Remove R-27ER/ET's in exchange for R-73s for both MiG-29 (9.12) and MiG-29 (9.13)

Hello and good morning/evening to everyone.
The MiG-29 (9.12) and (9.13) currently only have the R-60M/MK as their top IR missile loadout, which is historically something incorrect, since the introduction of the R-73 in 1985 all variants of the MiG-29 had them in their arsenal and as other posts have suggested something that could amend the lack of these missiles in these MiG-29s without making them basically “better versions” of the G and SMT would be the removal of the R-27ER/ET on them, having it top at R-27R/T.


I forgot to put it, but thanks for reading anyways

Also i forgot to put it, but the MiG-29s (9.12 and 9.13) could also get their br increased to 12.3 or just keep it at 12.0 in case it starts being unbalanced

1 Like

100% agree. Especially for an aircraft that fights ones such as the F-4E with neither all-aspects nor PD to be effective at low altitudes, R-27ER is much more powerful than the R-73. This makes for an aircraft of equal attier/uptier performance but less oppressive performance in downtiers. It’s also more historically accurate which is nice.
In terms of BR, 12.0 should still be fine. R-73s are pretty easy to flare if you know how, and especially with the countermeasures changes coming soon they’ll be even easier. The SMT and G should never have been moved to 12.7, they’re pretty definitively worse than every other 12.7 and even some 12.3s.


Its missed opportunity to not have 9.13 and 9.12A as dedicated dogfighting variants and SMT as long range sniper variant.


It would be the historical loadout and would be better for balance on top of that.
If necessary both aircraft could be placed at 12.3 with these changes.


You should just decompress the current BRs and add the R-73s while keeping the R-27Es

12.7 br then. Without R-27ER/ET 12.0 might be acceptable but with Mirage 2000-5 at 12.3 MiG-29 without ER/ET but with R-73 should be to. Would make the plane more capable and historically accurate without clubbing to hard in downtiers. Would also balance gameplay on MiG-29.
Good medium range instead of very long as well a very short range missiles.

1 Like

Historical accuracy went out the window in 2014 with the addition of stuff like the Tiger II 105. Bad argument. We also have the US fighting itself basically every match past 9.0.

It wouldn’t balance gameplay for the Fulcrum, you would be gimping it. The R-73 is basically just an R-60M with some minor tweaks and the most basic IRCCM ever. They’re not amazing, but they are better than the R-60M

You would also be inadvertently annoying every single 11.0 with R-73s. Which is fine for planes with large amounts of flares, but for stuff like the MiG-23MF/M that have 12 flares that are launched in such a way that the R-73s wouldnt even see them, it would be a slaughter. At least with R-60Ms their gate width is so huge they see flares almost every single time.

You’d be trading 2 easy to dodge missiles for 6 much more annoying missiles.

R-27R/T is only easy to dodge when it was launched badly. R-27ER/ET are even better.
At 12.3 MiG-29 with R-27R/T as well as R-73 would be fine.
ER on a 12.0 MiG-29 in a downtier puts much morepressure on the enemy if well used than R-73.


All SARHs are easy to dodge, just hug the deck and theyll miss nearly every time. ER vs an F-4E is much easier for that F-4E to dodge than an R-73. The ER doesnt put more pressure on a team anymore than the normal R does, nor than a 7F does.


In the average match you will not always be in a position to constantly fly that low. Unless you want to be a free kill for someone else.

1 Like

Yeah, really good idea. Looks really dumb with r60 on the mig 29

1 Like

• An early version (current one) without R-27ER at 12.0, just normal R-27R-T and R-60Ms (and refund people who got the modification.)

• Late variant with R-73, (or both R-73 and R-27ER/ET) at 12.3 (or 12.7 respectively)

(folder for late and early ofc)

This would let you play based on the loadout and BR you want, and honestly something I want to see. What do yall think?

That would be 3 variants of one aircraft for very little reason and difference.
Irl the current MiG-29s at 12.0 we have in the German and Soviet tech tree had R-73 but not R-27ER/ET.
In game having less 11.0 aircraft face MiG-29 would be a improvement while MiG-29 would benefit nicely from having R-73 instead of R-27ER/ET at 12.3.


All of them at a different BR with a different gameplay style is a difference. And with the SMT likely going up in BR when the R-77 (or R-27 ARH variant), another MiG-29 between 12.0-13.0 would be nice.
Its just more options and different choices is all, don’t see why you wouldn’t want that.
Think of it like the F-4E, the F-4S/J/UK, and the F-4EJ/F-4S(late). (Not the best example since they’re all in different tech trees (unless the F-4S(late) or F-4G gets added, but they should still make a point. Adding a late one like the MiG-29G for the Russians, (that doesn’t crap out all its speed at the mention of a turn), would be a more than welcome addition (if foldered) IMO.
Edit; (And yes I’m aware the R-27ER was produced after the R-73. They specifically didn’t add the R-73 for balance reasons, yet for some fricken reason decided the ER was totally fair and balanced.)

1 Like

You got a few things wrong there.
I’m all for more MiG-29 variants but I’d like them to be balanced as well as authentic.

Talking about the aircraft we have in game and the situation at hand MiG-29’‘‘A’’ should have it’s historical loadout at 12.3 because authenticity and balance, especially compared to some other aircraft as well as considerations how gameplay feels on the jet.

With MiG29G/SMT at 12.7, MiG-29’‘A’’ at 12.3 with R-27R/T as well as R-73 what would the purpose of another MiG-29 with R-60M be at 12.0?
Of course all based on the assumption that the consesnus is that MiG-29’‘A’’ is just odd with the R-60M, R-27ER/ET combination and is awkwardly placed both in Br and matchmaker.

1 Like

In an average match you are often able to fly low for the entire game, I do it constantly in the Yak-41and rarely does it not work out

Well idk about you but I enjoy having early variants that i can use to just go massacre downtiers with hahaha.

Jokes aside, my main reasoning for a MiG-29G equivalent is that the SMT is likely going up. And technically speaking the MiG-29G is currently the best variant in game given its flight performance compared to the SMT. More variety and options is all I’m suggesting. And additionally, given the MiG-29 did operate with R-60Ms at a point in time, an early historical version like this would be fun for the sake of taking it into lower tier battles.

If the SMT does go up, (which is highly likely given 11.7 would struggle against ARH) I would love the option to choose between;

MiG-29 “a” early: at 12.0 with R-60Ms and standard R-27s
MiG-29 “a” late: at 12.3 (or 12.7) With the R-73 (and R-27ER/ET)
MiG-29SMT: at 13.0 (approximately assuming it gets the R-77 or R-27 ARG missiles) With a wide variety of missile options, and possibly the later R-73 variant in the future.

I just don’t want there to be a whole BR point gap between the two variants if this happens.

I see what you mean but I’d argue a 12.3 airframe as described would be best of all worlds.

1 Like