You did not read my post did you?
What makes you say that?
What i did notice but is the comment was from 2 months ago, thought it was a more up to date thread.
So can leave it here if you’d prefer.
Because you are not directly responding to the points I made and you quoted, all but ignored them to seemingly overwrite them.
I’ve seen that being done often on the forum.
It is not contributing to any discussion.
How did none of what i say corelate with what you did .
Your willingness to ignore what others have said for whatever reason is on you.
The first one for example where you state that Magic 1 is the best rear aspect missile in the game.
I know. But that is not something I was talking about there.
I acknowledged the sheer performance characteristics, especially their differences from missile to missile but in the end they get flared just the same while doing the same job. Some deliver a bit earlier or in a broader array of situations.
You ignored or did not understand my point again in the second quote where I pointed out that having more slightly inferior missiles still allows for more kills in many situations which is true especially if you take full advantage of what they can do while understanding what they can not do.
I would disagree in regard to Magic 1 being a guaranteed kill. Magic 2 and R-73 would be closer to guaranteeing a kill.
In the last quote I am comparing IIIS with IIIE since they are in the same match maker regularly. Both have countermeasures and radar guided missiles.
You mention a load out someone else would have liked to see then proceed to tell me that it is weird comparing IIIS with IIIE after you had stated previously IIIS should be 10.7. The irony.
Throwing my own complaint back at me without negating it doesn’t really convince me that you are interested in a reasonable discussion.
You could choose not to quote paragraphs if you do not have the intention to respond to them directly.
You could respond to the post or the topic in general but if you quote certain paragraphs the expectation is that what you are going to write is clearly discussing something that is mentioned in them.
If you still do not see the reason for my complaint I do not know what to tell you. We could of course leave it be as you suggested.
1 Like
and be what BR, exactly?
How is the 3E better than other 10.7s
1 Like
It’d have to be 11.7 at minimum.
I think giving the 3S the p-4 and shoving it at 11.0 would be more fair.
Anyone know what the recent drag changes to the AIM-26 did?
Less effective range especially while maneuvering.
Ideally launch at slightly closer ranges as directly at the target as possible.
The issue with AIM-9P4 is that it can easily be flared which means most of the time you would play like some F-104 looking for gun kills because you can not really afford to go slow.
A noticeably higher Br with reliable missiles might actually be easier and more enjoyable to play than a slightly higher Br with unreliable missiles.