French players do not have skill for performing in the Rafale. The Rafale is the most hand held plane in the game. Let’s not act dumb here.
Yes, because that’s similar capability. But as you chose to leave out, the Typhoon also needs to radar fixed to correctly simulate it’s BVR advantage. It doesn’t even need the C-5.
Sorry Mikey that your “America Number 1” planes are trash. Figures, since the US forces their equipment on other people, while people willingly buy French all over the world. Fact is, French planes are better, they even beat the F-22.
1 Like
I appreciate your response. Even if the radar gets fixed and AIM-120C-5 is added to the Typhoon, your belief to my understanding, correct me if I’m wrong, is that Typhoon also needs ASRAAM to be on the same level of Rafale with fixed MICA EM.
Just need @MythicPi to also give out his takes as well.
1 Like
We will most likely end up with mica ir, iris-t, asraam, aim9x and stuff by december at this rate, the new spaa seems a good way to test those missiles.
6 Likes
Because air rb is seen as a vehicle to spade aircraft for mixed battles.
So even new players are opting to fly low, bomb a base or a convoy when they unlock GPU-39 maybe get a 9M kill die and join a new game.
Typhoon needs its Radar fixed and its pre nerf acceleration and high altitude performance/turning cranking and not going from mach 1.7 to 1.0- 0.9 would be nice.
The C would be great but as always I would want Radar and fm fixes instead of a new missile to paper over the cracks
LMAO it’s not hand held (More than 90 reports are open on it and it’s lacking a hell lot of features and capabilities) it’s just that good; any plane will seem lackluster compared to Rafale until they add VLO Fighters and BVRAAMs of 200km+ range and even then… Rafale has good chances of still being very good at BVR while being insane at close ranges.
You are just coping here players in game just behave that bad they know they shouldn’t get close to a Rafale or let a Rafale get close to them yet they still go for furballs like in 2022.
A famous saying tells the following : “Adapt, Improvise, Overcome”
And Gaijin players do the following : “Whine, Cry to Powercreep, Never Improve”
1 Like
It’s still pretty handheld. The drag buff was just stupid. Mach 2 with a full weapons load despite Dassault themselves stating top speed of 1.8 and I’m assuming that’s clean or with wingtip and fuselage pylons.
1 Like
Isn’t that the same for everyone ? From what i remember drag is badly modelled for 100% of the planes when you have missiles / bombs and stuff.
It’s just because gaijin physics are too limited. To match datapoints they had to proceed that way. People complain about it just because no other plane was fixed that way but if Gaijin decided to fix EFT its FM and Accel curves would be very stupid too.
What Dassault say doesn’t actually reflect the true capabilities of the Aircraft. Dassault never clearly stated Rafale can do a Cobra or reach very high AOA YET there is valid and credible sources made during Rafale test campaigns that argue that Rafale can reach stupids AOA. And as Oceanfish just said drag for supsended armament is that badly/not modelled.
2 Likes
There’s the difference between me and you. You’re a cringe nationalist who gets on his knees for France. I, on the other hand, don’t really care about what nation gets what. I only care about cool fighter jets (with the F-14 being my favorite).
Quit the cringelord superiority complex. It makes your side look even more pathetic.
1 Like
I believe the ASRAAM gives the Typhoon around the same CQC performance as the Rafale with the MICA, and if that weaponry were available to it, it would do fine countering the Rafale. I also believe that if the Typhoon doesn’t get the ASRAAM (it shouldn’t) it should get it’s radar fixes to have it’s BVR advantage to the rafale for better balance. I specifically stated it doesn’t need the C-5 to acheive this. I don’t know if they questioning is the get a “gotcha” or whatever, but you haven’t gone over any of my points…
1 Like
There it is. The Rafale shouldn’t get absurd thrust curves and low drag. Because using your own logic, it’s very stupid. Using the excuse of matching datapoints doesn’t work because as you mentioned, the Eurofighter has the same problem.
Next.
By your logic launch day Gripen wasn’t handheld it was “just that good”. It’s the same thing except instead of the Gripen dogging on everything in only in the dogfight and being almost invulnerable to missiles, it’s the rafale outperforming every single aircraft at every single speed regime and being able to strike targets from 20km+ away with no problem or threat to itself. In Sim it’s even worse.
So again I ask why does the MICA need more range? You said it yourself.
1 Like
F-16, F-15, F-35, even the F-22 before export ban had other countries begging for the real peak
Everyone would be buying American if govt didn’t block sales
Anyways, +1 fixing stuff is generally cool
5 Likes
Learn to read here stupid means : “Thrust curves that doesn’t make sense or seem unreal” which is the thing most people complain about but due to the game phyiscs you can’t do otherwise than how gaijin did with Rafale. Matching the datapoints is how you make FMs realtively accurate it’s not an excuse it’s a fact. Also what is amazing is that people complain about Rafale thrust curves past Mach 2 while LMAO you just explode at MACH 2 otherwise thrust curves are quite accurate.
Bro make it make sense i said that in a context where we would have 200km+ missiles. Currently there is no such missiles and even then you are just making a double standard here. You just complained about Rafale unrealistic thrust curves but now say the MICA should stay unrealistic because it’s busted. I may not be making much sense but you make even less sense.
Also to really answer your question from my perspective MICA should get more range because it’d put it on par with other missiles in terms of BVR now that we have 2 superior BVR missiles in game (R77-1 and AIM120-C5) because lot of people argue “But it’s the best missile at close range”, well yes it is but it restrains it’s usage a lot. Now take it on a wider perspective : More range = longer distance of missile shots = more time where missile use INS to guide itself = more chances of dodging the missile. The thing people don’t want to understand is that due to it’s lack of range MICA is used in the firing domain where it has 100% of kill probability because Rafale are forced to play like rats only few people will try to climb to make shots from above in a Rafale even more now that AIM 120-C5 will be flying arround if it got fixed it’d alleviate a lot of issues both for sender and receiver of the missile because while the missile is very agile at short range it is less at long range.
In any way even if i made a more detailed and more thought explanation you’d still refuse to believe our cause because “MICA is insane at close range” well sorry that France decided to make one of its only Fox 3 versatile and thrust vectoring to be able to be declined in an IIR variant. People can only argue that “It’s not fair”.
Was AIM 54 fair? Was R27ER fair? Was R73 fair? Was F15E fair at release? Was KH38 fair?
In the end after writing all this i realized that people don’t truly have an issue with MICA but with Rafale being equipped with MICAs.
5 Likes
Jesus
I didn’t expect this thread to become an arguefest between the Eurofighter and the Rafale
I think PL-12 should also receive a range buff with all things considered, same as AAM-4.
1 Like
AAM 4 is categorized as being a 100km misile only(IRL) i don’t see where the claim it should get a better range even comes from. If in games it seem to lack range it’s only due to gaijin code making it not keep energy during its flight.
PL12 is not even that nerfed as it should be at best a 100km missile and suffer from the same energy retention problem as AAM4.
And finally what a lot of people don’t seem to realize is that MICA buff is not about “Making it OP” or that it’s an energy retention fix, no. MICA is literally limited to 50km of range when it should be 80km when looking at MICA data and code the missile is legitimately limited to 50km of maximum range it will actually explode when it reaches this limit the fix is not just about giving MICA more range it’s about removing an immaginary limit placed by gaijin that limits the missile without that limit MICA could go about 60km of range which would make people that want that buff already extremely happy.
this is a completely valid argument
The PL-12 is notably nerfed because it currently uses the export SD-10 performance metrics. I can’t speak for AAM-4.
SD-10 is actually a missile developed earlier than PL-12. The dimensions of the two missiles are actually slightly different, the booster stage as well.
But if Gaijin were not to do anything to the PL-12, then do you think a J-10A or J-11B fighting an AIM-120C-5-carrying F-15E and now potentially the Eurofighter is a fair matchup?
PL-12A is a thing and Gaijin could’ve totally added it, the specifications point to ~120km range.
1 Like