any inept person can expect a less maneuverable missile to come from basic angles, with the angles you can attack from magic 1 they are unexpected and thus the enemy will not have time to react
No, Mig-23Ms except MLD have a worse sustained turn rate and far worse instantaneous.
When not afterburning.* and if they’re not afterburning, they’re in gun range.
Being unable to tell if the lock ping is from a Mig-23 beside me, or the phantom 10km away is very difficult when you only have 4 segment RWR. It just leads to a large decrease in awareness, since you can’t always tell. Also, RWR is not useless in the slightest. In BVR/near BVR combat, it is very important to be able to figure out where a lock is coming from, and how you can counter it.
I am not.
I am also competent.
Alright, so we shove the r60 that can come from any number of angles on account of the all aspect function from an angle they don’t expect that they can’t react from. Oh look, 4 kills.
2 Likes
you dont need the rwr. for maximum safety of your flight, just assume he is coming after you regardless.
then you dont have a problem with the br of f1c because you can kill your enemies
If I take a vertical position on an enemy furball not checking above themselves I can kill more people while maintaining my position with 4 bad all aspects.
It I take a vertical position on an enemy fureball not checking above themselves I can kill less people and lose positioning with 2 good rear aspects.
I don’t have to get on the enemies rear to kill them if I’m on the same level.
The Magic Is are also not that flare resistant, they have to be up someone’s ass in the first place to ignore flares, it’s not like they can be spamming away from 2km and it still hits.
2 Likes
This is the same fellow who feels that a fighter with equivalent numbers of worse-equal missiles should be a notably higher BR than a fighter. Just a heads up on the caliber of argument you’ll be getting back.
2 Likes
everyone expects it to come from every angle when a russian fighter is using such a missile. however even when you fire it from any angle you can miss because your missile can’t pull as many G’s as the magic 1 at close distance. now the magic 1 can hit more unexpected shots where you expect the missile to miss and therefore dont flare because it has a higher G limit.
Have you played 11.7 without RWR?
I don’t really know how it performs, so I don’t know if 12.0 or 11.7 is better for it.
1 Like
if they did that and buffed the rwr yeah but the rwr is one of the worst in the game
You mean the magic 1s you have to get onto someone’s tail, within 1km, for it to effectively track? Let alone reject flares.
always. it is useless and eyeballs are actually better. you can ping someone when you are not indending to attack them and the people with rwr will panic and go in defense lmao.
not a problem when you ignore the rwr.
then maybe you should not be taking part in these arguments
it will still be ass no matter how good the seeker is due to flight dynamics
Do you have anything to back that up or are you just going to say it.
what makes you think this missile was somehow a good missile in real life in the time it existed compared to its counterparts?
The 530F flies fine, its just slightly picky on its range is all, the falling-for-first-chaff is the issue
if you think that is a problem then you can agree the r60m should also be buffed because it falls for the first flare
So you’re comparing a radar-guided missile at 12.0 to an IR-guided missile that pulls considerably harder at 10.7?
are you seriously comparing sarhs and fox-2s
2 Likes
its the same logic, if something should be improved because they fall for first chaff then the same should be done with missiles that fall for the first flare. battleratings dont matter here.