This discussion is pointless if you’re going to result to insults and claims like these when I make a valid criticism about what you’re saying.
What I think we should do is find better options for SPAAG to all nations. I am sure that there would be options.
Remember when you claimed you didn’t stalk me on this site?
No complaints were made. I was making a BR comparison.
That’s what Gaijin’s already working on.
Japan will be getting radar-assisted Type 81 this year as an example.
This isn’t you unless you’re claiming Joke is your alt account.
Worse cm and avionics sure but not worse missiles overall
In this br radar missiles is a must and avionics doesnt matter without radar missiles
Also 4j have hmd which is very nice
Sparrows are very useful and the Kurnass does not get any radar-guided missile.
This isn’t a complaint post either, I was just pointing out that a Mig-23 with R-73 would be a bit silly for 12.3
1 Like
You accused me of lying first.
I gave you a valid answer to your criticism, which you seemingly can’t accept.
You tried to make my claim about LoS irrelevant by using my CAS experience, without realizing I’ve been on the other side of the engagement plenty of times and seen it happening.
I also told you that you don’t need experience to observe some things, which is absolutely true.
Yes worse missiles.
On Kurnass 2000 I have 6 Python 3s, which have generous no-escape ranges against afterburning targets. AIM-9H + AIM-7F aren’t that. AIM-9L + AIM-7F is another story entirely.
@Just_Baron
Sparrows would be useful, and would make Kurnass 2000 12.7, the BR EJ Kai should be.
I know you’re pointing out BRs thanks to your clarification.
Mirage 2000 have Magic II on BR 12.3 which are comparable.
I will not discuss the Mirage because I do not know enough about them to make statements on their BR placement or weapon systems. I primarily play Ground.
I have both so I can compare.
I can say for certain, however, that the Magic 2 is not comparable to the R-73.
Python 3 have the same flare ressitance and even less then 9l due to large seeker
Also while p3 is better 9l has more range so overall this shouldnt effect a br diffrance
Yes f4 against f15c with fox 3 very fair
Thst bcuz of missile count and its 12.7(the s4)
The s5 is 13.0
Python 3/L have the same good flare resistance, both of which are superior to all rear-aspect missiles in the game.
And there is no BR difference, there are no 12.0 AIM-9L aircraft of Kurnass 2000’s capabilities.
Now, there’s arguably F-111C at 11.7, but I doubt you’ll be arguing they’re equals as the community in general has written off the improved Aardvarks.
I did because you made a statement that was deceptive and not factual. You made a claim that your method was better, so I wanted to see if it was, and to my surprise, you’re nearly negative in all aircraft at high tier for CAS.
I did not insult you for having worse stats, but you made a claim which was untrue and I told you so.
I compared your CAS experience because you said yours was better. I only returned the favor. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong if I am, but I know you won’t show your stat card like I did.
Yet you stated your tactics were better. That’s what you said.
Like R-73 turns better but they are pretty comparable. I am looking on statshark.
Again larger seeker=most likely to see flare even if it closer
But anyway p3 arent justification for a br raise not for the k2k and not for the netz as well
Now its off topic so im stoping here
The Magic 2 is a countermeasure-resistant missile while the R-73 is a thrust-vectoring missile with horrible countermeasure performance.
The main difference is that the R-73 provides the unique benefit of being exceptional at jumping players from unexpected locations in situations where most missiles cannot be effective.
1 Like
± I agree with that.