Russian missiles - usage, bug, problems, advantages

[tovivan]

Square one, you can face off 1v1, Flanker v Flanker and it will end up a gun fight.

 

Fantastic. Thanks ED, thanks a bunch! :(

[rami80]

I feel like the missiles are back to their previous state with this hotfix (awesome physics improvements aside)

[Exorcet]

Fantastic. Thanks ED, thanks a bunch! :(

To be fair it was a bug. The change wasn't a nerf to missiles, but fixing an unrelated bug. Given that 1.5 is in beta with the intent to fix software issues, they're certainly not going to leave a bug in for the sake of game balance.

 

Once 1.5 is stable, they're probably start tuning things.

[Flycat]

Well, after reading all of these post, it's very useful to me, and costs me lots of time. :D

And it really helps me get some more new understanding about r-27 and 120. 120 is not such scary and r-27 is underestimate by my mind. lol

 

==============

Other thinking about the thread:

And the ED said before is really helpful: the performance and capability of weapon is the R&D department(OKB/ company) and DoD's should take care about. Under this way, I think we need keep our mind on how to use the advantage of the weapon to defeat enemy('s disadvantage). If we're in another "game", just like the Sorcerer won't defeat a Berserker in melee combat(typical battle, a range witch with null armor and a melee warrior with medium armor, ; P), the witch should always keep away from hostile, and it's the Sorcerer's way to win the combat. There is no balance or always feeling comfortable during the real world combat, and there is no perfect weapon to defeat every enemy in the battle, every weapon have it's own way to use and win. So always focus on original "limitation" topic. Sorry to out topic. : (

[*Rage*]

As it stands currently in hotfix 2 the IR missiles are very easily spoofed. Its only if youre in afterburner and NOT flaring do you stand a reasonable chance of getting hit. They also do some interesting acrobatics.

 

R73/ET should be renamed 'All aspect missiles - only if the target is gating, not flaring, is nowhere near the ground or sun and flying straight and level' :)

 

On a serious note its clear missiles are a work in progress still - as expected of an open beta.

[Darkwolf]

When you see the Ethiopian conflict and the amount of R27 missile fired / plane downed, it's finally quite accurate :D :D :D If i recall, only one mig was hit and it could made it back to base and crash there. I'm wondering if he did not actually ran into the missile by mistake.

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm a mig driver myself :D

[karambiatos]

Yes if only the Ethiopian conflict could be used as actual evidence.

[Sleksa]

If we take the usual loadouts of the respective planes, any sane person will take triple tanks on the F-15 and a maximum load of Amraams. This grants the F-15 several distinct advantages over every aircraft in the game. First one is the flight performance, with a flight time of an hour with the throttle permamently set on medium afterburner, the F-15 has a distinct advantage to both engage and disengage fights at any ranges between 8-100miles, this is only further enchanced by the aim-120's active mode, where the F-15 pilot can in any engagement he finds himself in to respond by firing a 120 at the incoming plane, wait for active and then run away from the incoming shot. The chasing plane then has a distinct choice of chasing and dying to the 120 with absolute certainty while bleeding off the entirety of his fuel (if any other aircraft than another F-15), or attempting to avoid the missile and have a slim chance of living for the duration that the F-15 spends turning, reacquiring and firing new 120's.

 

There is no chance whatsoever that any of the Russian planes could stand up against the F-15. There should simply be a mandatory message in MP upon selecting a FC3 RU plane which states that you are nothing but fodder for the F-15's in the server/mission. This is slightly compounded by the Russian radars which become blind the moment the target aircraft performs any kind of maneuvering, and R-27ER/T's which have less kinematic performance than the R-13M1's carried on the MiG-21's, but fixing either will never bring any kind of advantage for the russian aircraft on a multiplayer setting. Nor should they really, as the SU/MiG we have in the game is pretty much a default 80's aircraft, while the F-15 seems to be from mid 2000, which is an age difference equal to trying to fight a MiG-15 with a biplane. Fun, but with an obvious outcome.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Sleksa

[Exorcet]

If we take the usual loadouts of the respective planes, any sane person will take triple tanks on the F-15

Never, the worst payload imaginable.

 

F-15 pilot can in any engagement he finds himself in to respond by firing a 120 at the incoming plane, wait for active and then run away from the incoming shot. The chasing plane then has a distinct choice of chasing and dying to the 120 with absolute certainty while bleeding off the entirety of his fuel (if any other aircraft than another F-15), or attempting to avoid the missile and have a slim chance of living for the duration that the F-15 spends turning, reacquiring and firing new 120's.

This ignores R-77 and ET, which can basically do the same thing, it also ignores positioning. Inferior positioning is nothing the AMRAAM can solve (assuming it's even in the mission). At best, you can force a mutual kill, but that's not guaranteed.

 

There is no chance whatsoever that any of the Russian planes could stand up against the F-15.

There is plenty of chance. The F-15 is more likely to win one vs one in a neutral BVR fight if 120C's are available, but you shouldn't be trying to go for that.

 

the SU/MiG we have in the game is pretty much a default 80's aircraft, while the F-15 seems to be from mid 2000

Something I would like to see addressed.

[Sleksa]

Never, the worst payload imaginable.

 

 

This ignores R-77 and ET, which can basically do the same thing, it also ignores positioning. Inferior positioning is nothing the AMRAAM can solve (assuming it's even in the mission). At best, you can force a mutual kill, but that's not guaranteed.

 

There is plenty of chance. The F-15 is more likely to win one vs one in a neutral BVR fight if 120C's are available, but you shouldn't be trying to go for that.

 

Something I would like to see addressed.

 

The payload doesn't really matter as you can discard it whenever you want, but what it allows one to do is to get from the airfield to where the fight's happening with full afterburner and still retain some fuel on the external tanks, as well as 100% internal, a feat which'd burn the entire fuel load of any other aircraft. There simply is no reason not to do it from the DCS point of view, real life might be different but that's not really the topic of this discussion.

 

As far as the ET/77 go, the ET is probably the only realistic threat if the firing aircraft manages to get on the side or rear of the F-15 to fire, but then again, even a MiG-21 can achieve a kill from these parameters with a heat seeking missile. However to get within such firing parameters without alerting the enemy on the FC3 russian aircraft, one needs to go in essentially blind without using the radar, and even then it's still more likely to miss if spotted by simple turning and flaring, if it even has the kinematic performance to achieve a hit on a target that's running and turning.

 

The 77 I wouldn't really even mention. The performance of the missile is much worse and the plane carrying it has a radar performance equal to the mig-21. Firing it gives the enemy aircraft a definite warning and there's no way to know when the missile goes active or not so from the pilot's point of view it's essentially a sarh with a chance to go active if radar lock is broken. The situation is already a lot worse than the F-15's, but when you factor in that the mig has probably spent his external+half his internal fuel load by flying to the combat area and spending 2 minutes on the afterburner whereas the F-15 is likely to have half his external tanks left doing the same on full burner since takeoff. This allows the F-15 to do any kind of defensive maneuvering he wants, and as many attempts to disengage as he needs, whereas the mig has a number of attempts to do before needing to head back to the airfield.

 

I'm not arguing whether or not this should be how things are, but objectively looking there is no reason to fly these aircraft if there's F-15's available on a multiplayer setting as it puts the players at a distinct disadvantage. And the disadvantage might be migitated a little by changing the missile's performances, but it will never be negated with how many other advantages the F-15's have.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Sleksa

[Esac_mirmidon]

Blue flag is telling us a complete different story.

 

Yes. Fighting the F-15 in a Flanker is difficult and very challenging but not impossible at all. I'm a very poor fighter pilot. My best skills are displayed flying helicopters and mud movers. But using tactics and teamplay i was able to shoot down several F-15C.

 

Just in the same situation the real thing could be. 5/3 4/2 advantage situation. Forcing the Eagle to go defensive with long range shoot from ER while other mates are closing fast and low to use EOS or vertical scan and engage with ET and R-73.

 

At any clue of an Aim-120 launch break hard, notching and using terrain. Avoiding high frontal engagements. Using our own advantages. And it works.

 

Forget about the mythological superiority of the Eagle. Yes its a very tough opponent but with tactics and teamplay is defeatable.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Esac_mirmidon

[TAW_Blaze]

Pretty much every multiplayer event ever tells the exact opposite. Well flown RU jets easily have the ability to compete with well flown 15s.

[Exorcet]

The payload doesn't really matter as you can discard it whenever you want, but what it allows one to do is to get from the airfield to where the fight's happening with full afterburner and still retain some fuel on the external tanks, as well as 100% internal, a feat which'd burn the entire fuel load of any other aircraft. There simply is no reason not to do it from the DCS point of view, real life might be different but that's not really the topic of this discussion.

On your typical server, you don't even need tanks at all to get to the fight. 3 tanks give you more fuel, but two tanks is already excessive, and you get better performance with the tanks on, meaning you don't need to dump them just to be able to maneuver.

 

If you're really trying to go 110% for every fight, you shouldn't even enter the fight with full internal fuel. Go in with a half tank, take your shots and pull back.

 

As far as the ET/77 go, the ET is probably the only realistic threat if the firing aircraft manages to get on the side or rear of the F-15 to fire, but then again, even a MiG-21 can achieve a kill from these parameters with a heat seeking missile. However to get within such firing parameters without alerting the enemy on the FC3 russian aircraft, one needs to go in essentially blind without using the radar, and even then it's still more likely to miss if spotted by simple turning and flaring, if it even has the kinematic performance to achieve a hit on a target that's running and turning.

There isn't really a comparison between the 21 and the Su-27. The 27 has IRST, datalink, better endurance, and BVR capability to try and force a favorable position. The R-27 has its woes for sure, but I don't really agree with the sentiment that it's ignorable. Ignoring it leaves you vulnerable to a very quick death. You do at the very least need to acknowledge it is there.

 

Given that, there is no reason to go in blind. You only need to be hidden when you make your attempt at a fatal strike.

 

The 77 I wouldn't really even mention. The performance of the missile is much worse and the plane carrying it has a radar performance equal to the mig-21. Firing it gives the enemy aircraft a definite warning and there's no way to know when the missile goes active or not so from the pilot's point of view it's essentially a sarh with a chance to go active if radar lock is broken.

You can tell when it's going to go active by paying attention to missile range. Get close enough, and it is active. At further distances, you have a clock. Yes, it's far less reliable than the F-15's counter, but it's there.

 

The MiG-29 does have fairly poor radar performance, but you need to look at more than range. The 29 has a wider area of coverage and is much better at look down. It also has a better RWR display to build SA with.

 

The situation is already a lot worse than the F-15's, but when you factor in that the mig has probably spent his external+half his internal fuel load by flying to the combat area and spending 2 minutes on the afterburner whereas the F-15 is likely to have half his external tanks left doing the same on full burner since takeoff. This allows the F-15 to do any kind of defensive maneuvering he wants, and as many attempts to disengage as he needs, whereas the mig has a number of attempts to do before needing to head back to the airfield.

If that is the case, the MiG has the advantage when it comes to maneuvering and on disengage, as the F-15 is going to be sluggish in comparison and have trouble running the MiG down, at least with three tanks that aren't even drained. The MiG can't afford to be drawn into a long fight, definitely true, but this isn't an insurmountable obstacle.

 

I'm not arguing whether or not this should be how things are, but objectively looking there is no reason to fly these aircraft if there's F-15's available on a multiplayer setting as it puts the players at a distinct disadvantage. And the disadvantage might be migitated a little by changing the missile's performances, but it will never be negated with how many other advantages the F-15's have.

The Russian datalink is a huge advantage. If it ever does get cured of bugs and made use of by mission designers, it can pretty much level the field by itself. The F-15 is the best plane in a vacuum yes, but I don't see that as a problem necessarily and I don't think it should be treated that way. Straight up 1v1 should be avoided at all costs in air combat anyway. That said though, while getting the Russian missiles tweaked won't reverse things, I think it would have a decent impact on the current balance. The ER is the best performing missile kinematically right now. Edited October 13, 2015 by Exorcet

[domini99]

Anybody noticing active's are capable of locking through mountains and from impossible angles and directions? You could have already passed the missile and it'll still be tracking you.

 

Seems legit

[GGTharos]

Is it tracking you (actually turning to hit you), or is it just your RWR memory?

[karambiatos]

Is it tracking you (actually turning to hit you), or is it just your RWR memory?

Everything radar tracks when the plane is near the top of the mountain (even your planes radar), that is to say slightly below the peak

 

if the plane dives further down the mountain the track gets lost.

[Frostie]

Regardless of F-15 the fact still remains that 1v1 competent VPs in Flankers ends up as guns, this for me says it all about how ineffective EDs Flanker is at any sort of missile employment. ie. Pointless.

Chaff effectiveness, Flares effectiveness and guidance are as detrimental as they have ever been in the series, why the change?

[Sleksa]

Blue flag is telling us a complete different story.

 

Yes. Fighting the F-15 in a Flanker is difficult and very challenging but not impossible at all. I'm a very poor fighter pilot. My best skills are displayed flying helicopters and mud movers. But using tactics and teamplay i was able to shoot down several F-15C.

 

Just in the same situation the real thing could be. 5/3 4/2 advantage situation. Forcing the Eagle to go defensive with long range shoot from ER while other mates are closing fast and low to use EOS or vertical scan and engage with ET and R-73.

 

At any clue of an Aim-120 launch break hard, notching and using terrain. Avoiding high frontal engagements. Using our own advantages. And it works.

 

Forget about the mythological superiority of the Eagle. Yes its a very tough opponent but with tactics and teamplay is defeatable.

 

I think you're arguing against completely different things than what I said. It is certainly possible to kill F-15's by using russian aircraft, as a freebie I can even throw in a picture of me killing one with the -21

 

 

However we can't really make the argument out of such data that the MiG-21 is equal to the F-15, rather we'd need to look at the overall statistics of multiplayer servers to find the truth. the crucial point from such data is to understand that there's a rather huge and distinct difference between possible, and likely. For every few kill I get against the F-15 on the -21, I have to disengage due to incoming amraams a dozen times, and many of those I end up as a flaming wreck or out of fuel a hundred miles away from the nearest airport. So while it's certainly possible, the F-15 still has a obvious advantage, and this advantage persists against any currently flyable non-modded aircraft in the game.

 

On your typical server, you don't even need tanks at all to get to the fight. 3 tanks give you more fuel, but two tanks is already excessive, and you get better performance with the tanks on, meaning you don't need to dump them just to be able to maneuver.

 

If you're really trying to go 110% for every fight, you shouldn't even enter the fight with full internal fuel. Go in with a half tank, take your shots and pull back.

 

There isn't really a comparison between the 21 and the Su-27. The 27 has IRST, datalink, better endurance, and BVR capability to try and force a favorable position. The R-27 has its woes for sure, but I don't really agree with the sentiment that it's ignorable. Ignoring it leaves you vulnerable to a very quick death. You do at the very least need to acknowledge it is there.

 

Given that, there is no reason to go in blind. You only need to be hidden when you make your attempt at a fatal strike.

 

You can tell when it's going to go active by paying attention to missile range. Get close enough, and it is active. At further distances, you have a clock. Yes, it's far less reliable than the F-15's counter, but it's there.

 

The MiG-29 does have fairly poor radar performance, but you need to look at more than range. The 29 has a wider area of coverage and is much better at look down. It also has a better RWR display to build SA with.

 

If that is the case, the MiG has the advantage when it comes to maneuvering and on disengage, as the F-15 is going to be sluggish in comparison and have trouble running the MiG down, at least with three tanks that aren't even drained. The MiG can't afford to be drawn into a long fight, definitely true, but this isn't an insurmountable obstacle.

 

The Russian datalink is a huge advantage. If it ever does get cured of bugs and made use of by mission designers, it can pretty much level the field by itself. The F-15 is the best plane in a vacuum yes, but I don't see that as a problem necessarily and I don't think it should be treated that way. Straight up 1v1 should be avoided at all costs in air combat anyway. That said though, while getting the Russian missiles tweaked won't reverse things, I think it would have a decent impact on the current balance. The ER is the best performing missile kinematically right now.

 

You're not really adressing the core argument here, but rather semantics like what fuel load would be optimal to further maximize the F-15's advantages

 

The argument I'm saying is that F-15 inherently has a distinct advantage. This advantage can be negated situationally by employing what few advantages the other aircraft have, but at the end of the day the majority of the engagements will go favourably for the F-15, which always retains the option to safely disengage from a fight with a high chance for a return kill against the agressor, as long as the distances between the aircrafts are over 10-15km. The R-77 and the R-27ET have this capacity theoretically yes, however on the R-77 it is impractical due to no idea of knowing whether the missile has gone active or not, and on the 27ET due to the missile's abysmal performance against even the most half-hearted evasive actions.

 

In engagements this advantage is also very distinct. The F-15 can afford to disengage from every single combat as soon as the amraam goes active, and by doing so frees the F-15 to disengage from the fight. However every other aircraft in a similiar situation has to keep chasing the enemy, which puts them yet again at a distinct disadvantage, like being flanked, loss of altitude and potential energy to disengage, loss of situational awareness due to the need to support the missiles, and high consumption of fuel from a much lower reserve.

 

Again it is certainly possible that the F-15's can lose fights if the enemy aircraft get into favourable positions, and in air-air combat things never go as smoothly as one likes to think, but this is in no way an argument to say the F-15 doesn't retain massive advantages over other aircraft.

 

Pretty much every multiplayer event ever tells the exact opposite. Well flown RU jets easily have the ability to compete with well flown 15s.

 

Do you have any actual data on this? From the single event quoted in here the amraam was responsible for 18 of the overall 25 kills, with the ER being responsible for 0 and the ET for a handful.

 

I could also bet my left nut that that statistics from servers like 104'th (if they collect such data) would likely see the amraam dominating the primary cause of pilots hitting the ground anywhere else except the runway.

 

And again to repeat myself. I'm not arguing whether this is how things should be, but rather how they are. I still personally fly the MiG-21 for pretty much all my multiplayer flights because I personally get a kick out of being the underdog.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Sleksa

[blkspade]

Regardless of F-15 the fact still remains that 1v1 competent VPs in Flankers ends up as guns, this for me says it all about how ineffective EDs Flanker is at any sort of missile employment. ie. Pointless.

Chaff effectiveness, Flares effectiveness and guidance are as detrimental as they have ever been in the series, why the change?

 

The alternative in your scenario would nearly always result in mutual kills.

[Frostie]

The alternative in your scenario would nearly always result in mutual kills.

 

If two equal pilots went toe to toe I don't see a problem with that except you're missing the fact of timing, an ER hit before the opponents results in a trashed missile and victory.

 

Besides missiles being trashed to tighter margins brings more luck in staying offensive, right now it is measured in whether you deploy chaff and flare or not making staying offensive against missile shots easy, which is what we don't want.

The respect for missile launches is not there and that needs addressing.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Frostie

[blkspade]

If two equal pilots went toe to toe I don't see a problem with that except you're missing the fact of timing, an ER hit before the opponents results in a trashed missile and victory.

 

Besides missiles being trashed to tighter margins brings more luck in staying offensive, right now it is measured in whether you deploy chaff and flare or not making staying offensive against missile shots easy, which is what we don't want.

The respect for missile launches is not there and that needs addressing.

 

That isn't absolutely true for two reasons. If counter measures are less effective, combined with the ER/ET double tap, both will likely still eat the ET. Radar missiles don't go completely dead anymore when no longer guided. So there is a chance that you'll fly into it if there isn't a sudden aggressive change in direction when the enemy is splashed. Even with flares inside a certain range you still need energy to maneuver to create separation. This is an easier task with the flanker than the eagle as speed bleeds while on idle.

 

I don't think that there is really even a lack of respect, more than a subtle understanding of game mechanics. If I'm fired on by a flanker that I'm sure I've identified, I can extrapolate my window to react and respond. Even you mention 'luck', which isn't an ideal mindset for combat.

Edited October 13, 2015 by blkspade

[TAW_Blaze]

The argument I'm saying is that F-15 inherently has a distinct advantage. This advantage can be negated situationally by employing what few advantages the other aircraft have, but at the end of the day the majority of the engagements will go favourably for the F-15, which always retains the option to safely disengage from a fight with a high chance for a return kill against the agressor, as long as the distances between the aircrafts are over 10-15km. The R-77 and the R-27ET have this capacity theoretically yes, however on the R-77 it is impractical due to no idea of knowing whether the missile has gone active or not, and on the 27ET due to the missile's abysmal performance against even the most half-hearted evasive actions.

 

ET/ER combos can be just as deadly as a well shot slammer. Bottom line is, that you need to have the SA to identify enemy positions and launches and the 15 is just far better at this.

 

The other bottom line is that you'd be shocked by how extremely difficult it is to kill a competent driver in a serious event like JW or SATAC. Most deaths are a direct result of lacking SA or a series of mistakes from one of the drivers.

 

In engagements this advantage is also very distinct. The F-15 can afford to disengage from every single combat as soon as the amraam goes active, and by doing so frees the F-15 to disengage from the fight. However every other aircraft in a similiar situation has to keep chasing the enemy, which puts them yet again at a distinct disadvantage, like being flanked, loss of altitude and potential energy to disengage, loss of situational awareness due to the need to support the missiles, and high consumption of fuel from a much lower reserve.

 

The Eagle is clearly a better BVR fighter and has numerous other advantages but the point is that for some reason people pretend russian jets should defeat an 15s by flying like a 15. If you fight with your fist as if you had a sword against a guy with an actual sword then no shit you will lose.

 

Do you have any actual data on this? From the single event quoted in here the amraam was responsible for 18 of the overall 25 kills, with the ER being responsible for 0 and the ET for a handful.

 

I could also bet my left nut that that statistics from servers like 104'th (if they collect such data) would likely see the amraam dominating the primary cause of pilots hitting the ground anywhere else except the runway.

 

And again to repeat myself. I'm not arguing whether this is how things should be, but rather how they are. I still personally fly the MiG-21 for pretty much all my multiplayer flights because I personally get a kick out of being the underdog.

 

Like I said, pretty much every multiplayer event. We lost the 51st in one of the JWs for instance, and there have been a hell of a lot more.

 

ERs get low amount of kills because nobody can ever afford to support missiles in a multiplayer event. If you try to guide a missile until impact in a standard situation I can guarantee you you're gonna die every time.

 

The respect for missile launches is not there and that needs addressing.

 

My perspective here. Every time I don't respect a launch I'm shot down. Unless the guy just sucks and doesn't know how to properly launch. And you know damn well I'm not the type of guy who does barrel rolls chaffing and praying that the ER'll just go dumb :)

Edited October 13, 2015 by <Blaze>

[Frostie]

 

I don't think that there is really even a lack of respect, more than a subtle understanding of game mechanics. If I'm fired on by a flanker that I'm sure I've identified, I can extrapolate my window to react and respond. Even you mention 'luck', which isn't an ideal mindset for combat.

The luck part is on reference to staying offensive when launched on by simple cranks and chaff, luck should be a greater factor in this situation as it goes against the logic of a real pilots behaviour.

As it is now anybody can press, crank and chaff, launch ARH at >20km to win the engagement without a great deal of luck needed.

[blkspade]

The luck part is on reference to staying offensive when launched on by simple cranks and chaff, luck should be a greater factor in this situation as it goes against the logic of a real pilots behaviour.

As it is now anybody can press, crank and chaff, launch ARH at >20km to win the engagement without a great deal of luck needed.

 

Because the Eagles TTA will always be sooner than the Flankers TTI. That will literally never change (barring major disadvatages). Cheapshot capability is even basically there now.

[Exorcet]

You're not really adressing the core argument here, but rather semantics like what fuel load would be optimal to further maximize the F-15's advantages

I'm only arguing what I don't agree with. I've said the F-15 has the advantage 1v1. I don't think going into combat with full internal fuel is part of that advantage. It's a trade off as endurance isn't a big deal when you pretty much fight over the field you took off from. Full fuel tanks hurt your ability to take and evade shots. If you're willing to put up with more takeoffs and landings, it's better to go into combat with less than full fuel in your typical DCS server.

 

The argument I'm saying is that F-15 inherently has a distinct advantage. This advantage can be negated situationally by employing what few advantages the other aircraft have, but at the end of the day the majority of the engagements will go favourably for the F-15, which always retains the option to safely disengage from a fight with a high chance for a return kill against the agressor, as long as the distances between the aircrafts are over 10-15km. The R-77 and the R-27ET have this capacity theoretically yes, however on the R-77 it is impractical due to no idea of knowing whether the missile has gone active or not, and on the 27ET due to the missile's abysmal performance against even the most half-hearted evasive actions.

That the F-15 is in a favorable position the majority of the time would be down to bugs more than the aircraft themselves. I disagree with your assessment on the R-77, at least if you really mean that one has "no idea" when it's active. By waiting until you're within ~12 miles, you get an active missile. That kind of range is pretty standard for online, at least when I last played.

 

In engagements this advantage is also very distinct. The F-15 can afford to disengage from every single combat as soon as the amraam goes active, and by doing so frees the F-15 to disengage from the fight. However every other aircraft in a similiar situation has to keep chasing the enemy, which puts them yet again at a distinct disadvantage, like being flanked, loss of altitude and potential energy to disengage, loss of situational awareness due to the need to support the missiles, and high consumption of fuel from a much lower reserve.

Fleeing is a bigger hit to SA than having to avoid a missile. Turn and run makes you blind to the enemy's movements. If that AMRAAM going active does not make a kill (far from guaranteed without putting the F-15 at risk), you'd better keep running. If the strategy is to retreat at the very hint of danger, you're not going to profit. Both sides will likely survive (assuming competency).

 

Again it is certainly possible that the F-15's can lose fights if the enemy aircraft get into favourable positions, and in air-air combat things never go as smoothly as one likes to think, but this is in no way an argument to say the F-15 doesn't retain massive advantages over other aircraft.

I still say "massive" is an exaggeration. Definitely so with a working datalink and this missile guidance issue on the ER resolved. I do admit to having been out of the MP loop for a while though, maybe things have changed more than I thought.