I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. The “early” MiG-29 variants (9-12A, 9-12B, 9-13 (not 100% sure for the Sniper though)) never had access to the R-27ER, but were able to carry the R-73, which was developed conjointly.
When the MiG-29 was added, it carried the correct missiles. Later, for the sake of “balancing”, the R-27ER was introduced to the early MiG-29s while the R-73 was removed from them (why they didn’t just change its br, we’ll never know). However, the game has evolved since then, and the ahistorical modifications are no longer required (assuming they were even required in the first place).
The early MiG-29s should therefore trade back their R-27ERs for R-73s. That would not warrant a change in battle rating in my opinion (unless it’s for decompression), as there are many aircraft below 12.7 that carry the R-73s, such as the Su-39 (11.3), Su-25T (11.3), and MiG-21 Bison (12.3).
What could possibly warrant an increase in battle rating would be a fix to its flight model, but that’s another topic.
Mirage 4000 carriers Magic 2s with worse flight performance.
And F-16A carriers AIM-9Ms with same amount of countermeasures or a worse loadout for more countermeasures.
Both are 13.0.
Gen 3 airframes, and subsonic airframes, cannot be compared to Mig-29, Mirage 4000, and F-16; especially when they only carry 2 IRCCM missiles.
NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE. Minus 2 R27ERs and + 4 to 6 R73s would still warrant a BR increase to 13.0 because that is massive uplift in armament over the current R60Ms. Let’s not compress the game further, as 11.7 and 12.0 MM don’t need more aircraft with cracked loadouts.
A more reasonable nudge for competitiveness sake would be restricting it to two R73s + two R60M while retaining the ER’s.
More importantly, decompressing all the way up to 15.7 so you can move certain 13.0-13.7s up and let things like this breathe.
It is difficult to know for certain whether or not it would create a BR change. It certainly would be treading a very fine line at 12.7 even with just 4x R-73s and 2x R-27R/Ts
Mig-21 Bison is a reasonable aircraft to compare to bar the fact it has a smaller potential loadout and a weaker FM. Though Su-39 and Su-25T would not be due to the fact they are subsonic. Subsonic aircraft always have a lower BR relative their loadouts.
The best comparison would be aircraft at 12.7 such as the F-18C or F-16 (Netz in perticular here) or other supersonic IRCCM carriers such as the Mig-29G, F-16AM, Gripen A at 13.0.
Its tricky, it would be weaker than the Mig-29G, but potentially stronger than those at 12.7 such as the Netz with only non-IRCCM Python-3s. Ideally it would be placed between 12.7 and 13.0 but that currently isnt an option. So I guess the best thing to do is wait until the next BR decompression if/when that happens, but yes. Needs to happen eventually. Especially as personally Id rather deal with R-73s than R-27ERs
f/a18c late imo would be weaker despite the aim7ps. yes aim7ps are good but r73+hmd are better. and things like f14a? not even a question f14 would be bullied by mig29(even more than it already does)
Cough Cough 2x magic-2’s only, and still pretty flareable
and you should have gone for Mirage F.1’s then at 12.0.
Also, Magic-2’s are much more limited range wise, let alone the time on target, than any IR missiles from 12.7, excepting the R-60M.
AIM-9L or Python-3, as well as PL-5’s or R-27T/R-27ET are faster to kill in a chase configuration
So IRCCM on Magic-2 is compensating the range enveloppe and fast killing time the other missiles have.
I think we’ve made what, 7 independent threads on this very topic ever since the “haha you have the SMT now there’s your MiG-29 with R-73s” switcheroo was made
yet the difference is appaling,… the Magic-2’s is a short range distance effective missile, but would never outclass other missiles at range,… while the Magic-2 still can fly to 10km, we can’t use it over 2.5km in chase configuration, as it slows down heavily
