With the 27R you can even go to a full notch and unlock the radar a few seconds before impact and the missile still has high chance to hit. Aim7F will go dumb immediately.
Also, you can somewhat HOBS with the 27R, and it will track just fine and can actually pull somewhat tight maneuvers for SARH standards. The Aim7 might just not track at all because of the worse signal receivers (or bug?), and won’t have the maneuverability to even turn hard after launch.
Because gaijin loves BR compression. The mig29G is too strong to be 12.7, and meh at 13.0, but isn’t the worst of 13.0. I would take it over the Belgian F-16A or the Sea Harrier FA2 any day.
Without decompressing top tier with at least + 2 new brackets, having a mig29 with R-73 and R-27R will either sealclub at 12.7, or be mediocre at 13.0.
I’m not against changing the loadout, I’m just against creating unbalanced vehicles… Do you really guys want that loadout? Fine, enjoy your new mediocre 13.0 mig29 then.
If gaijin refuses to address 13.0 BR compression, I’d take a single vehicle being mediocre over it ruining the matchmaking for multiple 11.7-12.7 jets.
Removing the 27ER will still make it better than a few 13.0s.
Do you agree on moving the Belgian F-16A to 12.7 too? It doesn’t even have radar missiles. Only 6 short range IR missiles that only work more or less reliably on side aspect shoots.
Both are too strong for 12.7, and trash at 13.0 when compared to a flanker.
I’ve been playing lately the 9.12 at 12.7 and it’s still great. The r60m are still usable and I like them better than aim9L, especially on a fast platform where you can easily close the distance to everything bar a mirage 2000. Give me R-73 at the cost of the ER and it will be constant sealclubbing when not uptiered. The 27R is still great because of datalink that makes “sneaky” shoots possible
It gets 6x AIM-9Ms. Why would a very good airframe with 6x invisible missiles, in no way comparable to R-73s, move to 12.7? It is a bad-faith argument to present the best short range IR missile in the game as “sometimes reliable”.
6x invisible missiles are not bad at 13.0. At all. Certainly not worse than a Su-27.
See above line about “bad faith argument”. If we’re gonna write fictional stories then I can’t wait to go on about how the MiG-29 is basically an F-104 and it can’t turn at all ever.
They are quite visible, unless you are talking about sim.
R-73 is virtually unflareable in close ranges at rear aspect and sometimes side, aim9m you can just spam a bunch of flares and change direction, but depending on the pattern, can be more difficult to do in a side shoot.
Aim9M complements well fox3 engagements where you close the distance to a notching target, where you have a clear side shot.
But the best short-range IR missile is the PL-5EII or the R-73 if dogfighting.
Have you ever played that jet? You can only do well with the Belgian F-16A if the enemy team is braindead. The su-27 is so much better for the meta, not even comparable, they should have different BRs but the flanker can’t go up because BR compression too.
The r-60m is as easily flared as the aim9L at distances, but since its faster, it has better chance to ignore flares at shorter range, and works better at much shorter distances.
I just said I like them better. I didn’t say it was plain superior. Just my own preference because I don’t value range for missiles that are easily spoofed by a single flare
The MiG-29A without ERs has NO BVR capability at all.
The R27R is actively competing with the earliest of sparrows in terms of range.
The R73 is a missile with a max effective range of 5-6km at best (if you even manage to get a lock that far)
I just listed 90% of the planes at 13.0
if all planes at a BR are OP, and a single one stands out - maybe they arent overpowered but the other one is just underpowered.
R-60M will be closer to the engines and as such, will have a relativelly narrower view of the engines. Which means it is less likely to see flares.
If they see any flare and enemy drops engine temp, both are easily flared off. So the faster one ends up being more reliable. The only advantage of the 9L is range and explosive payload, everything else is outperformed by R-60Ms except flare resistance which is similar
The R60s seeker ist like 300000x bigger than on the 9L
So logically the 60 would need to be significantly faster than the 9L and already be inside of the enemy aircrafts engine in order to ignore flares.
Maybe, below 500m this is effective
but everything above, especially in the mid range area of liek 1-2km the aim-9L is much more flare resistant due to having a native seekerhead that is much much smaller
Ofcourse it is. Thing is that it works better at short ranges, end of story. Thats my preference, both are equal level in my book, different playstyles. I just like the 60m better.
But there’s more to that. If I recall correctly, the 60m is more sensitive to engine plumes. In my experience the 60m is better at short range rear aspect, and from flaring both, I also notice the 60m seeker floating back and forth between the flare and engine more often while the 9L bites on the flare and goes away
