Should the MICA EM get its real range now that the AIM-120C-5 is added to multiple platforms?
As the dev server shows, the AIM-120C-5 was added to a multitude of aircrafts including but not limited to F-15E, F-15I Ra’am, F-18s.
This leads to potent loadouts such as:
While it was understandable to some extent that the MICA’s range didn’t get fixed due to its strong performance at close range, the addition of longer range fox-3s necessitates a more accurate/complete modeling of the MICA EM missile’s range. This is in addition to the fact that the AIM-120C-5 offers an improved seeker over the AIM-120A, notably in chaff and notch resistance making BVR a more reliable option. A report had been submitted showing that the MICA EM’s range has been underperforming and should be corrected:
MICA missile missing some kinetic energy // Gaijin.net // Issues
This report shows that the MICA EM is underperforming in vertical launch scenarios. Sources show that the MICA VL uses the air to air MICA EM, and from there the MICA VL’s stated performance numbers were tested.
In this report, it has been demonstrated that the MICA EM lacks range, whether it is due to lack of loft, or too much drag, we don’t know. But this should be fixed alongside the fact that the caliber of the MICA is incorrect at 165mm when it should be 160mm:
MICA EM should be 160mm diameter and not 165mm. // Gaijin.net // Issues
43 Likes
Probably won’t happen because this mean actualy moddeling thrust vectoring correctly, which is to much to ask from gaijin, given the fact they allready took the time to correct some stuff that was laying around for a long time (looking at you French ship)
10 Likes
Hey, you stole my screen cap 😿
Though I do agree with the points made so it’s fine. The missile should be fixed in either agility, or the range situation.
5 Likes
Poll added thanks to @_OceanFish for reminding me
+1
Gaijin also needs to fix the PL-12s, and the AAM-4 if the F-15E is getting Aim-120C-5s.
37 Likes
So how much range will it get with these changes? It’s already solid at 20km headon shots for BVR.
1 Like
There is no way we can try to do some bvr now without any change, even if people have either bad radar or lack awareness there it will be a mess and with the spam of aim120c-5 that will start each game with all the hornets (10amram in total) / f15e (8 or 6 ?) and rafale will end up being played similarly to the mirage 2k5f so low enough (also this one should go even more down it will get anhilated)
1 Like
The addition of C5 is an issue in the form that all other missiles are underperforming(MICA does not even have the ability to go beyong 50km as it just explodes whent the 50km counter is reached) and this addition is just made for bad players to be able to crap on people that know how to play. Along MICA many other missiles need fixes this update if Gaijin don’t plan to add better missiles for everyone.
17 Likes
Solid at 20km is certainly not how I’d describe it. Passable at best? Barely acceptable? Excellent at targeting the soul who does not evade?
At best, it would bring it into being good at the 20km mark, and passable at the 25km mark. This compares to C5 which from my brief screwing around so far is comfortable in 40km launches from an F18.
4 Likes
No, it is mostly due to the fact that gaijin doesn’t know how to moddle thurst vectoring, which make the MICA lose to much speed when turning.
5 Likes
This basically applies to every nation now. The only other plane that could be used in BVR is the typhoon, but it’s radar is too bad, and it’s missiles will be outclassed now.
4 Likes
The launching platform is launching it at extreme speeds compared to everything else. (On Average, shots should be taken at Mach 1.5+ for BVR anyway) The Rafale launching a MICA at Mach 1.7 at a 20km target is a excellent probability of kill. With them evading and trying to use countermeasures.
Everyone must keep in mind that this may trigger a domino effect, as the previous AIM-120A is also gimped, in fact most of ARH AAMs are gimped. the process of fixing them would make early ARH slingers quite powerful.
That said, i fully agree on MICAs getting their proven paper stats.
4 Likes
In fact, the MICA is used in the game at medium ranges, where it performs very well. Is there any point in changing its parameters?
1 Like
I find it a fair thing to ask for a boost on its effective range, being able to get slightly above medium ranges would make it a very unique missile.
16 km isn’t really medium range but that’s subjective.
1 Like
Even as someone who tends to engage with air to ground in a su 30 with little fondness for air to air, at 20km, MICA is quite comfortable to defeat with basic evasive maneuvers and a few chaff drops. If it’s hitting folk at that range, it’s on account of them deciding to commit to bad paths.
At 15km it becomes dicey, but at 20km it is just as annoying as the rest of the AAMs being slung at that range. Arguably less so than others aside R77, as it has lost the vast majority of its energy at that point and any maneuvers will kill the last hope it has of connecting.
I agree with this, the mica, aam4, and pl12 were all nerfed so they would be balanced against the aim120a/b. Now that the c has been added there’s no reason for them to stay in their nerfed state.
Not sure why you singled out the mica though, no reason not to fix all three.
11 Likes
