Seems pretty damn good when I use it, and things don’t get moaned about on a community-wide scale without a hint of excellence, people wouldn’t be complaining about the Pantsir if it has Roland 3s would they
I think yeah that’s the brunt of the issue currently, the new SPAA are so incredibly large and packed with electronics that those electronics eat all of the relatively small HEAT charge of most heli AGMs, the case before was that the warhead would get quite far into the SPAA and overpressure it, whereas now components absorb that damage.
It’s a negative for both parties tbh, since for the helis it delays the inevitable kill, and for the SPAA it takes them out the fight for a good 30-40s while denying a kill, and it’s pretty problematic when considering some new SAMs don’t need their TADS anymore
The video here shows how the SPIKE (light HEAT warhead) struggles to kill Pantsirs (applies to other SAMs too, this isn’t russian bias whining) due to these modules
1 Like
this is really nothing new and has been a thing for ages. Because FnF weaponry picks randomly where itll guide in instead of center mass of what you are aiming at youll end up hitting parts that just dont have anything important in them.
In case of pantsir, its super common for PARSes (or Spikes, land fired or air) to hit the engine+transmission or just the drivers cabin and do no damage. Same thing with a lot of other SPAAs.
If things were actually somewhat competently coded to where FnF missiles would fly to the center mass of a target, they would be much more usable. Alternatively if gaijin gave them the correct lofting profile akin to LMURs where they strike top down instead of just at an angle, this issue would be less common, for against both SPAAs and MBTs
2 Likes
There is a mix, but the USA has by far the most.
R-77-1 really isn’t all that good, nor was the R-77, they are very easy to counter.
Aim-9Ms, I’ll hit you with every time, meanwhile you’ll miss a lot of R-73s
1 Like
That screenshot doesn’t show any context.
All I see is something I’ve seen from my own playing of Apaches and Rooivalk.
This is why I can’t trust a no-context screenshot:
R-73 is the best at verry close ranges.
If it’s not over g’d still. Pretty much the “going to guarantee kill range” is touching the enemy.
Even then pre flare and your good. NATO planes around that br have 240 or more cms
1 Like
Its literally a worse amraam than A and B. People that parrot “WHY DID USA NEED C5 AMRAAMS” all just think bigger number = better missile. Its got worse off-rail performance than both A and B (which are essentially the same) and its acceleration is abysmal compared to both A and B. Its literally a worse missile.
Because Archers released at close range arent just going into the 4th dimension to strangle whatever you fired them at? What are you even talking about, 9Ms are great, but its not like Archers are any worse as what the russians get, thats just lying.
Yea and? After that “extremely good” SPAA you have a radarless SPAA thats better TD than SPAA, a roland PoS and then an ADATS and CLAWS. CLAWS is good and ADATS exists (tho atleast it got better now that you can get a lock via IRST from 3rd person but the missile is slow, prone to getting out of the beam, doesnt have an IR strobe and has only 10km range, which effectively is more around 8km)
And before that “extremely good” SPAA you got PIVADS, which is an ass of an SPAA. Atleast now USA did get their own “gepard” but that is at around that same BR so you still deal with PIVADS for a while.
I dont really disagree there atleast, T26E5 and T34 are probably the best heavy tanks ive touched in this game. Tho russians do have T10M and ofc the obj279 you mentioned
1 Like
It’s cool you are far more skilled than many CAS players.
It’s cool that you acknowledge Pantsir players had a higher skill than CAS players to warrant people moaning about Pantsir players being skilled.
Reminds me of when people moaned about T-80BVM despite 5 or more MBTs being better than it, and ever since skilled players moved from Soviets to other tech trees again people stopped complaining about T-80BVMs.
1 Like
The way spike behave really remind me of the RNG for dispersion in the other tank game, and it’s annoying as hell
Well, technically they fixed the Hellfires. Yes, the trajectory is still meh, but the damage is so much better than the average HEAT missile that one-shots happen all the time.
You cant make this shit up…
How do you read my first sentence and then completely ignore it and ramble about what things are the best
1 Like
To be fair. Russia is only good below 4.0 and at high to top tier. Russia has been eating shit from 4.0 to 9.0. Most people only complain about “Russian bias” at top tier. They fail to see how terrible grinding Russia is
1 Like
He can he’s a Russian main
Same goes as any ARH
Pre flare and change direction easy it deal the same ways as any IR missile.
1 Like
First off, the only time you used AIM-9M are your 8 games in the F-15E. Curious to know where your supposed gameplay experience with the AIM-9M comes from lol. I can’t find a single other plane you ever used that fires AIM-9M. Dishonesty at its finest.
And tell me you don’t know how these missiles work without telling me you don’t know. AIM-9M is probably the easiest missile to dodge at top tier if you understand its seeker.
The AIM-9M seeker turns off when it sees a flare. The missile will continue to your expected path and turn on the seeker again when flares are out of sight. It’s blind until then. To defeat AIM-9M, pop flare and change direction, that’s literally it.
R-73 and Magic 2 have a FOV system. The seeker’s eye focuses on a tiny point if it sees a flare. Which means they are easy to flare at longer range but virtually impossible to decoy when close enough, since they’ll just lock on your plane and put all flares out of their tiny FOV.
Others have already explained why you’re also wrong about the AIM-120C.
Just take the L and move on dude.
3 Likes
That is very much incorrect, the R77-1s are actually really really really good. They got very good close range and off bore performance and arent bad at all at longer ranges. They are very good, and since theres only single plane that uses -1s, being the Su30SM you have so many of them its actually not even funny.
Even in context of ground loadout you can bring up to 6 of them without compromising your ground strike loadout. Its genuinely unreal.
As for R77s, they are very platform dependant. On Su34 i dont like them as much, they work but its hit or miss due to the way the plane handles. On Su27SM where you can give them a lot of initial speed since after the change to 27SM its flying really fast, they handle very well.
I wouldnt call them trash at all.
Also like others have said, the 9Ms can be pre-flared and can also be shaken off. The biggest advantage 9Ms have over Archers is definitely the slightly better long range performance at cost of close range performance (you cant fire them as off bore as archers, not even close, and at close range archers are nearly impervious to flares due to the extremely pin-point FoV seeker) and they have reduced visibility so often times youll get hit by 9M without seeing it. Otherwise both are really comparable to one another in effectivity.
Id suggest using Archers at below 2-2.5km ranges where the missile will have muuuuuuch higher hit probability than if youre firing it from like 3.5km
1 Like
Yeah 9Ms have been insanely mediocre since the drag nerfs and increase in median countermeasure count at top tier, 9M reliant platforms are typically extremely defensively oriented (Harrier GR.7, JAS-39A) and rely more on their BOL pods and guns than the missiles, furthermore they are pretty much dead weight on anything that relies on Fox-3s for off boresight capability, and even more damning is that they are kinematically the worst IR missile at top tier, extremely sluggish and unreliable
1 Like
