Not wasting my time with the F-15C "Golden Eagle"

[SFmerc]

It actually wouldnt be.
They allready have better aim 120 and AIM9X in game, could just gave em on F15C and it would be just fine

[fwp88]

To my knowledge 15E was the first and only 14.0 for some time, after being moved over there pretty fast. Then the euro ufo’s came in straight to 14.0.

Point is, if one single vehicle is overperforming, raising top BR for just one plane has a precedent. And not too old one at that.

[Code_649]

@Papa_Daniel

@Code_649

For its weight? Damn right it’s a monster. You’re making comparisons to apples and oranges. Rafale and Eurofighter are much lighter, with the latter being a multirole interceptor, so of course it/they can out accelerate the F-15E

what does it have to fight every game?

Every game? Who knows. Matchmake either makes you fight 14.3 (which is <10 jets and mostly Russian) or you get blessed and find yourself in a 13.0 - 14.0 match

@SFmerc

@Code_649

For its weight? Damn right it’s a monster. You’re making comparisons to apples and oranges. Rafale and Eurofighter are much lighter, with the latter being a multirole interceptor, so of course it/they can out accelerate the F-15E

Yeah, and also we can start talking that F15 was made to be air SUPERIORITY fighter.
Only thing what this is superior , is being most horrendous top tier plane ever made.

Sure, the normal A/C Eagles are that, 100%. But you’re switching over to a different jet entirely when this specific message you’re replying to was about the Strike Eagle (which is multirole; it doesn’t do air superiority better than the C, never will)

@Zannafrancy

@Code_649

For its weight? Damn right it’s a monster. You’re making comparisons to apples and oranges. Rafale and Eurofighter are much lighter, with the latter being a multirole interceptor, so of course it/they can out accelerate the F-15E

I forgot there were weightclasses in this game, i guess it doesnt see ef2k everymatch considering its much heavier!

Don’t be daft, weight certainly matters if you’re expecting the same or similar performance in one or more metrics compared to a lighter frame

@fwp88

@Code_649

For its weight? Damn right it’s a monster. You’re making comparisons to apples and oranges. Rafale and Eurofighter are much lighter, with the latter being a multirole interceptor, so of course it/they can out accelerate the F-15E

Sure its apples to oranges, its not like EF, raf and GE are all the same BR and therefore see each other every single game, no “if”, no “maybe”, no exceptions whatsoever.

What’s with people taking a piece of my statement and making a completely different reply to suit whatever narrative they want 🫩

@vito_xD

research the ge and then talk man, straight line monste? dude rafale climbs faster, and is much faster than this sheet

In progress, but you’re misinterpreting that reply like so many others have.

[DirectSupport]

@SFmerc

It actually wouldnt be.
They allready have better aim 120 and AIM9X in game, could just gave em on F15C and it would be just fine

1. Isn’t the AIM-120C-7 just functionally the same as AIM-120C-5?

2. Gaijin stated they wouldn’t add IIR to aircraft unless it was added for everyone else too, and AIM-9X is quite a bit worse than its peers, which would mean that F-15C GE would be in an even worse spot than now already compared with most of its peers having AIM-9M, same IR missile.

Hence why it’s damn near impossible to do anything about this on a missile basis.

[kizvy]

@DirectSupport

Gaijin stated they wouldn’t add IIR to aircraft unless it was added for everyone else too, and AIM-9X is quite a bit worse than its peers, which would mean that F-15C GE would be in an even worse spot than now already compared with most of its peers having AIM-9M, same IR missile.

9x block 2 is certainly better than iris t, python 5 at least.

[SFmerc]

And better Fuze, and C7 is shorter , and supposed to be even more agile

And 9X
On block 1, it is more agile and faster compared to M , otherwise same seeker, motor etc.
But block II would give it LOAL ability

[_Renzo]

@fwp88

for some time

There was about a month or even less between the release of the F-15E and the release of the Rafale and EFT.

And iirc they only introduced 14.0 air in the update that introduced the Rafale and EFT.

[DirectSupport]

@fwp88

To my knowledge 15E was the first and only 14.0 for some time, after being moved over there pretty fast.

Was it not moved up at the same time on the dev-server only for it to be at 14.0 with the new Eurocanards when patch dropped?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1hdkblj/242023_242026_20241212/

[fwp88]

In fact it might be so. Either way we are talking weeks in single digits (like 4 or 5?). Thus it is to be considered that the point stands.

The new toy that rapes everything below it gets added → immediately gets moved up.

[tripod2008]

@DirectSupport

Isn’t the AIM-120C-7 just functionally the same as AIM-120C-5

[kizvy]

so in other words the exact same for wt purposes

[fwp88]

Given that ALL the guidance/software upgrades from A to C5 got ignored, I would say no shot.

[Pvt_Wade]

@fwp88

A to C5

to C-7 actually (found on CLAWS)

[DirectSupport]

@fwp88

Either way we are talking weeks in single digits (like 4 or 5?). Thus it is to be considered that the point stands.

The new toy that rapes everything below it gets added → immediately gets moved up.

Okay here, it never was 14.0 by itself, only was 14.0 when Eurocanards dropped in “Storm Warning” which means that there were other planes that could occupy that top spot with it.

War Thunder "Storm Warning" - Changelog - Updates - Game - War Thunder

[tripod2008]

@kizvy

so in other words the exact same for wt purposes

Depends on if (in future) they refine the lofting angles in future to optimize performance. Also they may confer an improved seeker at some point. In order to better differentiate future airframes.

Then again the C-8 & -120D series do exist, so there remains an “option” on the table short of the AIM-260 for the F-22 / F-35.

[kizvy]

@tripod2008

improved seeker at some point. In order to better differentiate future airframes.

technically that’s only 120d no? with 2 way dl and gps. afaik no 120s till the d model had any meaningful seakerhead upgrades

[tripod2008]

@kizvy

technically that’s only 120d no?

Depends on Gaijin really, “Upgrading the Guidance section” is fairly nebulous, and without taking a peak under the Radome, or otherwise reverse engineering the guidance boards it can’t really be proven, one way or the other, so some “latitude” for balancing adjustments based on “Gaming Conventions” exists. especially where the Hardware / Software revision is not stated.

[fwp88]

Since this is something usually not openly disclosed, it would be a reasonable guess that all that myriad of software/hardware upgrades might bring some form of ECCM (chaff rejection beyond simple doppler filter…) or even more intelligent version of current angle gating. Might as well go into that direction instead of plain beam width.

[DirectSupport]

@tripod2008

Depends on Gaijin really, “Upgrading the Guidance section” is fairly nebulous, and without taking a peak under the Radome, or otherwise reverse engineering the guidance boards it can’t really be proven, one way or the other, so some “latitude” for balancing adjustments based on “Gaming Conventions” exists.

I’ve reported similar stuff for missiles that are rather dogshit like Super 530F but they’ve been rejected for not stating something super specific or giving specific values that they can work with, so I’d be surprised if they do anything with it.

[tripod2008]

@DirectSupport

so I’d be surprised if they do anything with it.

If Gaijin feel it needs a balancing pass tweaking values (not always in concert with bug reports) is an option they undertake with some frequency.