that is the problem , smaller FOV means once you lost the lock it is harder to reacquire it . FOV is not small enough to make it a real advantage over wider FOV. (remember how small the FOV of the R-27T was in one of the test servers?).
Aim9L is like sand , it is flexible , if it loses lock it can reacquire it as many times as it takes to reach the target, Aim-9L loses lock easily but gets it back again and again and again.
magic 2 loses the lock harder but not by quite a margin , on the other hand it can not reacquire it as easy as 9L does which is the reason people say 9L has better resistance , it is better to be described as having higher reliability .
You can speak of all the voodoo black magic anti-french bias you want, the Magic 2’s are more flare resistant than the 9L’s in-game. Their only real weak point being their range
Magic 2 has the seeker FoV of pre-nerf 9L (2.5°), and we all know the 9L didn’t get better at flare resistance when it was nerfed to 3.6° FoV, so this is just straight up false
they also changed flare values AND heatseeking system, after the change it got weaker and after the heat update it got better .
The consensus was that the AIM-9L was nerfed in flare resistance when its’ fov was increased and now people are saying the opposite is true simply because I made an assertion. Y’all can agree with me, it’s not a sin.
The Magic 2 is demonstrably more flare resistant than the AIM-9L, you can test it.
They added a separate afterburner plume value and adjusted seeker lock-on ranges this did not affect flare resistance on afterburning targets, and improved lock on range at front and side aspects iirc.
you are repeating me here , larger FOV= bigger area that can be captured/recaptured .
I grinded the whole TT of France with Mirage F1C , there is nothing on that plane but speed bomb and magic 2 , trust me , I know magic 2
That’s not the case, the AIM-9L track rate was also reduced whereas the Magic 2 retains the higher track rate and lower fov. Feel free to try to demonstrate superior re-targeting capacity from the AIM-9L though I guess.
Certainly it can be seen when flying the mirage 2000, the magic 2 rarely loses a rear aspect after burning track and neither does the AIM-9L, though Magic 2 has better performance on mil power targets.
Just an FYI to everyone here, make a post on the planned BR thread asking for Mirage F1 to be lowered to 11.0 and Mirage 2000-5F to be lowered to 11.7. You can state your reasons why.
Upvoting other people’s posts DOESN’T count.
Earlier this year, in the April planned BR thread, there were 4 different posts asking for Mirage F1 to be lowered in BR. Those 4 posts totaled 34 upvotes. At the same time, there were 9 different posts asking for Harrier GR.1 to be lowered and it had a total of 28 upvotes. So Harrier got more posts but lower upvote reactions/likes. Mirage got lower post count but higher upvote reaction/likes. In the end, Harrier got feedback from devs while Mirage didn’t.
Smin was inquired about this. UPVOTING/LIKING doesn’t matter. The number of posts asking for something is more likely to garner feedback.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902016128686120960/1136321720836436099/reactions.jpg
You can find the thread here: Planned Battle Rating changes (table updated 04.08.2023) - #917
5 Likes
I am doing so right now.
I also strongly recommend everyone which sees this message to take a few minutes to write something on the BR feedback thread.
Even if you can’t find the words or the exact reasons it’s fine.
General feeling is also something they take into account and the BR of the damn thing is never going to be changed unless we properly show them a lot of players are having trouble with it.
Thank you.
2 Likes
Bouncing back on the argumentation for the F1C at 11.0.
Simply the MiG-23M&MF are at 11.0 with RNG Fox-2, bad Fox-1, a radar with limited PD capability, and strong but not overwhelming performances. There’s also the F-4E(J) at the BR, the MiG-21bis, and the J-8B. The F1C if it were to go 11.0 would not be without opposition.
Current Magic 2 is not nearly as good as the pre-nerf 9L. That shit was like a TY-90, impossible to flare unless you cut power and put a flare exactly between the seeker and the exhaust.
Meanwhile Magic 2 is not reliable against an afterburner anymore. I think its flare resistance was nerfed since La Royale.
1 Like
its ever since the heat changes before the changes the magic 2 felt great before now im scared to launch it because well 1 magic is 1/4th of your weapons
1 Like
low altitude cold 3km - 530D can’t see it
higher altitude same aspect from further away - 530D tracks great
What’s their excuse? Multipath?
3 Likes
“You don’t understand it’s different”
1 Like
You didn’t test with matching closing speeds and the target is actively maneuvering. Should re-do this test with a custom mission and set target speeds / distances.
How are speed and maneuvering relevant when the radar is in a non PD mode? There is no clutter either. Both shots should be trivial as long as there are no chaffs
Also you can tell the strength of the missile lock with the symbology, and at low alt it’s much weaker
I’m just telling you that stricter testing may be required to show the issue in a possible bug report.
Also, the missile might lose track regardless of radar lock mode due to its own filters.
The missile has its own dopler filter