Yeah so super powerful jet → more good players → even better performance
Doesn’t change that the starting point is the Rafale being significantly stronger in the current meta than its competitors
3 Likes
It absolutely does change the framing — because it shows the Rafale’s dominance isn’t just from being “broken,” but also from who flies it.
The point isn’t to claim the Rafale isn’t strong. It is. What I’m arguing is that its statistical performance is being inflated by factors other than raw airframe capability — primarily, the disproportionate skill level of its userbase.
It’s a self-reinforcing loop:
- Rafale is perceived as meta → skilled players grind France → they fly it with high efficiency → it posts better stats → perception is reinforced.
So yes, it’s ahead of the pack — no one is denying that.
But it’s not as far ahead as the raw stats alone suggest.
No one is denying that. Most comments just want that the initial level of power is somewhat similar so good players don’t feel the need to flock to one plane in order to perform at peak level
Unfortunately, that’s a human behavior issue, not a data problem—and there’s no easy fix. It moves the discussion into psychobehavioral territory, which is complex and often resistant to simple solutions.
Planes will never be truly equal; each one has its own strengths and weaknesses, and those inherent gaps create psychological incentives for players to flock to whichever aircraft provides the clearest advantage.
Unfortunately, balancing around some nations having “higher skill” than others results in some rather unfair outcomes.
Like for example is the reason why the Tornado Gr1 with Mk101 engines being a higher BR than the Tornado WTD61 with Mk103 engines purely because British TT players are better than German premium players?
Or why the Challenger 2 despite the fact it is on paper, one if not the weakest tanks at top tier the same BR as the Leopard 2A7s because German and Swedish players are bad/British players are good?
Player stats should be used alongside common sense and unfortunately it isnt
This is like asking to prove that the earth is round
1 Like
id say there is at least an easy fix to go in the right direction especially in a game like WT where swapping tech tree is not that easy. Just bring all other 14.0s to a similar powerlevel so playing anything other than the topdog is not that much of a detriment
Not that i complain, but what purpose is there to 120A/Bs now?
C5s seemed to be a great way to balance slower airframes like hornet or lacking in payload like Gripen C but now that even EFT recieves them, the gap between 13.0 ARH slingers and 14.0 planes just somehow got even bigger.
???
And screw the 13.0-13.7 bracket, right?
And it doesn’t really break the feedback loop.
Your ‘solution’ fixes nothing. At all.
You’re saying 2 things;
- The Rafale isnt OP, it just has good players
- Any player worth their salt knows the Rafale is OP, so they’re playing it
Your giant walls of text are effectively self defeating, and largely just hinge on assumptions of the Rafale player base being superior to all others, a metric that we cant really measure in any way accurately, and is effectively not worth engaging with when discussing balance, as you are debating objective facts (the raw performance numbers of each aircraft) against a subjective opinion (Rafale players are better than everyone else for XYZ reason).
Obviously, there is more to balance than just the raw performance numbers of an aircraft, but the performance numbers are still the primary indicator of an overperforming airframe, which the Rafale is blatantly so.
4 Likes
13-13.7 is suffering already, partially because the Rafale is so strong. By your logic only the Rafale is allowed to club the 13 bracket?
Ofc it might fix the loop, if all 14.0s are on a similar powerlevel, good players wont feel the need as much to play the Rafale
Rafale OP
Buff MICA
Rafale OP, but need more
placeholder
Most of not all 14.0s probably could go up to 14.3 now. But from my perspective at least in the typhoon, the C5 should give the typhoon some of the HOBS ability the R-77-1 and MICA EM have. Especially as we lack IR HOBS as well.
There is now room for buffing AAM-4, PL-12 and maybe MICA EM a bit as well and that would help create parity between the 14.0s.
Yes 13.0s would struggle even more in an uptier, but they already did anyway
1 Like
That’s factually incorrect, and not what I wrote.
As per my own words;
“It is the meta jet […] the jet itself is still extremely strong.”
“I’m not saying the Rafale isn’t strong. It is.”
You completely disregarded the part where I performed a multivariable analysis to associate why the Rafale’s playerbase may be performing better than other planes.
And they logically hold water.
By definition, they are empirically accurate assessments based on the data that YOU provided.
Do feel free to refute my point. Otherwise, you’re just flailing and saying that I’m incorrect without saying why.
Also, the literal biggest confouding variable (the PILOT) not worth engaging during a discussion about balance? LOL.
I do this for a living, chief.
What the hell do you mean? The holy trinity (F-15E, Typhoon, Rafale) already FACTUALLY seal clubs the entire 13 bracket.
It won’t fix the loop. If the planes are similar, they will simply pick the bigger numbers. And with the Rafale’s stats being the far superior plane right now, guess what will happen…
I mean just because they already struggle does not make it okay to make them struggle even more.
One can hope.
IIRC that statcard youve sent me earlier showed C5s having peak pull of 35Gs.
I personally wouldnt really call that HOBS capable missile, since it lacks TVC.
Ultimately my point was something different alltogether.
Whats the point of 120A/Bs now if not balancing factor to equalize better airframes with weaker ones?
you get paid for yapping?
yes thats exactly the thing if you make the other planes better more good players will get back to the other planes either for testing if the changes actually did something and because they dont feel as powerless as they feel now
1 Like
The 120C-5 is supposed have better AoA and a faster maneuvering time off the rails, which is what gives it the “HOB” performance coupled with the different rocket motor profile. The current iteration has neither the AoA improvement over the 120A/B and has the same 0.6 second maneuvering delay which is what kills the close in performance.
1 Like
C5 has 0.3 sec guidance