The vast majority of those have no real place in WT, or are incrementally different to things we already have ingame. Quite a few of the vehicles also just arent used by the US iirc.
Theres “a lot” but its a lot of fluff or just not applicable to the general game of WT, or would just make the experience worse for all, particularly if added too quickly, which was my general point.
last i checked the FFA P-16 wasnt used by Germany.
everything was designed, made and tested in the USA so it can come to the US tree. anyways, who else would a saudi, or qatari eagle go to? who else should have the desert falcon?
you can call it fluff if you want but each one has its own differences, i can tell you all of them that would matter ingame if you would like.
i do agree with added too quickly though, a lot i would like to see ASAP but they should take their time for some other things
Probably a ME tree, since the US already has more than enough of its own vehicles for it not to need subtrees lmao.
The swiss subtree (and honestly subtrees in general) were a mistake, and the FFA P-16 adds nothing to germany, its just a collectors vehicle for ppl that care about it specifically. Its “a vehicle” but it doesnt move the needle of the game in any way shape or form.
There isnt a “problem” with fluff, but its meant to be added between major addittions, which my main point was that there very much isnt much left of in the future of the game imo. We’re also getting super off topic for the EFT thread.
single vehicles do not equal subtrees
and anyways, the F-15SA is the closest T3 eurofighter equivalent F-15 imo, so would make sense to USA
https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/109548/fly-by-wire-f-15sa-makes-first-flight/
read this if you want more reasons to add it to US
They dont add much in game though, Radars are not modelled or working correctly, an AESA Radar is currently a fast mech scan. They are not (much) faster than the current F-15E in the flight regimes the game operates.
Upgrades in game new missiles 120C/D but then every other nation gets their new ARHM equivalent. New HMD, new CAS options.
Saudi will be interesting like India they use so many nations kit, the best way will be to share these vehicles between trees.
Hopefully more AESA radars will mean more bug report.
For Korean eagle, it uses SLAM-ER and has an IRST, and has in-game F-15C radar. Singapore has AN/APG-63V3 AESA and the IRST from Korean one, it is the only one I know of that carries JSOW operationally. Saudi has same radar as Singapore one, but has 2 more wing stations, a MAWS, better ECM suite, and the IRST. Qatar one has the better AN/APG-82V1 and a nicer cockpit, other than this same as Saudi.
There are notable differences between types which is why I want them all in game
I agree, Saudi should be split by US and UK
Maximum is 15 AoA /9g
100% skill issue.
Well in SIM AMRAAM performance much better than MICA, MICA have advantage on dogfight situation. While AIM-120 good for long range…
Yes, due to some air RB mechanics, long range is the exception there. Most fights indeed take place within few km and thats where Rafale teams are too strong. Radar too op, too many Micas / jet and ofc the Mica itself. A missile from hell. Quite funny how Gajin says they can’t get us Iris-T, since its unflarable and op in close range to mid range. But Micas are exactly aht. Once locked and fired there is nothing you can do except extreme low alt and hope for the goddess of multipath.
The seeker is the exact same as any other ARH missile, if you can notch an AMRAAM at 7km you can notch a MICA at 7km.
Notch+multipath+skill issue
Iris-T will be OP. Micas are not.
mica ir is on the fence.
We shouldn’t be getting any long range/very good IR missiles soon, because it will ruin the balance.
We need decompression and better game design before that.
All IIR missiles are a horrible idea for gameplay, the MICA IR would be especially unfun for the receiving end.
I disagree that they’d be bad for gameplay in general. The game is just going to have to drastically start to change to accommodate things like IIR seekers or they will indeed be a clusterfuck.
Nigh Unflarable (you will not realistically flare it ever) missiles that can get you at 20km and up to 60km in the MICA IR’s case will not be fun.
It’s an instant death bubble. Nobody likes those.
well except for a few US mains that in the past really wanted Aim-9X to counter the R-73
Granted this is way of topic but still
We would need a flare overhaul or something similair before next gen IR missles get added
Would be much less of a problem with the implementation of pyrophoric flares which form a wall of IR emissions behind the plane through which the seeker can’t look until it passes through or the wall vanishes. This type of IR-CMs would be effective against IIR seekers too.
So strategy-wise: Get the missile to your six, drop pyrophoric flares and break away to be out of the seekers FoV at the time the missile passes through the IR wall or the IR wall vanishes.
Also a thing I noticed: Once a flare was ignored by IRCCM (e.g. seeker shutdown of the 9M) it ignores it forever even if it remains in the FoV of the seeker, which happens often as BOL flares fall much slower behind the plane.
Its entirely dependent on HOW they are modeled. 9Ls and 9Ms are WAY easier to flare than they should be, no reason to assume that IIR seekers wouldnt be nerfed down to “gameplay” levels. Im currently imagining that they’ll be something like a Magic IIs level of flare resistance but out to like 5 or 6km instead of 1km, with similar flare rejection techniques to the 9M. Very hard to defeat, but perfectly do able with the right tactics.
Combine with proper CMs like BOL and I dont think they would be too bad. The bigger concern will be the long ranged IR missile that you will have little to no warning about like ASRAAM and MICA IR.