I support this
1 Like
look guys so much minor nation stuff
The new Tornado is already DOA with the asinine nerf it’s getting to its Brimestone.
The F-15E definitely won’t come with the Aim-120Bs or C-5s it uses today in service.
We all know Gaijin won’t come close to getting the radar cross section right for the F-117A.
We still don’t have HARMs or any other ARH missile to counter the BS that is the Panstir but don’t worry; the Su-34 is coming with PESA; a capability no other nation is going to get a comparable system for.
A solid 3/10 looking update. The saving grace is the new airfields and vapor effects. And they’re doing a lot of lifting for that 3.
2 Likes
My thoughts too. Apart from the F-117 the rest is just top tier stuff I genuinely don’t care about.
It’s not like they could’ve been added in a historical way tbf.
4 Likes
I just don’t trust them to get the radar cross section right. The thing has no A2A capability, stealth is all it has so would need to basically be invisible to anything besides line-of-sight. The Hail Mary is the F-15E getting Aim-120C5s but I doubt it.
Shocking truth! (Yes, he is)
Great, another Update where Germany is getting screwed. Kinda curious where the Luchs will sit in the tree tho. Shouldn‘t be any higher than BR7.0. I‘d also guess the silent-mode won‘t be implemented…
1 Like
With things in display like the SU-33 and the recent addition of the J10, will other planes be de-nerfed like the JAS39 handling?
Also, with more advanced CAS being in trailer, will we expect to see less CQC and MOUT maps in top tier ground battles - allowing for better positioning and reaction time? Will airfields be pushed further back so you have more time to acquire (air to ground, ground to air)?
Its probably Ray tracing, as we see also full reflections in the lakes.
Russian bias is real:
F-117 - introduced 1983, retired 2008
F-15E - introduced 1988
Su-34 - introduced 2014
4 Likes
You’re correct!
Thank you for pointing that out, I’ll edit the post to clarify :)
1 Like
You sure about those numbers in the table? E.g. AGM-65B with an almost 30x zoom?
There can absolutely be faults in the tables, they are player made.
if you look at all the tabs at the bottom there is one tap to the far right where you can leave feedback on wrong numbers and the maker tends to answer, correct them and leave the comments as a log :)
Edit:
Feedback is left on the link provided in the tab on the far left not right.
The zoom for AGM65B might be correct? i test-flew the F-16A and there is a really big zoom on them, hard to tell exactly how much though.
Calling the most OP CAS coming to War Thunder DOA is funny, cause your post is implying that you thought Su-25SM3 was DOA assuming consistent beliefs.
F-15C MSIP II is already in the game without its counterparts Mig-35, Typhoon, Rafale, and so forth.
Radar cross sections aren’t in-game currently, and is a feature we know is being worked on.
AIM-120Bs are the same as 120As for the most part.
C-5 equivalent missiles aren’t in-game yet.
NATO already has CAS that out-ranges and counters Pantsir with a 100% success rate.
Su-34 is going to be the worst airframe above 13.0, and PESA isn’t anywhere close to as strong as you think it is.
Thanks for disproving Russian bias.
Also…
F-15JM introduced 2019.
F-15C MSIP II in-game: Introduced 2015.
1 Like
I bet the patriot is just for airRB airfields though.
2 Likes
My god please just learn to argue normally… I haven’t seen a single post from you without some kind of strawman or twisting others words.
6 Likes
There is no twisting of words.
At no point in “Calling the most OP CAS coming to War Thunder DOA is funny” are words twisted.
That’s literally what they said:
Oh look, them calling the most OP CAS coming to War Thunder DOA.
The part AFTER THE COMMA, is a separate point entirely and NOT me claiming they said anything different.
If I say Leopard 2A7V is DOA, I would be inherently implying that I think T-90M was DOA cause people rightly should think that I have consistent beliefs and don’t have hypocrisy.
I obviously don’t think either was DOA, as this is just an example.
It’s a critique of his post’s poor exposition.
If I say Tornado GR4 is DOA as CAS, I am implying F-15E is DOA as CAS as well cause that’s how our grammar rules work.
1 Like
God, why would you want to debate with a person who doesn’t understand and is a staunch Gaijin troll and also a Russian supporter who only wants to hear what he wants to hear and doesn’t accept other opinions?
4 Likes
Hm, iirc the 65B has a 3x magnification EO seeker…