Note, at higher speeds only, which is only achievable by flying straight line for an extended duration for the F-104. I know the F-104 is fast and all but the MiG-19 is kinda a bad example since its well known to be one of the fastest below-mach accelerating supersonics of its BR.
in the game flat out. It’s a gen2 with gen4 acceleration
1 Like
Yes, as I said this is one of the worst matchups for the 104. But above 850kph the 104C outaccelerates it, and actually maintains acceleration even significantly above the speed of sound.
This applies to the F-6C’s 1200kph top speed as well. 104 is always faster and is always accelerating faster above 850kph.
The MiG-19 pretty much teleports to 1200kph. The F-104 hits a significant efficiency problem at around 1350
Starting at 800kph it only outaccelerates the T-2, which I’ve now added as another reference. More importantly the 104C just keeps going faster and faster.
1 Like
Yeah but that assumes you’re both going in a straight line. Once an F-104 has a mig-19 on their tail they usually panic and that mistake compounds quick. Doesn’t help that they can barely juke the R-3S when compressed.
I know it might be tempting to look at it from a “fair play” perspective but in regular arb matches, the first thing you’d do in any supersonic with missiles is to 1. climb and 2. intercept and launch a missile within 1-2km of any F-104
in which case they have two options
- die
- juke the missile, which opens them to guns due to their speed bleed.
That said when used correctly I still think the F-104 is still on par with some 9.7s. In the sense that its a more hyperspecialized BnZ machine in return for losing defensive performance against supersonics, and especially missile armed ones.
That’s no different from a number of other situations. You can use smaller speed advantages effectively, I have avoided Sagittario 2s in Sabres by staying calm and using my very small ~70kph advantage to get them to turn away once they noticed they weren’t getting the kill.
If I had panicked I definitely would have died.
If you want to play anything else like the various ~9.0 subsonics that’s not an option. Unless they’re just incompetent, take a head-on, and somehow lose.
Anyway, I won’t argue this further. I’ve made my points and Mr “Nah” can believe whatever he wants. I’ll just enjoy my subsonics knowing that I’ll be much less likely to meet such an unfun plane.
Well, that’s why I did say supersonics, since those tactics can’t be applied to subsonics (lol)
though I do think you can still pressure F-104s by slipping into their flightpath within 1km and using the 9Bs to make them bleed. I haven’t done this personally with a subsonic 9.0, but I assume it is achievable since I’ve done similar scenarios at below-mach speeds in my F-100A while stock.
While the the F-100A is a well rounded plane, when it was stock it cannot outaccelerate any subsonics and can barely reach mach unless in deep dive. I had to make use of the 9Baits to pull the F-104s in for an easier kill.
Yeah I have no idea why Gaijin decided that it was in ARB and not GRB that the Su-7B needed to go down
Why do people genuinely think r60s are garbage. Is it because it goes for flares, like every other heat seeker? I can kind of see the point with the later ones as I feel range is more important than turn at those ratings, but I find them super potent at the lower ratings ~10.0.
They can hit stuff that the 9J/P can’t if someone is preemptively turning somewhat. Also I believe the much better ability to lock/pick up heat signatures means the odds of a very good preemptive turn literally making the missile lose lock after fired is less.(Yes, if you fire on someone but they become “perpendicular” enough to a rear aspect only missile it will literally lose lock mid flight and then will just go straight)
If I remember right the rear aspect ones don’t have a proxy which is a con though, but I still like them a lot.
I remember some youtube person reacting to the changes recently and one of the points they mentioned for it needing 9.7 was “the c has rwr”, like seriously nothing really has enough range that you can’t visually see it coming at this rating.
People still think this plane is ridiculous; shows they haven’t played this rating since the changes to it.
The whole rocket as flare thing is its own can of worms. Not sure exactly which planes can successfully and consistently use rockets as flares, but I think the ones that consistently can might deserve a rating increase cause having flares is a big upgrade to combat fighting 18g missiles. The smart t2 players run the lobby when the rockets work, and they don’t even take up a missile pylon. It’s super oppressive.
I maybe know 1% compared to others about how the tech in game works in real life, but I find it pretty dumb how consistently the trick can work sometimes. Literally had an su7 with its enormous engine compared to even other supersonics pull it off against my small seeker aim9d pretty easily. To be fair his rockets are bigger than others but still, I’d prefer for the trick to just be removed really.
Hottest take on earth, planes that get flares/chaff even if it’s their sole upgrade(mirage C->E) should have a 0.7 rating increase minimum.
The S-24 rockets are huge, so it makes some sense. If rockets as flares were removed it would create a new issue of flareless aircraft being yet again completely defenseless against missiles.
Well yes, I was implying that the rating should be fixed, it’s arguably the most unbalanced “rating range” in the game
“I believe this is a marketing lie”
1 Like
suuuuuuure, the dart with AIMs should be at the BR of korean war F-86s without rockets, speed and cannons, and lower than Lightning with two worse rockets and cannons.
1 Like
skull emoji