Well it’s compatible with it. P4 will still be too strong RN, unless u accept it receives unrealistic IRCCM and range.
Yes i said it many times gaijin should add this with the 9m irccm until it could get its full irccm capability
Not all fighters, for example the Kfir C.10 only has the P3 as an IR missile. Then it does need the P4 (and then the powerful Python 5, but that’s another story).
2 Likes
tell me what IR missiles in game recived his real IRCCM capabilities and range? none of the present in game the R-27ET for example is a missile that IRL have a 50+ km of range in game is completly unrealistic, AAM-3 is not even close to its real performance haha and we have many more cases like this ones, also it already passed 2 years since the Python-3 was added and 1 year and more than a half since the Python-4 appeared in the files its time for this missile to come it would be one of the best IRs in game thats for sure but i totally doubt it would break the game like the R-27ER did back in the day when it got added to the MIG-29 9.13 for example or like the KH-38MT in GBR that it caused at completly unbalanced matches we are in a meta specially in air that the most important missile are the FOX-3 everybody is using FOX-3s as its main missile and people brings a lot of them because even in close range FOX-3s are more effective than the IRs, practically %80 of the players just use 1 or 2 IRs and the rest of the missiles are ARH ones and it would stay like this even if they add fifth gen IRs in december this year it never would change the fact that FOX-3s have the range, speed, accel, pull and even way better percentage of hit rate than an IR being launched at 20km or more the IR seekers will be always limited at some point if this werent true we should be seeing the countries around the world developing IR missiles with 100km of range and more to be on par with ARH missiles but its not the case yet.
Well, for the R-27ET, you’re confusing the lock on ranges for a seeker that isn’t even in game… those lock on ranges are for the modernized seekerhead, not the original 80s one.
Spoiler
mmm… this is for the T not the ET the ET uses a different seeker version its not the same 36T optical seeker you can find in the T variant it use the AZ-10 seeker that it was presented in the MAKS Moscow air show in 2009 leaving this aside because this is about Python-4 and not russian missiles. my point stands still that no missile in game is historically correct.
1 Like
I think that if they haven’t included the P4 it’s because it’s really strong, but what it should excel at is precisely its resistance to countermeasures. For me, it’s very unfair that a Python 3 is diverted at the last minute and an AIM 9 L doesn’t even look at them.
1 Like
But accepting that would just mean p4 is no better than 9M. Pick ur poison, I’d rather have a placeholder until the real missile can come out. Unless for like China where there literally isn’t one so they gave us the 5EII placeholder.
It would be a huge ‘advantage’ over what is currently in game if modelled correctly, therefore I said u either have to compensate on missile performance and BR or just wait.
Well I mean I normally run out of them but having a reliable IR is quite nice to finish off the job.
Huh?
P4 has more g more range and speed how is it not better then 9m?
Oh and dont forget the 90° gimbal limit
1 Like
Which will make it OP, so no. You either have to deal with it as if it has similar range, slightly faster speed and gimbal will be nerfed as well. That is the price for it to come in now.
No u have the r27et with insane range and irccm
So p4 just trades range to pull and gimbal limit
Its not gonna break the game not even close
1 Like
R27ET I think u mean, that thing has basically no IRCCM, a single flare will do unless u are in a tail chase. Also it can’t do off bore sight very well, after all it is an R27E.
Ok then give me p4 with gatewidth irccm or how its called
And as i said it trades range and speed for agility
Well will u trade it for AMRAAM though? That is R27ET’s thing, cause it is like worst irccm.
1 Like
Yes
I need at least 1 df missile on my loadoat if not 2
Well yeah for NATO stuff they can be on either. Here is the case, u already have 4 R73s, do u want to waste 2 extra R77 for R27ET NVM ETs are 1 flare thing, be it R77s are bad.
R27ETs occupying ARH missile slot is what balances it out. Which except for SU30 it is a concern.
1 Like
If u want to take r27et or r77 its your choise but at least u have the option
I want the same
If u want the same then you will have to have nerfed missile like everyone else.
U mean derby?
I doubt that will be the case
They will probably change the seeker irccm drag coefficient and fin aoa since the p4 rn is a p3 placeholder in the files except for the seeker head
Tbf i think it will get the 9m irccm and the fin aoa of the aam3