Oh you said it well, it is a video game and for this game the purpose of the aircraft is pure striker capabilities and isnt currently supposed to be a multirole aircraft, just accept the fact it is a game like you said lol, played yourself with that one
2 Likes
They have, the precedent exists simply look at either F-16A-15ADF.
Do you legitimately think for a single second that the -15ADF could not actually carry A2G ordnance, or that the fact that it doesn’t have any was done for no reason by Gaijin, the same way it doesn’t have the AIM-120 (yet).
Also I’m still waiting for the GPU-5/A to be added among various other ordnance options (AN/AVG-8B & AIM-95, AGM-119A, AGM-45 /-78 etc.)each of which have already been reported or are pre-written waiting for their mechanics to be implemented.
2 Likes
Now I fully admit I am against the Su-39 getting major AAM upgrade because I have genuine concerns about it becoming to strong, we have already seen the consequences of a top tier jet getting AAMs that are too strong in the form of the R-27ER on the Mig-29 and Yak-141. An issue that will plague top tier until such time other nations catch up, hopefully with the addition of AMRAAM providing the Mig-29 isnt just instantly given the R-77
Now Before I begin, I admit, its probably under-performing in ARB, a lot of ground attackers are, does it need a buff at all? Well that’s a seperate conversation all together, but for THIS post specifically, im going to assume yes, but rather argue WHAT upgrade it could get.
Primers
1) First things first. We have to all agree, it is a ground attacker. I for one hate the idea of an aircraft being added for GRB. A number of British aircraft suck at the moment within a lot of content, so I do genuinely sympathise.
"Right now its too soon to provide any meaningful statement on its performance. The aircraft is indeed doing satisfactory in ground RB. Naturally attackers are going to be weaker in some cases in Aviation modes.
If / when we have some more news on the topic, we will for sure share it." - Smin
Now regardless of it’s IRL “role” that is what its for in–game and by all accounts, that is what its used for IRL. So it shouldnt and likely wont ever be a strong pick in ARB. The question is though, by what degree. I think it only needs to be on-par with the Gr1 and other IDS version of the Tornado, and that is at best, marginally stronger.
2) Its a more modern aircraft than a lot of other jets in-game. I’d say for a lot of nations we are around 1990-1995, but the Su-39 by all accounts is a early 2000s-2010 era jet. This means IRL it could get a lot more advanced AAMs, but just because it could doesnt mean it should in game. If it does, then I vote Gr7 gets its ASRAAMs, or at least its Historically accurate AGM-65s
3) Its premium. This makes it hard to balance with BR changes, and a lot of people will just buy it, making it common, My concerns would be greatly reduced if it was a tech tree jet and not premium
With that out of the way, the choices that I think are not completely insane
Viable options
1) Increase R-60M count from 2 to 4. Personally I think this is a missing loadout bug and not balancing issue. If you have information/sources for this being an actual loadout option, then submit a bug report
2) R-27T - It might not have actually ever carried these, but I think thats more because why would they equip a jet with R-27Ts when it could in its time take an R-73. These would give the Su-39 longer range IR missiles, and not necessarily be too strong. They’d be my choice for a first upgrade
3) R-27R - I have big concerns about adding BVRs onto a PREMIUM CAS jet. I’ve outlined this above before, but its mostly down to the Su-39 being pitted against BR 10 ish jets in GRB that might have no CMs, in ARB, they “might” be okay, but it could also be a big mistake, and so this decision must be made with caution. I think a small BR increase would be required too.
4) R-73 - In the future, sure. But with the current state of the game. No. Quite frankly. I think the Tornado IDS is in the same boat as the Su-39 in ARB. Every single argument you’ve made for the Su-39 could be copy and pasted over to the Tornado IDS and change R-73 for Aim-9M. But I’d make the same argument against it that I do here now. The game isnt ready. Many jets lack the necessary defence. Tornado Gr1 has HALF its accurate number of CMs. I’d be very much concerned about R-73/Aim-9M being too strong for the current game. Regardless of airframe. We have also seen many issues with how the game handles IR seekers. 9L is not performing well at the moment and I think they need to work on that before adding the next gen of IR AAM. My concern here is that the R-73 will either be immune to flares or instantly defeated by flares. In either case, its not a good choice.
Nor do I think it would be fair to add such an IR missile to a premium jet, that by all accounts is doing very well in GRB, but not give it to a jet like the IDS that is not in most gamemodes.
Other options such as R-27ER and R-77 should not be considered. Neither missile would be evenly remotely balanced.
ANY addition needs to be carefully considered and debated. Maybe im being selflish, but I fly the Tornado Gr1 mostly in ASB, and its not an easy jet to complete sorties in. The last thing I want to deal with, is another Top tier jet that is overtuned. Its hard enough to evade the Mig-29s. With the Su-39 being a premium, its very very common
3 Likes
MiG-23 has large calibre flares.
Wasn’t my experience when I died to a PL-5B whilst flaring and my IRCM facing the missile but I guess you could call it luck on the J-8Fs side.
Doesn’t matter. The found data for the 9L is based upon test conducted by the RAF with 9Ls fired at Jaguars dropping large calibre flares. In rear aspect, 9L would always go for the Jag if on Reheat and usually go for the Jaguar in most other aspects if it was on reheat. When you consider the Mig-23 is significantly hotter than a Jaguar, any difference in flare type is mitigated. That missile should have hit. This has been confirmed by tech mods and is under-investigation.
Within context of THIS discussion however, I think it shows fundamental issues with how flares, IRCCM and IR seekers in-general are handled and underlines the core part of the issue i’d have with the R-73 being added before those issues have been addressed. It could be disasterous
1 Like
I mean competitive as in it should be able to be of use to it’s team, but dosnt control the meta and the fight. Even if you give it two R-27R’S all you gotta do is notice that this plane has locked you and either, notch, turn away from the plane or go low, which is a skill all pilots have to already do at this BR, as there are many other planes with similar missles present. If you were to find yourself repeatedly dying too the Su-39 with two R-27R’S, it’s not because it’s suddenly overpowered but rather because you keep ignoring it and letting it lock you and guide the missle all the way. Keep in minde the missle on the Su-39 isn’t going to come off the rails as fast as it might on a Mig-29 or Yak 141, and I doubt any Su-39 player is gonna climb unless they wanna eat a phoenix or sparrow, so the missle will be fired and low speed and low altitude. An R-27R tho would still help the Su-39 have a decent chance to get a kill so long as they target unsuspecting fighters, but if anyone is paying attention too you your still doomed, because almost any plane at that BR range can get on your tail and kill you ez. Even an F-4E pilot has the potential to control the fight with you, he just can’t be dumb and flight high and straight at you if you have radar missles. This helps put a bit of agency back into the Su-39 in Air RB without making it ridiculous and keeps it from being a boring useless plane too it’s team.
The concern I do have, is not 11.3-12 matches though. Its the 10.3-11.3 matches and the 9.7/10s that it very much could encounter with GRB. It could be strong there.
But, lets for the sake of argument pit a Tornado Gr1 against the Su-39 in a 1v1 match. The Su-39 as 2x R-27Rs.
The Tornado Gr1 is a faster jet, and could control the fight, but there is an issue. Attack from the front and the R-27Rs kill you, Attack from the rear and 9Ls do nothing. So its either try and get behind and use your guns, or try to bait 2x R-27Rs. Now with only 28 chaff, its enough in this scenario to hopefully defend against both R-27Rs, but only just and it would leave you vulnerable to R-60Ms. Do bare in mind, these 2 jets are about evenly matched on turn speed. Especially if the Gr1 was to match the Su-39s speed.
Now over the course of a ARB match. I may have long since expended those precious few CMs and now im at the mercy of the R-27R fired from an Su-39 that has only just made it too the battle. I may not be able to notch because the Gr1 is not built for turning and I may not be able to turn enough to evade without CMs.
It is these edge cases that I have concern about. Not the Su-39 fighting a dedicated fighter with a decent CM count. Its the other under-performers, the IDS Tornados, The Jaguars, etc. and those that it will encounter in GRB. It is for these aircraft that I think caution needs to be applied.
I think that if it gets any buff. The first needs to be an increase in its R-60 Count. Then consider better IR AAMs such as R-27T and only after both of those have actually been tried properly, do you look at BVRs. Skipping those 2 first steps is just tempting fate. I am on the fence about R-27Rs. It might be just enough power, or it might be a disaster. Honestly im not sure. But either way. I’d much rather see incremental buffs and it to be found to be needed. Than jumping the gun and it being kind crazy. I use to enjoy the Lightning in ARB, I havent touched it in quite a while because of a few reasons, but one of those is the A-10 with 9L just sniping you and you not being able to do anything about it. I just think a bit of caution is needed to avoid that again
1 Like
The use to the team the Su-39 provides is the fact that it can carry significant ordnance, though this is more a factor in GRB where if left unopposed, a single one can win entire matches single handily, Sure in ARB its less important, but it still has the capacity to take out a significant number of AI targets quickly.
So what happens when the Su-39 simply holds onto the missile and waits to get into the NEZ of the R-27, there is little else you can do but to die since there is no time to Notch or Crank and turning cold is energy intensive (especially if you pull G’s to turn faster), and potentially wasteful if you also dump ordnance & fuel to improve performance. And if you drop low you might dodge the first but that won’t stop it from closing to use IR missiles or its gun.
This is further complicated by the Generic RWR lacking important features; the radar identification circuits, the fact beam width has been implemented so the RWR pings often, the lack of a dedicated missile guidance warning indication meaning that you need to see a launch to know about it. And combined with no DECM / ECM mechanics causes issues. I wouldn’t mind it so much if there were additional ways to degrade performance but they aren’t yet implemented so it will cause issues especially in a down tier.
Though with the IRCM and A2G radar mechanics being modeled I don’t see them as being too far off in the future since the groundwork now exists.
Exactly, that is part of the issue, the only way to deal with it is to stay at range, be aware and respect the potential capability of them to produce long range missiles out of nowhere, which due to most map layouts means there is an additional risk when going after bases / AI targets as the Su-25’s may be around.
Due to lacking the AN/ASX-1 TISEO the F-4E can’t do much in a LD/SD situation other than use the gun, it was never an issue with the F-4E, and the IRCM deals with the Rear-Aspect Sidewinders until very close range where controlling closure rate can help provide overshoots and reversals, so staying below it deals with the major threat it provides.
The concern isn’t so much surrounding how well it would do against fighters if equipt with better A2A missiles, but people using it as a Ersatz fighter against other Strike aircraft, and how it would control a large area of the map.
2 Likes
yet ty-90’s are a thing lmao
And they’ve consequentially been nerfed multiple times, still provoke a lot of anger by the community and yet are no where near the performance of an R-73.
R-73 aren’t even going to solve the situation as these would probably just bump the Su-39 even higher.
The best chance it has, although somewhat unhistorical, is to get the R-27T that has good performance even against flare.
Capacity dosnt translate to much when you consider that most Su-39’s get shot down before they even reach target or get too the Ai ground targets by the time your team is already wiped.
I really don’t know what to tell you man, you are literally complaining about the META of this game at that BR. Im sorry but do you even play top tier jets? This is a reality every pilot has to deal with and plenty of people do. If they Su-39 pilot exercise discipline(which most won’t since there premium players) then maybe he deserves that kill since you weren’t giving their front aspect the respect it deserves. Thaing is that’s also any other jet at that BR range can also put you in a similar situation, so I’m not sure why your acting like this is some game changing stuff. Plenty of people including myself have to dodge Fox-1 on the regular and tbh it’s not that hard so long as your paying attention. If anything the Su-39 will still be easy to deal with as all I have to do is stay either low or keep some distance so I can notch it’s missles and if I get close then guess what, he’s got nothing because all he’s got is poor flight prefromance and two crappy R-60M’S which are easy to flair especially head on or side
Your acting like having to do the bare minimum to doge a Fox 1 from a slow plane at 11.3 is some sort of exhausting exercise, like it isn’t the meta already. If you think a strike plane with Fox-1’s is scary wait till I tell you about planes like the F-4S or the Mirage F1.
If you fail to recognize the capabilities of a jet, that’s an identification and knowledge issue. Part of this game is learning the capabilities of your enemies, not sure why your acting like nobody’s gonna be able to realize the Su-39 has better missles if it gets them. Also again it’s gonna have the same weapon’s envelope as many other jets at its BR range, so not like this is something new, and it’s not really gonna be “controlling” large sections of the map since it’s still an overall weaker plane compaired to it’s peers
I tend to play AAB most since the maps are better setup for Strike Aircraft (and everything isn’t always a straight TDM) and the occasional low population match can drag on leading to high scores. Recently I’ve been playing around with a 10.x Lineup (due to it being Arcade the BR range that can be seen is +1.3 with specific lineups) so do often see F-4E/J’s, MiG-23MLD, A-10 F-5C, various Mirages etc. I have run into the Su-39 & Su-25T on occasion and the IRCM already makes prosecuting a positional advantage difficult since misses have a significantly reduced range, and the radars needing to be manually locked on
I really would suggest at least trying out AAB if the TDM focus of ARB is too much.
Yes, but none of the Aircraft that have access to SARH’s are classed Attackers so tend to focus the starting furball and map / altitude control, which can be worked around, or often counter-picked with a late spawned fighter to then open up the AI lanes since respawning and in air reloading possible.
AAB can pretty hectic and there are a lot of things happening at any given moment, I still get a ton of kills with the AIM-9B & -9E since people tend to target fixate when they get a guns solution to the expense of their positioning, the Su-39 would be yet another aircraft you would need keep checking to see a launch and the burn time on those motors is quite short so the window to actually see one coming is tiny, let alone their range even with a mid to high subsonic launch.
Because it will increase the general workload I have to do while attacking AI targets, since I need to decide to prosecute the attack and continue to scan for a possible missile simultaneously from aircraft that I could otherwise disregard for significantly longer period of time.
To go further, what is the time to intercept of the R-27 to a target 8 km away in a SL, Co-alt, tail aspect shot?
Let alone the motor burn out time (6 seconds or 9 seconds vs the 15 of the AIM-7F) which is the period of time you have to see it coming anyway. so you can only scan less half the volume vs AIM-7’s to even have a chance to see it coming, and even then the sheer acceleration means you need to commit to dodging evading immediately, possibly even pre-emptively to have any change of survival.
and so the attack profile required to deploy ordnance effectively can no longer be executed due to needing to now fly defensively, and deal with the potential threat(and depending on the airframe, and loading in question I may not even be able to run, and so force a confrontation, which further plays into the capability of All Aspect missiles). Which limits the ability to score points.
It’d be like adding the AV-8B+ or Harrier GR.9 with 4x AIM-9M / ASRAAM & AIM-120 at 11.7, its not going to happen but that is the closest performance combination to provide a similar capability to other nations to a full kitted Su-39.
So what is an A-7 supposed to do?, the Sidewinders (that they have access to of which could be improved) are heavily degraded by the IRCM / flares, and flight performance is worse than the Su-25 anyway, so the only option is a head on which is frustrated by Real Shatter and the DM of the Su-25 familiy being significantly tankier than it should be. let alone dealing with prospective advanced missiles, and baiting for missiles is risky since energy recover is not great so any expended on maneuvering is energy lost, that you can’t recover.
The fact the launch aircraft is slow doesn’t matter so much at short range but the ratio of the speeds and the absolute closure rate, any R-73 / R-27 /R-77 is going to be absolutely deadly and make things far worse.
It will be for numerous reasons the major one is that it is going to be spammed out, and they will have a reason to go explicitly after Attackers since they already know they can’t respond, and with more advance missiles more will be reaching Target zones that I will have to hang around in to complete the tasks that would normally be assigned to slower, high capacity Attackers; going after ground targets.
I at least know what they are planning to do when they go nose hot, and becuse I expect them to do so I can react to it, or plan for that.
That’s the thing I know exactly what a prospective Su-39 w/ R-27’s is capable of in comparison so they can easily deny me the ability to attack ground targets safely, and they will be further incentivized to hang around where my targets are so there will be a very high encounter rate. That is the issue the A-7’s were previously bumped up due to being able to take Sidewinders and gunpods so the resultant BR decrease that will likely eventuate only furthers compression for the 9.x bracket, due to the trend of 10.x Attackers downwards.
They will have a reason to hang around the area where Attacker’s targets are, which is a key area to not to a successful round for attackers, themselves being attackers and loaded appropriately they will be encountered frequently and likely be relentless and and these prospective missiles would confer to them a massive unneeded advantage over counterpart airframes.
it would be similar to the A-7’s getting access to the AIM-9R / AIM-95, and inner-wing station Sidewinder racks (none of these options saw service).
It makes up with it having practically exclusive access to numerous utility features (A2G radar, 16x Vikhr, IRCM, HE rockets, special DM) which give it a lot of wiggle room, which of course is why it sits at a much higher BR than aircraft with similar kinematic performance. It’s still far superior to the A-7s, and the A-10 is no contest, the harrier lacks a radar, and Tornado, ordnance.
3 Likes
There’s nothing stoping your from learning that you have to give the a su-39 the same respect as well. New stuff get added all the time, adapting is part of this game.
I mostly play air RB but even in air AB this thaing still won’t be bringing any new capabilities, and any fighter pilot is free too go after attackers with even more efficient since they have better flight prefromance. Yeah if you gett too close while high up too a Su-39 with R-27’s then he’ll kill you, but guess what, the same can be said for most Fox-1 planes at 11.3, this is nothing new. Now there just so happens to be a premium attacker that can do it with worse flight prefromance than all the attackers around it.
None of this matters in the context of air RB. And all the planes your comparing it too still have significantly better match maker for them in air RB and ground RB as they have a significant chance of fighting weaker air targets and also weaker SPAA in ground RB. Su-39 is almost always gonna be fighting the very top.
Again, please stop acting like this would be a unique problem, fighter pilots can already do this and do it faster at that. Also your forget but the A-7’s also sit at a lower BR and have better match maker for that as they don’t constantly see top tier matches.
tornado is in the same exact weak position, always gonna fight top tier as well
Besides the fact it has much better missiles and is much faster.
1 Like