Some doubts that arose with the arrival of the aim 120C-5

Dev Server "Leviathans" General Discussion - Dev Server
60

People constantly are complaining about the Pantsir and the Kh-38MT.
Just because these complaints aren’t being discussed as much on this side of the forum doesn’t mean that these complaints don’t exist.

The F-15E and F-15I Ra’am getting these new missiles isn’t good for the balance and people claiming that this will balance the USSRs CAS/SPAA dominance is nonsensical, as this CAS/SPAA dominance doesn’t exist in ARB.

The USSR tree shouldn’t have the Pantsir and the Kh-38MT, but them having these weapons doesn’t justify the addition of AIM-120C-5s to the F-15E and F-15I Ra’am.

6 Likes
61

1 F-15 shot down 2 MiG-29 in late 90’s

1 Like
62

Iraqis said both were shot down, USAF said 1 was damaged by the missile

63

Pantsir was OP when it was added it has been powercrept to dust now by newer CAS. I even made a thread recently asking for help because i have been spading it and the advice given for fighting things like typhoons and strike eagles rafales etc was to just hide from them if they know what they are doing.

I really hope the new spaa is good, but im not holding my breath.

1 Like
64

It still is rather strong as it can reliably shoot down incoming missiles and bombs.
Don’t get me wrong, it definitely is getting outclassed by CAS and will finally get some proper competition in the coming update, but currently it still is the strongest SPAA/SAM in the game.

65

C-5 isnt op, the 38mt is… atleast not the c5 in game

1 Like
67

Yeah exactly. So since neither side has proven anything and it’s allegedly, that means neither side is confirmed.

You pretty much said “it’s allegedly so it’s not true”. Which is also just blatant bias.

68

Yeah, just commie tears, it’s not like there are NATO nations that are getting left out of having C-5s on their planes.

69

Why do you care so much about a missile that is worse then the 120b in most situations

70

Again, the performance of the Kh-38MT doesn’t justify the addition of the C-5.

3 Likes
71

the 38mt doesnt justify the addition of an arguably worse missile? that makes no sense.

72

There’s a reason why the R-27EA is being considered,
relax. They’ll surely add C5s to EFs, and it’ll trigger the domino effect that ru mains are desperately begging for.

Edit: C5s are nerfed, thus making R-27EAs unnecesary.

73

The Kh-38MT is an A2G weapon. The C-5 is an A2A weapon.

How does the performance of a weapon that is only really useful in GRB justify the addition of a better A2A weapon?

Also, how the hell is the C-5 worse than the B?

2 Likes
74
  • When at 5000 feet altitude (at mach 1.2) the 120b is both faster and has more range 5.6 miles more range infact
  • When at 16000 the 120c is still slower but has 4.3 mile more range then the 120b
  • the only notably larger range is at 33000 feet altitude which is 12.6 miles.

This means the only time the 120c is better is around 20,000+ feet altitude vs a target at 20,000+ feet altitude

2 Likes
75

Who the hell climbs to those altitudes in ARB?

76

We got aim120C5 before aim9m working properly wow

1 Like
77

My point, the 120C-5 is only better at the altitudes that are rarely reach. the 120b is so much better at the lower altitudes

120c is slower and has less range at any altitude below 15000 on a target below 15000 when moving at mach 1.2 at launch

78

F-15E And F-14B

79

It certainly does, if something so gamebreaking can exist with nothing to counter it or something even close to being equal to it i don’t mind it at all and i will benefit from it alot.

80

At lower altitudes the C-5 should have better maneuverability, which is much more important than speed.