch and I’m well within 3km when the 530D misses.

It used to never miss head-on even at super low altitude and medium range. It was even sometimes capable of hitting +/- 10 degrees notching targets with the -5F in TRK PD mode.

Now the 530D

  • blows up if it’s going after a cold target even in non PD with empty background no chaff
  • blows up if it’s going after any notching target in non PD with empty background no chaff
  • misses ideal head-on targets

Even if you manage to keep a good lock the entire time with the RDY. It’s clear to me that they gimped it.

I don’t think that matters at all, the target echo is blue-shifted because of its closing speed with the radar source, not the missile seeker. The blueshift is what makes it stand out. Target won’t be more obvious if the missile is going Mach 5 or 0.5 towards it because any clutter would also look like it’s equally “speeding” towards the seeker.

1 Like

They literally do not overpressure due to being modeled as a HEAT, not HE. even though their caliber and explosive mass are well clear of ordnance that should otherwise qualify.

from the wiki article on damage mechanics

For closed-up vehicles, this happens when explosion effect manages to penetrate the armour of the vehicle:
HEAT and HESH shells and ATGM can also create overpressure damage but are less effective at it compared to HE ammunition and seem to only affect vehicles when very thin parts of the hull or their critical weak spots are hit directly, with overall armour thickness of hit surface having to be below 15 mm RHA, since their explosive power is directed towards creating special effects (molten jet for HEAT and scabbing for HESH) instead of producing shockwaves. There are exceptions in HEAT ammunition, which can deal overpressure damage through 20 mm (select few powerful HEAT ATGM) or 30 mm RHA (most tandem missiles). Tanks with reasonable amount of armour will not take overpressure damage from HEAT, even if special effect penetrates them easily.
This mechanic affects vehicles with thin armour negatively, but, unlike with the hullbreak, any tank is potentially vulnerable to overpressure damage.

So even though it’s main charge is of similar mass to a Mk. 81 250lb bomb (which has a 5 meter destruction radius) it can only penetrate 30mm of RHA

I just stetted it. it has overpressure damage. But to trigger it, you have to break armor with HE damage, EFP jet won’t be able to cause overpressure damage.

and the report is closed with

EFP do not cause overpressure damage. Works as intended.

additionally the HEAT warhead magically has less penetration than the AGM-114 even though it is significantly larger and heavier.

The -54C definitely has been, as there are practically no differences between it and the -54A modeled, are three is certainly enough evidence to call into question a few of the changes that were made, let alone the fact that the seeker remains the same even though it should be significantly improved.

There are definitely options available (ATAS / AIM-9M , AGR-20 (M247), AGM-179) and the potentially unbalanced ordnance (AGM-114L/-N, etc.) they could be further restricted as needed (limited station availability, only able to be carried on dual rails, etc. ) to balance them since they don’t have to be provided in denominations at first.

Multispectral smoke configurations exist so it wouldn’t be entirely inaccurate, since with an INS, you should still need to combine deployment with movement to avoid being hit by a -114L, the same way one would against a PARS, or other F&F store.

The issue basically boils down to the fact that ERA remains effective against the -114B, since doesn’t have a tandem charge, so can occasionally cause issues, and considering the the AH-1Z remains in service its anachronistic for seemingly no reason when the AH-1W could have been chosen in its lace with practically no other loss of capability, for the most part.

1 Like

I’ve been having my AGM-65s overpressuring targets for the last month, and re-verified my memory in a test drive.
They don’t do as much overpressure as HE cause HEAT fires a metal slug, but it does overpressure.

HEAT overpressure damage as a whole [not just AGM-65s] might need buffed, cause I know APFSDS overpressure damage needs buffed.

Gaijin doesn’t limit ordnance making your AGM-114 suggestions moot. Especially since the laser ones are already perfectly fine.
WT’s not ready for IRCCM missiles, which doesn’t bode well for the BR changes that will impact Magic 2 carriers when Magic 2 gets its IRCCM.
And AGM-179 is ARHs.
PARS can be defeated by smoke, radars yell through smoke.

And as I said, tandem isn’t modeled in WT. Tandem warheads in WT are just default warheads with more oomf currently.

i do think fixing the over/early leading will help it keep the seeker in fov

I think it’s a signal strength issue not a FOV one, if the missile can barely see a head on target that’s point blank from the Mirage it would also explain why the missile blows up so quickly when the target notches or goes cold.

That’s why the 530D seems to track intermittently, going in a straight line then sharply turning, straight line again then turning again, it’s always on the verge of losing lock even in ideal setups

They do, all over the place. For example look at the stations that can take Sidewinders on the various A-4’s.



Not with the way they currently are since they have dynamic guidance profile and are very slow and circuitous in flight so the launching aircraft must remain exposed for significantly longer than they should in order to reach targets especially those approaching maximum range, and the greater capability could be quite useful, and actually allow for the use of the Longbow(Radar) to its fullest capacity.

They already exists on helicopters(FIM-92A, Igla, Mistral, TY-90, etc.) so neither option would actually bring entirely new capabilities, and would only serve to bring the AH-1Z up to standard with counterparts at its BR.

its not like I’m suggesting the AIM-9X Block II+ or something, though that is an option, since its still in service.

it was more the option for the extending the range, should SAMs see further improvement time of flight is going to cause issues. The seeker is also multi-modal so it wouldn’t necessarily need to be modeled with the entire suite to begin with, but would be an option going forward.

again, Multi-Spectral smoke exists. Its not an issue. turning it into a F&F option would be more than enough to account for the performance even if it could be defeated to bring it into line going forward.

That is a photograph of an A-4G, which is not in War Thunder. And if added would likely go to Britain since it’s Australian. Zero A-4s in WT have artificially limited AAM pylons.

With laser munitions, I’ll use Mirage 2000 as an example alongside Tiger HAD.
Mirage 2000 can launch an AS-30L from 10km away hugging the deck, then climb right over the battlefield dodging missiles while guiding the missile into a target.
In the Tiger HAD’s case, launch a Hellfire, wait until the last 10 seconds, pop up, guide it into a target, pop back down.

Aim-9M will come when it’s ready. Be patient.
Multi-spectral smoke does not exist in WT, and if it gets added in the future, THEN we can start suggesting these things.

Just to verify, you know HEAT doesn’t fire a solid metal slug right?

You know, I almost thought I accidentally typed solid.
I can’t put HEAT into words perfectly yet. Most common explanations are unsatisfactory, including the one I gave.

Plasma super soaker

1 Like

That one has humor behind it. I like it.

The only reason I pointed it out is because people can often confuse HEAT for EFP (explosively formed projectiles) which are indeed a explosively formed metal slug.

İ dont know if they fixed it or not but last time i checked Mavericks wasnt overpressuring tanks, in fact there was a bug report on it.

Also Ah1-Z never used Aim9L in its service life.

İt should either use Aim9m or Aim9x models.

So your information about loadout is currently wrong.

Is there a reason it couldn’t use the AIM-9L? The pylon it uses supports it.
Pic of page

It states in here that it can use the AIM-9L also.