Eh, we’ll see how it performs after the acceleration and energy retention nerf
You really need to look around on how to decoy such missiles,…
tru, placing a hornet below the br of the tornado f3 early is crazy
f3 is 12.0, man…
YES. YOU are the ONE who wants to F/A-18A with 6 AIM-9L & 4 AIM-7P (or 6 AIM-7P & 2 AIM-9L)
being same BR of Tornado ADV (Early).
Sir, Do you even can’t remember what you said by yourself…?
1 Like
Aaaaaand???.. F.3 Outrun Hornet, F.3 have much more CMs to outflare the Hornet missiles.
You cannot be serious.
Yes?
Supersonic aircraft with 6x ARH and some semblence of WVR combat ability Vs sub-sonic with 4x ARH and no semblence of WVR combat ability in that config.
That is exactly my point I was trying to make, it doesn’t “NEED” to be used as CaS, use it as CAP, it will do just fine where it’s at,
Ill agree the C late is Overtiered,
The A variant though? God already a menace it really cant go lower
you can’t really lower the BR of something that carries 10 of the best BVR missile in game, it may just have to sit and deal with the roughness just like the Su27 does because if it’s lowered in BR it becomes very very op with it’s loadout
1 Like
If its in a downtier match, yes its going to be a significant problem if it gets lowered, but thats more of an issue of the MAJOR compression issues existing from 12.0 to 13.0 rather than an issue of the plane.
If you look at the F-18 as a whole and not just its missile count, it really isnt on par with the monsters that are the Euro Rafale and 15E. What needs to happen really is another decompression to allow it to sit between current 13.7 and 14.0, but I know that wont happen
So using your reasoning, to avoid decompressing even further, it can rough it out at 14.0.
Not sure why you make Decompression sound like a bad thing, It isn’t (and is actually really GOOD for the game)
he managed to make me reason with myself into coming to the proper answer xD yeah it should prob stay at 14.0 for now
1 Like
I meant compressing mb
And why then A an C early have same BR?
Because besides for the Pay-To-Win 7P, they are essentially the same plane.
Sure its annoying as all hell and bullshit that the A doesn’t get them as well, but its unfortunatley not a big enough jump to warrant a BR increase with how compressed things are.
The ARH are by far the worst in the entire game, and when you carry 6, you don’t have access to Aim-7s means you’re at 12.7 with Aim-9Hs. The aircraft itself has no semblance of survivability.
You have 4 of the best ARH missiles in the entire game. You have ARH that can actually be used in WVR unlike the Phoenix. You have lots of countermeasures, great avionics to alert you of incoming threats, and are generally small and able to avoid missiles and guns.
I generally enjoy your takes but this is by far the worst…
The point is that it’ll be one of the weakest fighter-bombers at its BR for 12.0 GRB… weaker than several 11.7 and 11.3 GRB aircraft. The US has zero decent fighter-bombers between 11.3 (if you can call the F-4E decent in its gimpy state) and 12.0, and the Hornet, with its limited armament, would be perfect to fill the gap at 11.7.
As a pure fighter, its performance will be adequate for 12.0, but it wouldn’t exactly be broken at 11.7 either.
But Hornet outturns F.3, and Tornado gets outturned by nearly everything in its radius.
Maybe F-104 is the only exception?
You are bringing only good points of counterparts while bringing only the worst parts of F/A-18.
for nothing but biasing F/A-18A&C to send them into batshit insane level.
If your claim is plausible (no it isn’t)
Hyperbolically, both Sea Harrier FRS.1 and FA.2 need to be sent down to 9.7 because they are nothing but Harrier 1.
Yes. I am bringing the most diabolical take which can be created by my brain just for you.
4 Likes