Thanks, I’ve added that to avoid misconceptions. But its about R-73 +27R vs Aim9M only
Nonsense, look at the BR of the Sea Harrier FRS.1 with 2 AIM-9Ls and with 4.
1 Like
Good point, or the A-10s
1 Like
The higher we go in br the less gaijin cares
It is not like I have not given an example
2 Likes
Since belgian F-16A is at 13.0, MIG-29 is also likely to rise to 13.0BR.
The f16 also has way better flight performance and better avionics, with the ability to take way more CMs than the mig29
3 Likes
Isn’t R-73 better than AIM-9M carried by Belgian F-16A? In addition, MiG-29 has HMS.
I would say that the 9m is better in any scenario that isn’t a rear aspect shot or a close range dog fight.
And if the f16 gets into a dogfight it can just easily win with its flight performance
4 Likes
Yes, in 1v1s the F-16 is superior.
However, in air RB you’re more furball management in wolfpacks, which is less about dogfight performance and more about positioning at speeds well above 800kph, which the Mig-29 and F-16 do in a meta fashion.
And of course with HMS on an IR primary platform, Mig-29 does rather great at 13.0.
After all, my Mig-29G loadout was 6x R-73s, and for the most part still is.
However, in a 1v1 where both players are last of their teams, it’ll be down to who manages their flares better, and while F-16 can win the long fight, Mig-29 can and will win the short fight.
Both platforms contain more missiles than effective flare count, even with conservative usage.
1 Like
I would say that even in the normal rb match the 9m has certain strong points, sure the missile diamond is still there but you are still less likely to notice the missile without a thick smoke trail behind it
On top of that BRs shouldn’t really be decided by looking at 1 plane in isolation and then balancing everything around that. You should look at the already existing planes at that BR and then think about a fitting BR.
Currently there are M2Ks at both 12.3 and 12.7 with a pretty comparable IR missile to the r73 and a better sarh missile than the r27r and then there is also the Mig21 bison at 12.3 with the r27r and r73 combo which shows that that combination of weapons does not instantly justifies 13.0.
And last but not least:
The BR can still be changed after the fact if the Mig29 would be really that OP, it is not like it would be set in stone.
2 Likes
Well the reason M2K with flares is sitting at 12.7 is because it’s a limit of 2 IRCCM missiles and 2 R-27/R-24 equivalent missiles as the only loadout.
It’s not 6x IRCCM missiles of Mig-29G or F-16A.
I can’t even say 4x IRCCM missiles because no gen 4 plane has such a loadout outside old Mirage 2000 5F.
So while M2K is superior in the 1v1, its loadout is objectively worse than Mig-29Gs while both being fantastic airframes in air RB.
The 13.0 BR is already set for the 6x R-73 loadout.
Also Mig-21 is still a false equivalence fallacy, as it’s 2x IRCCM missiles on a Mig-21 airframe.
Not 6x missiles on a Mig-29 airframe which already has an example: Mig-29G.
MiG29 could be limited to 4 R73s and 2 R27R and probably remain at 12.7
Gaijin does not care about the ammount of missiles as said before look at the 29g and su27
I would argue that the r530d is a better radar missile than the r27r.
That br is set for the r27er and r73 missile combo if not please explain to me why the Su27 is at the same BR as the 29g even tho it has more of the same missiles
A Mig21 airframe with a better radar and better CMs as already discussed above and I bring that one up to showcase that it is apperntly fine for 11.3s to face the r73 just like it seems to be fine for them to face the magic 2 on the m2k
2 Likes
That is ahistorical and kinda stupid to bring up in a threat that is asking to make the Mig29 historical
3 Likes
I mean if the issue is that with 6 R73’s the 29 would probably be 13.0, then the best outcome would be to limit it’s number to 4 R73’s and make it stay at 12.7.
In the end you will still use the R27Rs making the loadout historically accurate while staying at a much more beneficial br
Su-27 is under-BR’d, and both examples are 6 or higher.
2 is not 6, 4 is not 8.
Amount of missiles below 6 most certainly matters, and citing under-BR’d aircraft only strengthens that statement.
If missile disparity did not matter, then A-10s would not be different BRs.
F-18A and C Early would be the same BR.
JF-17 would be 13.7-14.0 instead of 13.3.
Kfir C10 would be 13.3 instead of 13.0 [referencing Su-34 which is now going to 13.7].
Missile counts when they are limited most certainly matter.
The biggest difference is getting up to 6 missiles, ideally all universal stores.
With the last notable jump being 8. After 8 it’s largely diminishing returns.
They don’t have the same missiles the C early has a stronger missile with the 7p which strengthens my statement of stronger missile equals higher br
Lets just forget all the other 13.0 fox 3 singers
Why isn’t the F4f ice not 13.3 then?
It has double the ammount of missiles.
You are only are not telling the whole story here
Argument was that the r73 would be way too strong against 11.7 and yet here we are with 11.3s fighting against both the magic 2 and r73
they are not all universal on the mig29 you can only bring radar missiles on the inner most wing pylon
2 Likes
i think the bison did have 120cm, gaijin doesnt give them for “balance”
just make it so it can only put 73s on the other 4 pylons. Balancing via loadout is way more realistic than giving it r60s
You can defend against it, but it puts you in a much worse position. AIM-7Fs having much better kinematic performance than R-27R is a huge deal.
AIM-7F to R-27R is pretty much what an R-27ER is to AIM-7F.
1 Like