None of those things make it too strong compared to an F-16C.
What good is AESA? How do you expect it to work in War Thunder?
Extra AAMs? The most common loadout I’ve seen is 4 IR + 4 S/ARH which the F-16C will share.
Higher G limit? Every other aircraft shares this besides the F-16s, like the Mig-29/F-14B/(and most likely the F-15C/J). In other words you’ll get an easier time pulling lead initially but then it’s a turn fight and you won’t be pulling those high Gs anymore.
Yes the G-override which will function as higher g-limit in general so instead of limited to 9Gs it would be 12?Gs and as such can pull more lead at high speeds but that’s inconsequential once you start turn fighting at lower and lower speeds.
Oh okay, then sounds like an easy fix, limit the XF-2 to 6 AAMs or if it’s already limited to IR missiles, let it have 8 IR (assuming it can mount them).
Though you’d propose an F-15J which could carry 8 AAMs total and be similar performance wise to existing planes, so not sure why it would matter here on the XF-2.
Aren’t the Sparrows themselves still PD and subject to multi-pathing and issues tracking at lower altitudes?
In addition, or say they aren’t affected, okay, again we just limit the XF-2 to IR missiles now what does it matter that you have no issue locking low-level targets?
Gaijin has not limited any tech tree vehicle in total AAM count and should never start.
The precedence would be bad.
Sparrows are SARHs, they themselves don’t have radars, they have radar receivers and look for the radar frequency that launched them, the radar return from the lit aircraft.
Maybe not in total count, but they have limited what weapons can be carried (ex: 9Ps on EJ Kai till recently with 9Ls). Total missile count sounds like fair play as it’s the same line of thinking as armament limitation in general.
Then why do SARH missiles like sparrow have trouble locking cold or notching targets even when the launch aircraft has a perfect lock? How would this effect not be present when AESA is involved?
If gaijin adds an XF-2A or early F-2 with only IRs it would only have up to 4 since that is all the pylons it has to accommodate IR missiles unlike F-16s that could carry up 6 IR.
For BVR there is a theoretical loadout of 6 BVR and 2 wingtip IR but I doubt we will see such loadout at least not at the start.
As for radar yes they could give it APG-68 while it’s unconfirmed that it used it or not according to documentations it looks like that would of been the stand in radar if J/APG-1 wasn’t ready so it wouldn’t be a fake addition. Even with J/APG-1 we simply have no real data on its true performance so gaijin can take liberties on how it can perform in game with or without sparrows.
Performance wise with the addition of F-16C we now have a jet using the same engines F-2s would have. Acceleration would still be slightly lower but comparable, it’s in top speed where the major difference is, the F-2 would be a lot slower though this might actually be an advantage as it might prevent it from turning into a brick like the F-16s in game. And yes they should have better low speed maneuverability and handling but it is hard to say just how good maneuverability will be.
You never know, they might add the XF-2 next with copy/paste F-16C radar (the AJ debacle shows they will do whatever they want) and then add the F-15J after a few months of the US getting theirs. After all, if they want fox 3s to be exclusive to US/RU first then we’d have to wait if our only option till then was AAM-4+ right?
In fact, I’m pretty confident about them adding an F-15 without FOX-3, SU-27 with just R-27ER, and JAS-39C with RB.99 and then filling in with AMRAAMs, R-77 (RVV-AE), PL-12 for other countries that have no heavy fighters.
The US may even see an improved Phoenix before 2024.