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.
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.
4 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
That’s not my problem read the title this thread is about MICA feel free to make a PL12 buff thread. Also no i don’t think it’s a fair matchup so go fight for your cause like i am don’t do it in a thread that is no dedicated to it.
Yet French equipment is used all over the world, while American equipment is used primarily in western Europe. Sounds like everyone loves American stuff, so explain why everyone else uses French and Russian stuff (excluding Eurofighters in some places and Chinese stuff in Pakistan).
F-15’s in Asia, F-16’s everywhere, A-4’s, hornets in Asia, not to mention the Browning M2HB .50, UH-1’s, F-4’s also nearly everywhere, F-35’s across the world, 5.56, 7.62, Bushmaster chain guns, M134’s, AR-15 and all its derivatives, Patton tanks, Sherman’s, Abrams in some countries across world, M60, Chinook, Blackhawk (Chinese even copied it lol), American radars, engines, HMMW, jeep, JLTV, MRAPs, M113, MIM-23, Patriots, standard missiles, ESSM’s, Phalanx CIWS, AIM-120, AIM-7, AIM-9, AGM-65, the glorious JDAM, Paveway bombs, AGM-88, JASSM, Tomohawks, AGM-84, American targeting pods, American ammunition, C-130, C-47, C-17, A-37, OV-10, American maritime and AWACS aircraft
The only reason they use French and Russian stuff is because US won’t sell or won’t sell any of the higher end stuff that actually is counterpart to Rafale or they’re just broke. Lets not forget Pakistan used F-16’s and had an AH-1Z order made but cancelled bc politics
3 Likes
Threads regarding anything even remotely related to Rafale get invaded by EFT muppets.
It would also lead to some energy retention improvements, because currently it is degraded in that capacity, as well as hard limited to 50.
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Turns out when you try to act like the victim while having the objective best jet in the game, people don’t roll on their bellies for it. (except for Gaijin apparantly)
1 Like
Thread going full off topic because 3 guys are obligated to debate which country between US and France is best weapon seller in the world. This is a thread for a MICA buff these talk have nothing to do here.
Muh. AMRAAM GONNA BE OP! NOOOO
Gaijin’s honest reaction:
Everything making the C-5 is not in the C-5
7 Likes
yep only better than the C at 20km + now and even then not by very much
Forced reliance and they left equipment there. Otherwise Israel just has a hand in American dealings (they already have a history if stealing stuff like the Mirage III), Saudi Arabia just wants it because they get money out of it, and NATO reliance.
Also, if it was so good, the Soviets would have just copied it in general. They took the philosophy, but that’s like saying that Americans are Evil Windmill Germans because they copied and pasted multiple German weapons (STG-44 to M-16 and FG-42 to M-60 if I remember correctly), and that Americans were in love with the monarchy (Gewehr 98 to M1903)
are you saying that an over 40% market share means nothing?
1 Like
stg 44 and m16 are seperate, iirc it was mg42 to m60. but i only said design philosophy, i dont see where you get the “soviets loving US govt/military” and german comparisons from
Asian countries are not forced and the weapons were not left behind in singapore, malaysia, etc.
anyways, can we at least agree MICA buff makes sense since realism is generally a good thing for weaponry?