Actually curious here, what’s different about the MICA’s? I’d hope the AAM-4 is same as MICA at least
iirc it is this one
Makes it slightly less vulnerable to chaff (a buff ou won’t actually notice according to the discord)
2 Likes
The AIM-120C has a longer range than the AIM-120B due to improved aerodynamics, a smaller warhead (WDU-41/B), and more propellant. The B model maxes out around 50-75 km, while later C variants (C-5 and up) reach 105-120 km. The C also has better guidance and electronic upgrades. If you think they have the same range, you’re dead wrong.
1 Like
This isn’t about past metas—it’s about balance now. If you think one faction suffering before justifies breaking balance now, you’re missing the point. Fairness means every nation gets competitive tools, not just flipping the script to favor one over the other.
1 Like
Ground, yesn’t. Air, not at all
America still has some of the most powerful aircraft in the game, alongside getting 3 very capable dogfighters while multiple nations got little less than 2-3 vehicles
1 Like
So you’re saying the Su-30 being slower means the R-77-1 isn’t that strong? Funny, because in-game, it’s still dunking on the AIM-120. If platform speed was the only factor, we wouldn’t be seeing the R-77-1 dominate like it does. If anything, that just means AIM-120s should perform even better than they do now—so thanks for proving the AMRAAM is currently nerfed.
US should get equivalent Air-To-Ground missiles.
The F/A-18 is now stuck fighting a jet with better missiles. Sure, the Su-30 has drawbacks, but that doesn’t change the fact that the R-77-1 consistently outperforms the AIM-120B in-game. The Hornet is already at a speed and acceleration disadvantage, and now it has to rely on weaker missiles while the Su-30 gets superior BVR tools. If the argument is ‘airframe matters more,’ then why is the F/A-18 struggling despite its supposed advantages? It’s because the AIM-120B isn’t competitive anymore, and that’s the issue.
I can’t find the source now, but I recall something about how lower beam-width makes it harder for an elevated target above the horizon to notch your missile.
The equation is something like Beam-width times half = anything above that cannot notch the missile.
So at 15 degrees, half of that is 7.5. It would require a target to be above 7.5 degrees in relation to the missile, for the missile to not be notched.
But if it is reduced down to 7 degrees, it would only require a target to be above 3.5 degrees in relation to the missile, for the missile to not be notched.
Unfortunately I cannot find the changelog that discussed this as it was old.
Yeah, exactly. The F/A-18 was already outdated the moment it dropped, and without better missiles like the AIM-9X or at least the AIM-120C, it never had a chance. Meanwhile, the Su-30 gets R-77-1s, and we’re supposed to believe that’s fair? The whole situation just proves that U.S. top tier keeps getting shafted in balance decisions.
2 Likes
Range alone doesn’t determine balance. The issue isn’t just that the R-77-1 has similar range—it’s that in practice, it’s outperforming the AIM-120B due to better in-game performance. The Su-30 also has a better radar and more missiles, while the F/A-18 is stuck with AIM-120Bs, which are already outdated. ‘Same range’ means nothing if the missile itself is more effective in actual combat.
I want people to look over this graph very CLOSELY!!! the 77-1 is not better then the 120…the launch platform plays a BIG roll in BVR, it’s why the 15E and Eurofighter are still the best BVR jets in the game!!!
5 Likes
TWR doesn’t mean much when the F-15E and F/A-18C are forced into defensive maneuvers before they can even fire an effective shot. The issue isn’t just positioning—it’s that the R-77-1 consistently forces AMRAAM carriers to go defensive, breaking BVR balance. If the F-15E’s TWR advantage made such a huge difference, we wouldn’t be seeing R-77-1s outperforming AIM-120Bs in-game. The problem is the missile imbalance, not just the planes carrying them.
1 Like
READ the graph above!!!
The AIM-120C-5 has a longer range than the AIM-120A/B/C, but not the C itself.
1 Like
Drag alone doesn’t determine missile effectiveness. Even if the R-77-1 has more drag, it’s still performing better in-game because of how War Thunder models missile guidance and retention. Also, launch platforms matter, but when F/A-18C and F-15E players are struggling to get effective shots off before Su-30s force them defensive, that’s a balance problem. The R-77-1 is still outperforming the AIM-120B in practical combat, and that’s what actually matters.
Lol this is cope, F-15E can easily go into a position to fire their Amraams faster than the Su-30SM, and being faster also means better conditions to actually fire the amraam
11 Likes
Higher drag means more speed bleed when maneuvering btw
8 Likes
in BVR the 77-1 DOES NOT out preform the 120…15E at Mach 1 30km 30SM Mach 1…both start defending after launch 77-1 DOES not win this fight!!! BECAUSE OF THE DRAG!!!
2 Likes
Time to optimal launch parameters…the 15E beats the 30 hands down…it’s not even close!!! YouTubers are already making videos showing this!!!
2 Likes