Excellent climber, great turn fighter, good controls at all speed, great armanent, v. good speed at low alt, good speed at 5000-6000m, flies just fine without a wing.
It can fight and win vs anything in 6.0-6.7 range with sole exception of BI (it’s broken and no other plane can fight it either). Vs Spitfire Lf Mk IX at similar energy it can run away without issues, and out-energy it soon after, while Spitfire bleeds energy like crazy, overheats, is much slower and has worse armanent.
The only downside is low rip speed, which only means the enemy can delay the inevitable.
Ground RB - Jaguar IS
11.0 > 10.7
A single extra LGB does not really warrant a 2 step BR increase over the other Jaguars with smart ordnance, epically considering the retainment of the same countermeasures suite. This change also allows for a Indian Armed Forces line up (Bhishma, OSA-AK, Strella, & of course Jaguar IS) without up tiering the lone high tier Indian MBT to a possible 12.0 matchmaker.
It is true that the Israeli F-16D is inferior to the F-16C in terms of performance and armament capacity. However, it is not so inferior to the F-16C as to take the BR down a notch, taking into account the HMD and radar.
The kfir C.2 definitly shouldn’t be 11.7 for the crime of having two python 3’s. It used to be the same br as the mig 21 bis, witch is about equally as good as the kfir c.2. But now they are 2 battlerating steps away from each other.
I also want to mention the F-5E FCU, witch has two python 3’s plus two AIM-9P-4’s. It has arguably better cannons with twice the ammo count, and more flares (some are even large caliber) with better placement. The F5E-FCU has all of this and a good flight model, at a lower br of 11.3.
I say the Kfir C.2 should be at 11.3.
Reason: The Type 87 RCV prototype is at an br where no other vehicle is ground wise,
Only in air you have 2 vehicles, but that isn’t an line up.
It is speedy, it can be used an anti air and it can scout people.
The pen is horrible in full uptier of 8.7
It’s an aircraft that suffers from artificially inflated BR from ahistorical AMRAAM and missing more than half of its countermeasures, and instead of fixing any of that they decide to add HMD it never had…
In the British tech tree the premium Harrier GR.1 sits at 9.7 but lacks any effective air to air weaponry(just it’s funny missiles) especially considering it’s peers and the availability of countermeasures. The Harrier GR.3 sits at the same 9.7 br yet has countermeasures and a proper set of air to air missiles(as opposed to the SRAAMs).
This plane as a result is entirely useless out of getting lucky and hitting a base with a tiny bit of ordinance. Can it be looked at to move down to 9.3 or even 9.0 considering it’s lack of maneuverability and countermeasures?
SURELY this aircraft is equal to the Tornado F.3 at the same BR currently. It’s ridiculously overtiered and next to unflyable currently. It must be moved down to match similar aircraft. While having AIM-9L over base F-104S, you lose 2 of your 6 pylons and the RWR. Trying to play 13.0 games all the time with 0 situational awareness is awfully difficult.
When you send a message on forums you have multiple icons over the message box, the third one to the right allows you to change the colour of messages but you need to first select a message before you click on said icon and find the colour code of what colour you’d like to change said message to.
yes the pen of type 87 rcv P is horrible but i dont know if lowering the br helps the tank because on 6.3 are a lot of tanks with more amour and in my opinion for tanks like rcv is 7.7 or 8.0 pretty good because of all the bmp, leos, ikv 91, fox, Aubl bradley, Marder etc and less IS 2 King Tiger T34 etc
Mode: Ground Realistic Vehicle: AMX-13 (FL11) BR Change: 4.3 > 3.7
This machine is a competitor to the Chaffee (M24), but unlike it, it does not have a stabilizer and an anti-aircraft Browning.
