R27ER/ET Removed from MiG-29's and YAK-141 able to carry 4

As everyone knows. In the next coming update the MiG-29SMT will be coming with the R73 and R27ER/ET. This combo is insanely good and will lead to the MiG-29SMT dominating top tier.

My proposal is to remove the R27ER/ET from the MiG-29(9.13) and MiG-29SMT and allow the YAK-141 to carry its historically accurate 4 R27ER’s/ET’s.

This would give players an incentive to still play the YAK-141, and would help with balance.

With this change top tier USSR/Russia would look like this

MiG-29(9.13) with 4 R-60M’s and 2 R-27R’s/T’s
MiG-29SMT with 4 R-73’s and 2 R-27R’s/T’s
YAK-141 with 4 R27ER’s/ET’s

With this the MiG-29SMT would still have the best IR missiles in game. While its Radar missiles will be on par with the AIM-7F/M, and Skyflash SuperTEMP

If you remember the MiG-29(9.13) was given the R27ER to help it out because when the “Apex Predators” updated dropped. The MiG-29’s radar was broken. Now that the radar on the MiG-29(9.13) is fixed the R-27ER is no longer needed to help it out. With its fixed radar and the better radar on the MiG-29SMT the R-27R would be closer in performance to the AIM-7F/M.

This would allow people to use different aircraft for different roles instead one aircraft that does everything better than everything.

This change would make it so NATO countries/allies would have the better the better flight performance. While USSR/allies would have better close range IR missiles, and the radar missiles would have similar performance.

@Smin1080p I know you have some power over at gaijin. Please make it so top tier is balanced


Honestly this is an incredibly horrible idea. Just remove R-27Es, I’m fine with 27R/T but ER/ET is not needed at all, giving the 141 ET will just make it more broken (It’s ability to carry 4x R-27s as opposed to the MiG-29’s 2x R-27

1 Like

I’m fine if they remove them from the 9.12A and 9.13 because they never had them, have them replaced with R-73, but I’d like to see them stay on the 9.19.


indeed, also the GERMANS never even RECEIVED THE 27ER, so that one should be absolutely removed from German MIG-29


Yak-141 cannot carry 4 R-27Es due to their physical size, this was already proven in a bug report and actioned on which is why it’s 2 instead of 4.
ERs should stay on SMT, no 12.3 should be nerfed that hard.

1 Like

the yak never carried any weaponry (historically) as it was just a testbed


please remove a third of the useful weaponry from a top teir aircraft from a nation that has nothing except a mig 23 as its top dog.
if you argue based on history, you will not only have to remove the R-27ER but also the R-27T and leave the german mig 29 crippled.
the F-16AJ dosent even exist, where is that historical argument?
balance, boys, balance, if people knew how to use the pheonix theyd be monstrous, a shame i dont have the tomcat otherwise i would make tutorials about it. its not as one sided as you think, the range advantage is still in the hands of the americans as is the better radar. not to mention the only ARH is american and it can carry 4 of them ALONGSIDE 2 SARH and 4/2 Aim9L’s!


F-16AJ’s prototype is legit in the F-16 database.
Aircraft are given their capable weapons not their service weapons, cause this is a war games simulator not a historical battles simulator. :)
Best argument to make in regards to arguments like Malekitth’s.

personally i have failed to find it but ill assume it is there

a good argument i must admit, but it also depends on the viewers opinion.

as for the F-16AJ… why not add a handicapped version of the Mitsubishi F-2? like how they added the mig29 without the R-77

Cause the precedent of empty AAM pylons isn’t a thing on tech tree aircraft.
I have to specify tech tree cause of premium A-10.
F-2 can’t have 8 IR missiles to my knowledge, it’s still just 6.

dont they look like sparrows?
ofcourse i could be wrong

“i cant believe its not an f-16!”
edit: i admit this is off topic but dont get so triggered to flag it

1 Like

if the wiki range is anything to go by, 100km isnt much and by some stretch could be added in game

4x IR + 4x SARH / ARH - Not six.

Yes, these are 4x AAM-3 and 4x AIM-7M

Incorrect. First of all; the picture @HYPNOSYS2002 posted shows AAM-3 and AIM-7M. Second; F-2 didn´t have AAM-4 from the beginning, it used AIM-9L, AAM-3 and AIM-7M in its early service days.
And once again; only 4x AAM-3 / AAM-5/B + 4x AIM-7M / AAM-4/B.

First production AAM-4 has roughly the range of the AIM-120B, AAM-4Bs range is closer the AIM-120C-5.

1 Like

They never received r23t, r24t nor r27t either. The only reason people care is because the r27er is actually good. They used to care about the r24t back in the day too I guess, but now no one cares.

Imo 9.12 and 9.13 should have their R-27ER removed and be given R-73 instead. 9.19 should remain with both R-73 and R-27ET/ER. YAK-141 doesn’t need a change except from possible addition of R-73 but only if it lost R-27ER.

I think that would be the most balanced and historically accurate solution that would please all MiG-29 and YAK users. Balancing that out with NATO missiles is the other thing tho and I think something should be done about that as well.


They can take aim7s on the outboards so it’s possible they can take aim9s on the inboards as well, the actual question is can it be set up for more than 4 IR/radar missiles electronically. But certainly 2IR/6Radar would be physically possible (I’ve never seen IR missiles on the inboard pylons but mostly because they’ve either had fuel, radar missiles, or anti ship missiles equipped, because normal militaries don’t rock around with 8 ir missiles lmao)

those inner pylons can take some entertaining loads

for XF-2A: 4X IR 4X SARH

Thats the XF-2 and its was only shown on that specific model, this capability wasn´t taken over to the production F-2 (at least its not officially used in service).

do you have any sourcing for that?

for production F2: same thing, 4x ir 4x sarh/arh
match the colour of the weapon to the colour of the pylons on the aircraft