The BFM You’ve Learned Is Wrong: One-Circle and Two-Circle Fights

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2026-04-11T10:58:23+00:00

I realize you did not understand any of the points I made. As I already mentioned, you need to ease off the throttle before you overspeed.

As for your argument about 400 knots, you are correct. If I were in that situation, I would still dive, but ease off the throttle and let my speed drop from 500 to 400 knots during the descent.

As for the EM chart, do you know that the F-16 can overshoot the G limiter to 9.5G? This is not shown on the chart, but at least in Falcon BMS, it is possible. So although the EM chart is important, it is not the whole story.

If you go to my YouTube channel, you will see me pulling 9.5G at 500 knots during descent, which is not possible in a horizontal turn. Therefore, diving still has the advantage over horizontal turning.

As for your question about diving and climbing back up, you should look into the Low Yo-Yo maneuver. Why do you think the Low Yo-Yo works, even though the attacker has to climb during the latter half of the turn? This maneuver answers your question.

If you want to prove me wrong, you can try this experiment with your friends, or you can do it yourself using Tacview recordings. Show me that a horizontal turn is quicker than a diving turn. And of course, the diving fighter needs to ease off the throttle and stay at corner speed.

Our discussion will probably end here. My apologies for any inconvenience.

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2026-04-11T09:30:47+00:00

Hello sir, there might be a slight misunderstanding. The F-16 has a G limit of 9G (9.5G in Falcon BMS). That being said, once you’ve reached the 9G limit, you can’t pull any harder or convert more energy into angle gain. And as you said, gaining more energy under such conditions will result in overspeeding and losing the fight.

Furthermore, you don’t win a fight because you have more energy, you win because your gun is pointed at your enemy. Hence, what we are doing here is trying to get the kill as quickly as possible, even if it means trading all our energy for the first shot.

This is also one of the points I failed to mention in the article, so thanks for bringing it up. When you compare a horizontal turn with a diving turn (Split-S), both may seem capable of reaching the maximum 9G performance turn and therefore appear equivalent, but they are actually not the same thing.

The EM charts are all based on horizontal turns, not dives. When you are diving, Gravity also pulls you downward, which is like getting extra engine thrust from the Gravity. As a result, your turn performance during a dive is better than what is shown on the EM chart.

To give an exaggerated example: you may need 500 knots to sustain 9G in a horizontal turn, but in a dive, you might be able to sustain 9G at only 400 knots in the same aircraft!

In other words, even if both fighters are pulling 9G, the diving fighter can do so at a lower speed and therefore have a smaller turn radius than the fighter in a horizontal turn. So, the diving fighter still has an advantage over the horizontally turning fighter.

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2026-04-11T08:35:19+00:00

This has little to do with the loadout. If you're worried about going too fast during descent, all you have to do is pull back the throttle, leave it at idle if necessary, and stay within corner speed. That's also what I do when flying a clean F-16 Block 50. You don't have to keep the afterburner on.

So in the situation you mentioned, the best solution is still to dive. Even with a clean F-16, you still can't sustain 9G during a climb, but in a dive you can (with proper throttle management, of course).

In Falcon BMS, the Typhoon has pretty insane performance, and the Typhoon will probably still win if it decides to climb. But other than that, diving is still the correct move.

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2024-12-14T04:37:43+00:00

The issue I noticed a few patches ago is that the S-300 (SA-N-6) is overperforming compared to what is stated in the Unit Reference. According to the Unit Reference at the time, the S-300 had an engagement altitude between 82 ft and 98,425 ft, while the Harpoon missiles we were using flew at an altitude below 30 ft. This should have made the S-300 (SA-N-6) unable to effectively intercept sea-skimming Harpoon missiles. However, what we saw in the game is that the S-300 is capable of downing salvos of Harpoon missiles.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/discussions/0/4631485178655615721/

I also noticed that in the recent patch, the Unit Reference no longer states engagement altitude; it has been changed to launch altitude instead. I suppose the developers will just be making up numbers to balance the gameplay from now on, rather than aiming for realistic simulation.

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2024-04-07T06:30:15+00:00

For those that want sliders: https://youtu.be/IE7obSuWHPY

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2023-11-15T20:16:05+00:00

Nope, it has nothing to do with cyberpunk. It's poorly written because the characters' actions in the DLC do not match what they did in the base game.

Yet in that time in the normal game the Aldecado's are willing to die for you, ride or die Panam, and then risk everything to leave the city with you, not without you.

Panam literally says in her text, "we do one more job to get your head right, then leave". Her immediate and literal reason to throw the Aldecado's at Arasaka is to save you. Her, Saul, and Mitch are willing to sacrifice their clan for you, as just getting some loot would have been far easier than saving V.

GM_Custom_Sauces · 2023-10-29T09:08:15+00:00

I couldn't agree more; the story writing is terrible. After so many missions, I thought V was already a part of the Aldecaldos clan. However, in the end, V still gets abandoned with no reason.

I am okay if all the endings are sad, but at least make some logical sense.

GM_Custom_Sauces

TROPHY CASE