I wonder if the motor change is historically accurate or just a balance decision. That change was quite a big one
Hug the ground & it wont hit.
Notch & it won’t track.
3 Likes
it has less range but more acceleration, range doesn’t matter when everyone flies low, it is still going to be a free kill below 8km of distance. Nobody does BVR in this game now. All successful engagements occur at 10km or less and the closer they are the more common. Even if it’s a “huge nerf” (it’s not given the meta, rather a buff) the aim7m is still a hopeless missile you can just dodge by tossing your plane around, and it is the slowest and worst accelerating missile in all rank 8.
datalink gets you, missile detonates near you and leaves you with a red wing, making you unable to dogfight. You miraculously arrive at airbase and repair, match is over. Try again.
AIM-54 does this way better than the R-27ER lol. Don’t fly in a straight line then? Try again.
3 Likes
So true
is it right?
r24r being a better skyflash, r24t now is unflareable, r60’s totally ignoring flares on head on, r27et, r27er short range buff, r73 dogfight missile (perfect for the furball meta, if you don’t flare around a mig29 that isn’t even looking at you you die)
this patch is definitely for America.
2 Likes
R-60M ignoring flares , İN HEADON? Damn bro at least try to be subtle if you are gonna make stuff up
7 Likes
huh? they do ignore flares below 2km from launch, aim9j’s too when you get a frontal lock on someone, they can flare as much as they want. The aim9l is very flare sensitive on head on. Plus doesn’t pull as hard initially as r60 or aim9j.
Side note: F16’s pull harder now, at the expenses of snapping their wings when snaprolling a missile on same fuel loads. Patch is for America, we have f22 raptor and aim9x too. USA OP.
AIM-9J seriously? 🤣
1 Like
yes they do ignore flares head on.
Yes, that tends to happen when you launch it point blank. 9L, R-60, anything that can arm fast enough(sad magic 2 noises). The only missle ignoring flares in a head on not point blank is the aim9m. Since you argue in bad faith by ignoring logic, I’m eager to hear what wisdom you have to bestow upon us today.
4 Likes
That missile barely has front aspect capability. You need to be really close to your target in order to lock it in front aspect using a rear aspect missile.Since you are already very close to your target your target’s flare wont affect the missile.You can get a similar result using all aspects as well.Just fire the missile(Front aspect) under 1 km and it should ignore flares
1 Like
SMT we have in game is from 1997, not 2005. 2005 version should’ve had additional flares and SPO-150 instead of SPO-15. Also, f-16c we have is a 2003-2004 modification, with JHMCS installed.
3 Likes
it can reliably lock on tomcats, mig23s and 29s from 1.3km away. I’ve launched my 9l’s the same way and they don’t usually even need to flare, the missile just misses. It’s got very slow acceleration and poor first stage maneuverability. Besides the fact that the f16a adf is a shitbrick of a plane and still takes a whole year to respond despite pulling 12g’s on maximum fuel so you won’t lead on the target as accurately.
The ADF is NOT a shitbrick lmfao. After the F-16 fm buff and Mig-29 fm nerf the Americans wipe the floor with the Russians after the merge.
3 Likes
the adf is a shitbrick compared to the A variant, it still will rinse mirage 2k ass. A is just another league, if you get with the program and learn how to keep 740 ias you are clocking a disgusting instantaneous turn rate doing 180 degrees in two seconds.
oh, that’s because mig29’s have band J radar, non detected by anything that’s not an F-16 or an F-4E Late like we have in game(and still missing the aim7f’s and aim9p2)
1 Like
You shouldn’t even be in situations where you are able to be shot at with a R-27ER.
That explains it, but is an incredibly stupid decision by Gaijin for gameplay purposes, IRL they did not face each other so it didn’t matter, but if they did they would absolutely have a different RWR to be able to detect each other radars.