I’m as lazy as the guy who decided to respond in Russian. Deal with it, because I literally don’t care.
Everything else you said I agree with. Russian made Indian gear? Well no one has an Indian sub tree. So give it to who made it. The same reason Germany got the 2a4can. This stuff is so easy to get right.
Very Nice .Whose tech tree is it going into?
It had AIM-9M but never carried AIM-120 or VTAS in service sadly
Sadly, britain does have a Indian sub-tree now. The Bison cemented that.
New Zealand follows the same suit yes. Currently there is only one however (unless im mistaken and someone will no doubt point out the other(s))
Well… fuck lol.
I stand by my point, and it shouldn’t be.
Thats just R-27R1, not the ER1 and even if it was these are only 2 missiles.
Don’t you think that this is a bit unfair. You give the Britain equipment from other countries, even if it was not in the british arsenal. But you do not give the USSR equipment of Soviet origin from India. Arguing that India is a subtree of Britain. So make India not a subtree of Britain, but a free country like Canada. Nothing prevents you from doing this.
F-14A IRIAF - an event US Rank VIII Jet Fighter!
MiG-21-93 says hello (more flares, R-77 missiles, better A2G ordinance)
I’m sorry, but I also recall GJN claiming/implying this a few years ago: If a nation didn’t use X missile on a Y plane during it’s service, it would not get access to said missle on game. When did that change? That’s my last question, thanks for the replies!
AWG-9 + R-27R is OP ?
What kind of drug are you on ?!
The only way the R-27 is dominant is due to the ER, not the baseline R
America?? Oh OK.cheers
Multiple nations have equipment from other nations. India is not unique there. The Russian tree already has a large selection of vehicles and we will continue to expand on that in the future.
Nothing new. We already have that widely across the board
Dude, I’m having a blast observing all this coping and seething from IvanBoos.
Sorry. Going to @ you here Smin. Egypt, Cuba, Syria, and Kazakhstan (with Belarus camo as well) all had strong connections to the USSR for the duration of the Cold War.
Worst argument is Kazahkstan/Belarus, as both were republics of the USSR.
Best argument/analogue to this is Egypt, although I’d argue the Camp David accords we’re done diplomatically, whereas the Iranian revolution was, well, a revolution.
This also doesn’t really address the poor historical/geopolitical considerations that both the IRIAF F-14 and the T-90S “Bhishma” imply (even though you’ve said the developers don’t consider historicity, alliances, or geopolitics in these decisions).
All weaponry is subject to individual case review now. If it had / used / tested / manual’d it, its open for consideration, but not guaranteed to be implemented.
Can you please clarify, NZ has no sub tree or NZ is a UK sub tree?
I agree, I didn’t mean to remove the current camo and replace it with IIAF, they have to do a dual release as you said.
I guess it should be placed for the US tech tree since they were exported from the US to Iran, but there are so many complaints about its placement.