When the MiG-29s were first added, they were denied their historical main armament, the R-73. This was fair- at the time, over three years ago. But now IRCCM are ubiquitous. There are a myriad of 4th gen 13.0s with IRCCM, the French F-16A and F-16OCU are both 12.7 with AIM-9Ms, and Gaijin has even made the absurd decision to move the F-15s to 12.7- the same BR as the MiG-29s despite having better missiles, more missiles, and better flight performance!
And now Gaijin is giving the 9.13 R-73s and moving it up in BR, with a new MiG-29 at 12.7. Which is nice for the Soviet tree, I suppose, but it’s putting duct tape over a very patchable hole. Italy will still be left without R-73s and at this point what reason is there against simply giving the MiG-29s their proper armament: R-73s and no R-27Es? This would fit the MiG-29s into 12.7 compared to the current BRs of e.g. the F-16OCU though 13.0 if recent compression of that BR range are not considered.
Anyways, what are your thoughts? How do you think the MiG-29s should be implemented?
Note: the MiG-29N and MiG-29SMT are a different situation, the MiG-29s in question are only the 12.7 and 13.0 first-gen MiG-29s of the 9.12, 9.12A, 9.12B, 9.12G, and 9.13 standards.
- Keep current Dev Server implementation
- Give all MiG-29 9.12/13 historically accurate R-73 and no R-27E, BR 13.0
- Give all MiG-29 9.12/13 historically accurate R-73 and no R-27E, BR 12.7
- Give all MiG-29 9.12/13 R-73 and R-27E, BR 13.0
- Give each nation one MiG-29 at 12.7 and one 13.0 (e.g. R-73 and R-27ET for MiG-29 Sniper)
- Something else (comment)