Practally the same end result, not as impactful as pl12 nerf but the issue is the same
He never said that
Reading in between the lines for this post and other posts you made, I have a question.
Do you believe that the PL-12 should not get fixed unless the AIM-120s also get fixed?
1 Like
i think this is why everybody is arguing with him cause its reads like that imo. Using the ancient 120 nerf to justify the now PL-12 nerf
4 Likes
I mean
purely based on timing 120 absolutely should be fixed first if not both at the same time
but its more of all these people complaing about PL12 now were saying 120 nerf was fine for the past year and a half, but its suddenly a problem when the same thing happened to their missile
1 Like
Can you quote or name one of them?
Let me clarify, if developers refuse to fix the aim-120s, are you saying that developers should also refuse to fix the pl-12 on the basis that the aim-120s aren’t being fixed?
2 Likes
Yeah it def gives off that vibe, but people can’t pinpoint exactly what he’s saying so hopefully he can clarify.
1 Like
where have I said that at all
do you just not read what people say or something?
the amount of times I have been told 120 is good and even that its is the best missile in the last year is insane
There’s a reason why I’m asking and not claiming that you said that, can you answer though?
Yes I am seeing that SOME people are saying that the aim-120s in their situation is fine. I am also seeing that SOME people are saying that the PL-12 should be fixed, but I don’t see any evidence that there’s commonality between both groups which you alleged
So can you provide evidence that anyone who said the aim-120 is fine are also simultaneously claiming that the pl-12 should be fixed?
3 Likes
I would say that aim 120d currently is performing was performing better than the pl 12a before and after regardless
Mostly because of the effective range difference
Pl 12 was good at hobs but had poor range
Aim 120 is a jack of all trades and gets the job done the majority of the time
Now pl12 lost its hobs and gained a marginal amount of effective range but has extremely poor turning performance and is currently the worst fox 3 at top tier
Worse than derbys
I did say before that the pl 12 needed a buff so it can actually compete in the range category in order to either be close or match the aim 120 performance
Though buffing the aim 120 would be nice it would make the eft even more oppressive than it already is and the gripen would probably also become a small beast of its own
Even if they buff it american main would still complain because they don’t have a platform as powerful as the eft
6 Likes
So if the Chinese are in the same boat as the US, “deal with it”, it would be less hypocritical if you were separating the two situations.
However its not even close to the fact someone can out roll it and in some instances out pull it.
So fix your missile first as its more of an issue than the pl-12s being defeated without notching eh?
6 Likes
yk as someone who has been extremely vocal on the AMRAAM problem it is concerning that the devs have not learned. no source. misleading changelog framing it as a buff to range. same thing different year i hope that the pl-12 lovers have more luck than we do, it is a horrible situation to be in.
no one who cares about the 120 should be happy to see this. the only positive thing i can gleam from this is that now we have more allies to fight them making such severe changes with no source.
8 Likes
Not sure why, but the dev/devs are somewhat stubborn about it. Like sometimes they introduce a new missile for balance, but when that clearly isn’t working(back when C-5s were introduced) i think they should look for further improvements they can to make the missile better such 30° fin aoa whatever for the C-5s. Instead they just go ghost mode on missiles and rather have them untouched. Like many times the devs are looking for sources to buff x vehicles or missiles. Do what’s right there infront of you.
They ended up buffing the pl-12A’s motor or fuel capacity anyway? Regardless of the fact the info on it is scarce but through analysis its there and even weight factor. It ended up being an estimate right?
I really dislike how devs create this random line between what should be realistic and what shouldnt be.
Cant make sense of it, especially in the future we know we can barely bug report anything.
2 Likes
Yeah, I think if this happens one or two more times it’s gonna come to a breaking point and the devs are either gonna have to accept more analytical, bug reports or deal with community backlash because what used to be a great system for invoking player change would become a farce.
1 Like
I’m so close to say some utter words that will get me ban from this forum.
First BS changes on Pl-12 missile now sneaky br change on JH-7A ground rating.
3 Likes
The BR chane was there from the begining
Does it change the outcome?
They effectively destroyed 11.7 line-up’s CAS power, now you have to take a risk to see 13.0’s if you want to use your JH-7A with your 11.7 Line-up.
4 Likes
Gaijin keeps pushing China CAS to highter brs but no signs of at least KD 88s on the J10C and JH7A…
3 Likes
Cope really I have the MBT-2000 available for purchase for a while but with no CAS now and really only side tree options for a lineup I’m just gonna wait until 12.3 to just go straight into that
VT-4 shouldn’t be 12.3!!
3 Likes