But in the graphic, it shows the Phoenix standard performance, at 13km of high.
Why dont go better?
1 maybe there is a something in the Air drag of the game at high altitude?
2 maybe the drag model of the missile need to change ?
3 the missile does not loft enough?, It does not go to 20km
It is obvious you are not reading the thread at all from this statement. Stop with the distraction.
Those you refer to as scabs are also the ones who helped bug report the Phoenix…
I think it’s best to not give any acknowledgement to the two offenders and set them to an ignore list. They’re being quite distracting and not reading the thread.
It Will come the smookeless engine for the aim54C? It had some guidance values changed, i dont know if is it good or not
From 2.29.0.111 → 2.30.0.15 changes:
This means Phoenixes should be harder to notch now, right?
probably I assume it might be related to chaff rejection aswell especially the rate limit
This was a change added for basically ever ARH/SARH missile so we don’t really know yet.
The phoenix has a few listed that others didnt get and the others got
“Guidance table heavily adjusted”
While the Phoenix’s did not. Time will tell.
we will get a smokeless engine for the aim-54C?
Doesnt look like it
This isn’t indicative of Russian bias.
I can say that this is a myth,
snails simply introduce technology and weapons without collecting enough information about them, and then they simply ignore it.
for example from a recent one.
completely unrealistic aim-9m, smoke and resistance to ircm should depend on the missle version, also has better acceleration than the irl missle. because of this she is now close to aim-9x block 1
completely incorrect losat, with a bunch of incorrect things, bugs, and shortcomings. I counted 18 problems.
Artificial nerf to engine power and maneuverability of MIG-29
also nerf r-73, r-27t, r-27et, r24t for “balance”
What nerf are you talking about?
The IRCCM on the R-27(e)T should be different (dual band instead of reduced FOV) but since dual band IRCCM and flares are not implemented it’s not really a nerf to those missile.
I’m talking about missiles leaving on flares at long distances + target acquisition distance.
That’s normal since the IRCCM modeled is the one reducing the FOV. So it’s usefull at close range but useless at longuer range.
If they modeled the rigth IRCCM (Dual Band), the missile would be almost unflarable for older jet that only have single spectral flares but the IRCCM would be useless against the latest plane using dual/multi spectral flares.
But since Dual band and multi-spectral flare are not implemented in game, we’ll have to see.
Unfortunatly all IR missile in game suffers greatly for acquisition range so it’s really a nerf on all of them.
Most small diameter IR missile (9L/9M/Magic 2/ R-73) should be able to lock to 10km+ rear aspect and 5km+ front aspect
The R-27T should have the TGS " Geofizika 36T" seeker with 17km front aspect and 70km rear aspect.
So yeah it’s unfortunate, but the russian missile are not nerfed, all the IR missile are wrongly modeled.
since the IRCCM modeled is the one reducing the FOV.
that is, in essence, they are not modeled at all and are in no way different from missiles of the previous generation.
The iterations in-game use the 36T seeker… Not underperforming afaik.
You sure about that?
I never used the R-27 but saw lot of people complaining that the seeker had a really short range. AT least not the 17km front aspect and 70km rear aspect.
Yeah that what i wanted to say.
We’ll see if WE get upgraded seeker for those missile in the futur
Regarding IRCCM, not underperforming afaik. Need more documentation to prove that.
Otherwise yes… seeker range underperforming according to my report.
If the Aim-54 C and A have basically no difference in-game, can the F-14A get it then?