I guess might be F-16C Block 30/32 (post gulf war config) and F-16CG Block 40/42 (early Iraq war) around battle rating 13.3
Agree. Should be 13.3. Never got.on with the f16c
Feels so heavy in game compared to the rest of the 16s.
13.3 f16 is probs my favorite jet to fly in the current MM.
The f16C isnt enough of an improvement over the 13 3s.
Many other examples of this too. F18s with X ammount of CMs, HMD, better engines at same BRs of f18s that dont.
Try it with current 13.7 matchmaker. it already sees a lot of downtiers to 12.7.
right? at high alt it just weaves through the battlefield. I absolutely love it.
1 Like
if the radar had the basic NCTR it would be perfect
1 Like
yeah, basic NCTR would be nice to have, but im fine with the current config. certainly one of my go to planes to grind events with now.
1 Like
True. The 12.7- 13.7 hole is real.
Cant see how it can be fixed when we have same jets with massivly differnet spec at same BR… then the flip side = flanker no fox 3 13.0. Flanker fox 3= 13.3.
Its a bad mess. Still.think WT is great but out of so many jets theres like 20 that actually compete throughout the full game
Su-30Mkk and M2 AVE should be 13.7 or 14.0, rather than F-16C go down. I don’t like it but I suck at top tier air so it’s realistically a skill issue on my part, but overall it’s fine where it is.
2 Likes
If that wasn’t obvious enough, it’s not as bad as 40 cause it has the upgraded engine
If 120 CMs instead of 60 isn’t an improvement then I don’t know what to tell you
US F-18s have the same CM count as F-16C
EHEM all of the premium Su-30’s
At least for sim I wish most of the F-16’s didn’t get massively overpowered due to being assigned the 14.3 bracket.
And maybe they should also add the 1001 missing features still pending, like the SMS, NCTR for recent APG-68 platforms, etc.
Ik the cockpit mfd has provisions for nctr for the f-16 but is there any documents that actually state that the radar itself has nctr?
Yeah, there was testing for APG-68(V)7 iirc, I have the document on my computer, said implementation has also been reported and shouldn’t be a problem for other variants like the APG-68(V)9 since that radar is a further development with SAR (which is quite the capability furthering the overall power of the radar)
I agree , the snail doesnt.
Same BRs for the NETZ’ one has 3 x the CNs
Same BRs for the f18s like the sweedish version with many more flares, hmd, engines sat in same BR as f18s that dont.
J35 no flares- 10.0. J35XS flares and more missiles= + 0.3
Meenwhile jaguar no.flares 9.7. Jaguar with flares 10.7.
Etc etc etc
If you can make sense of it LMK
Oh man, this take is so hot I thought this was a TigerTank post.
1 Like
Here’s the community report I mentioned
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9SlVTxINGbUl
1 Like
Ah so it’s just typical gaijin laziness
Oh dear, if you only knew how lazy Gaijin can be when it comes to sensors and capabilities, even with Russia (a nation often regarded as the best when it comes to sensors and capabilities correctly modeled) they still have problems, my favorite example is how the MiG-29SMT is still missing a detailed MFD page for engine parameters lol.
Or not go too far, how the EF-2000’s (non-AESA) X-ray model is of an AESA radar instead of the mechanical ECR-90 haha…
I still like reporting these issues myself but it gets tiring to not have them approved or even considered.
1 Like
If think the word you’re looking for is powerkrepted
The Prem Su30s just need to go to 13.7 the chines 1 specifically the F-16C is prob the most balanced plane in the game for its BR.