[Poll] Remove the R-27ER from the early Mig-29 variants

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

In my opinion it doesn’t make a difference whether it has 6 or 4 R-73s. If it had R-73s and R-27R/Ts, it could be either at 12.7 or 13.0 and it also wouldn’t make a difference, at least in sim and especially with new BR brackets around the corner.

The best outcome would be a fixed flight model with R-73s and R-27R/Ts at 13.0. However, this is a thread about the missile loadout.

1 Like

Why would a worse MiG-29G sit at the same BR?

Same reason why a mig29g and su27s are at the same br

Su-27s are at least bigger and heavier, and a little slower.

Because they carry more missiles drop your payload to 4 and it will be similar to a MiG

why would the 29 with R27 and R73 sit at 13.0 but the F18C Early with like 6x 7Ps and 2x 9Ls is at 12.7

the 29 without the ER would have 0 BVR capability in a BR range full of Tomcats, F18s, Gripens, F15s, F4F ICE and other Fox-3 13.0s

Why the fuck would it stay at 13.0 with literally 0 BVR capability and only 6x R73s.
The Gripen sits at 13.0 with 6x 9Ms and some BVR capability - but more flares, better Flight performance and much more modern avionics.
Same goes with any other 13.0 - it would be by far the worst 13.0 and would even be worse than some 12.7s like the F18C Early

The only logical solution would be 12.7 lol

4 Likes

Thank you for proving my statement correct by citing another under-BR’d 13.0.

@Merf_HD
You cited under-BR’d 13.0s.
Mig-29G is still 13.0 and will never be 12.7, and is not the worst as your post is obviously ragebaiting.
You just want an OP plane, and if you want one go play the F-18A for now while it’s still OP.

so if every plane around the Mig-29 is under br’d are you sure that they are really under br’d or you just not trying to accept the obvious

give me one plane from 12.3 to 13.0 that isnt under BR’d in you opinion

1 Like

Less than half is not every plane.
Viggen Di x2, F-14B, Sea Harrier, Mirage 4000, J-8F, JA-39A, Kfir C10, Mig-29G, F-16A, F-14A, and probably Tornad F-3 Late & AV-8B+ x2.

11 - 14 aircraft.
Vs the 8 - 11 under-BR’d aircraft.

The only way Mig-29 with R-73s is below 13.0 is if half or more 13.0s move to 12.7 for fairness.

With 14.3 becoming a thing, the OP 13.0s can move up leaving behind the 11 - 14 13.0s that deserve to be there, and more can be added such as F-18C Early x2 making 13 - 16 13.0s deserving to be there.