The seeker of all fox 3 missile is nerfed compared to every fox 1, they have a larger notch gate. In difficulty it’s ER > other fox 1 > Fox 3.
You know they’re running out of arguments when they’re using a SARH to argue that the R77 being weak is balanced.
2 Likes
Tell me something i dont know please, so far you didnt do that.
As the alledged american superiority prior to the ARH introduction, forgetting that the R-27ER was singlehandedly the reason Russia controlled most of BVR encounters.
This thing of supposedly being disengenuous is nothing new to air discussion in this forum.
Not if you manage to fire the R-27ER first. If you manage to position yourself in a significant advantage, your missile will connect regardless of what your opponent does, from launching a fox-3 to going defensive. If y’all can’t get that singlehanded point, then it’s a substantial skill issue.
You’re playing with a slight technological disadvantage, yet you’re still proposing an equal-to-equal situation. That’s again, a inherent skill issue. I’m telling this for the last time: Play around the missile strengh (having an absurd booster and capable to reach absurds amounts of speed), not by playing as another ARH slinger, you’ll find way less frustration and inferiority complex by doing so. You don’t like it? Cope, or grind the US tree.
I’m not lying by any means. Don’t treat the USSR tech tree like it has been mistreated for the longest time, as it clearly has been handheld in the missile department for quite a good while up until ARH missiles, where clearly still has a strong point in the medium to close quarters slingling.
And obviously Armchair will agree with you, he’s brainwashed into believing that the R-27ERs were and still are alledgely close to useless, and the BVR meta prior to ARH missiles were not the R-27ER slinging, but the freaking anemic AIM-54s before march’s buff.
There was no BVR meta when multipathing was 100m. It was a fox2 meta.
3 Likes
And there it is, thank you for gently proving my point.
So how do you “play around the absurd booster and amount of speed” ? You didn’t offer once a single practical use besides “skill issue”.
You are not contributing to the thread, just claiming things that I’ve yet to see being translated to real gameplay. What do you exactly means by this. What range are you talking about ? What aspect ? What situation ?
I’m playing with the SMT a lot these past few days. The optimal loadout is full R77 and 1/2 ET. ER isn’t relevant to today’s top tier meta. Unless you’re counting on your opponent not doing anything to dodge it, in which case the R77 is its equal. I’m doing pretty well with the SMT too. Currently 130/68 KDR with 57% winrate. It’s a lot better since they upgraded the HMD to 20km, it was barely useable before. The F15C is a much better plane by a landslide tho.
I’m not saying the ER is bad. It’s the best SARH in the game. It’s still a SARH and is way less useful in general than a FnF missile is all I’m saying. The best use I found for it was in full downtier in 12.3-13.3 matches because I can sling one ER at the first target I see, then go back to full R-77 as the team merges.
6 Likes
The only point is that you have a bad memory and have forgotten that the Grippen was the god king of the previous meta. It was the best because of its 9Ms, infinite flares, and that it had the best FM for knife fights. Radar missile quality was not what defined a meta aircraft before multipathing height was halved.
1 Like
Fakour 90 is easily superior to R-27ER, and Fakour 90 is worse than other ARHs.
I’m talking about difficulty to notch specifically, not overall strenght of the missile. I don’t think the Fakour is particularly difficult to notch, tho it’s so fast you have to be in defensive position before it start active guidance.
Superior in range and speed, ER is harder to notch
1 Like
As the alledged american superiority prior to the ARH introduction, forgetting that the R-27ER was singlehandedly the reason Russia controlled most of BVR encounters.
This thing of supposedly being disengenuous is nothing new to air discussion in this forum.
We can sit here and argue whether or not the R27ER should have been added, but that has nothing to do with the points I made. Regardless, you and I know that no one flew above 100M for this very reason. You have the SMT so tell me, before it got FOX3s, how was it’s FM competitive in the WVR meta?
Not if you manage to fire the R-27ER first. If you manage to position yourself in a significant advantage, your missile will connect regardless of what your opponent does, from launching a fox-3 to going defensive. If y’all can’t get that singlehanded point, then it’s a substantial skill issue.
So you’re making a non 1-1 argument and still trying to say it’s more powerful? All things equal, you know what happens.
You’re playing with a slight technological disadvantage, yet you’re still proposing an equal-to-equal situation. That’s again, a inherent skill issue. I’m telling this for the last time: Play around the missile strengh (having an absurd booster and capable to reach absurds amounts of speed), not by playing as another ARH slinger, you’ll find way less frustration and inferiority complex by doing so. You don’t like it? Cope, or grind the US tree.
Lol. So you’re admitting that the AMRAAM is more capable now, assuming all variables/launch parameters are the same?
I’m not lying by any means. Don’t treat the USSR tech tree like it has been mistreated for the longest time, as it clearly has been handheld in the missile department for quite a good while up until ARH missiles, where clearly still has a strong point in the medium to close quarters slingling.
I’m not.
And obviously Armchair will agree with you, he’s brainwashed into believing that the R-27ERs were and still are alledgely close to useless, and the BVR meta prior to ARH missiles were not the R-27ER slinging, but the freaking anemic AIM-54s before march’s buff.
Ad hominems don’t strengthen your argument.
1 Like
And i’ve done that as well, not the most shiny performances, but by no means suffering.
That’s the point, it’s not useless. But one of the folks here has been following this narrative that the missile is near a waste of a pylon, when it clearly is not the case. A waste of pylon would surely be a Skyflash (DF) at 13.0, but not any R-27ER/T.
Why i shouldn’t admit that on paper, any ARH is technologically superior to a SARH? A different thing is their individual assets. On that regard, the R-27ER is still the fastest missile in the game within the average encounter distance by a long shot, and has one of the most competitive seekers in the entire game.
By assuming that Russia suffers on a unparalleled scale, you do.
And making up narratives that has been proven wrong throughout the entire game’s history doesn’t strengthen the actual need for russia to get some buffs.
Which is undermined by the fact that a Fox-3 user can shoot and immediately evade while the Fox-1 user has to hold his lock. This is a massive boon that lets even bad Fox-3s pull ahead of the very best Fox-1s in real combat situations where people are shooting back against you.
4 Likes
The HMD buff to 20km saved the plane, ngl. It was unusable before. And Gosh dang I tried. Playing the 2000-5F at the same time it was painfully obvious which plane was suited for top tier and which one wasn’t. MICA have maybe 15km of effective range, but they are truly dangerous to anything that get within that range (if they don’t spin out of control) and M2000 has excellent energy retention at high speed on top of excellent top speed.
I still didn’t buy the 27SM yet because I absolutely loathe the base Su-27 radar. I’d rather buy the Yak141 whenever I have some SL to spare to play the only russian plane with a good flight model.
I’m honestly tempted to go for the Su-34 afterward even if I have to grind the entire bomber line. The radar is good and it carries 6 ET.
Why i shouldn’t admit that on paper, any ARH is technologically superior to a SARH? A different thing is their individual assets. On that regard, the R-27ER is still the fastest missile in the game within the average encounter distance by a long shot, and has one of the most compeititive seekers in the entire game.
Sure, but you make your argument based on having a positioning advantage that any SARH would benefit from. In a “joust” where both the SU27 and an ARH carrier fire, you still lose. By the time you splash the other plane, good luck notching his missile that requires no carrier radar to guide. Especially with the 60 degrees of radar deflection you have.
By assuming that Russia suffers on a unparalleled scale, you do.
And where did I say that? Does Germany not suffer with an F4 as it’s top fighter lol?
And making up narratives that has been proven wrong throughout the entire game’s history doesn’t strengthen the actual need for russia to get some buffs.
And using fallacious arguments to make something appear in a way that it’s not is better? Because that’s exactly what you’re doing.
1 Like
Well thats assuming both carriers fire at the exact same time.
1 Like
In my place, people call it a trade. Isn’t that better than not having a kill at all? I’m pretty sure that, out of any of the existing tech trees in the game, curiously any plane capable of bringing the R-27ER is at least capable to do so. While for example, you get any plane using a Skyflash/Matra 530D/AIM-7whatever variant and it’ll lose having that particular advantage a significant amount of times against an ARH missile, cause all of those SARH are slow enough so they can be notched, while the R-27ER has that individual advantage.
They indeed suffer moreso than most of tech trees, that’s an actual problem.
If you still think that the R-27ER doesn’t have a chance even with a slight positional advantage against ARH slingers, then i will clearly say that i’m proving better.
And that’s the problem, if people here assume that the R-27ER or the R-77 should be played as a exact counterpart of the AIM-120, they’ll clearly lose every encounter.
The same that happened way before ARH when US mains used AIM-7F/Ms to joust as equals to the R-27ER: you just can’t expect to win those encounters being the technological and practical underdog.
1 Like