you got a loicence for that bowl cowntah meashah guvnah?
1 Like
It seems we don’t have a license to bol countermeasure before every US plane gets BOL, and maybe that’s one of the reasons why we’re paying a British tax. :P
remember how much bitching we needed to do just so the T10 would get BOL lmao
1 Like
the R-Darters have the range of an R-77 without the good parts of the R-77
I didn’t fully make my stance clear on the IRIS-T/A Darter but my proposed idea was just put it on par with the other 13.7 Gripens and my reasoning was that very advanced IR missiles are way too strong for the game as it is currently.
Im gonna call you out on this because you twisted it to blame sweden but the SAAF Gripen got AGM65G first. SAAF Gripen irl had no missiles (AGM’s) yet it got AGM65B when it was released, it gets irritating seeing people try to act like sweden was the nation that got fake loadouts first and people continue to lie and ignore what actually happened.
You also claim that it got added because they could carry them since RB75T has a heacier warhead but that wasn’t the case. They were added as Gaijin had just added the HUN JAS39C to the dev server which was the best Gripen. AMRAAM and AGM65G and H. They added AGM65G to the SAAF Gripen on the dev server and after about a week Smin stated it would be added to the Gripen C on sweden. After the patch went live he stated Sweden would get AGM 65G like the SAAF did for balance reasons, 3 werks later it was added so it was the last Gripen to get Mavericks.
I find it a bit vexing that this constant blame towards swedens gripen is constantly spoken of when it wasn’t the nation to get fake armaments first nor did they even get the AGM65G first it was both the Hungarian and SAAF Gripen. 3 weeks later SWE Gripen C was given AGM65G and if you had the AGM modification you weren’t refunded SL or RP nor given AGM65G.
Tbf i could rant all day about how many things gaijin gave to the SAAF gripen for balance over realism like GBU-39. The avionics required to use it are only on MS20 models of which SAAF has been struggling with money, they had to ground their gripens for a while because they couldn’t afford to get them their basic maintenance needs. Only recently did they make a deal with SAAB to get parts but were also unable to pay for the upgrade to MS20 which SAAB recommended.
It was not my intention, nor was I thinking of “blaming” Sweden. I used them as an example as I thought them getting G mavs was a sign of them getting most “capable” Gripen weapons, hence why I mentioned it. Sorry if it came out wrong, but that is not what I intended to say if it came out like that
I also was not aware of it having Mavs first
Im sorry but the way you phrased very much looks like you putting blame on sweden, and you not only continued to make them the target of blame but actively avoided checking if it was correct. Im sorry but that is just horrible to see misinformation being used especially in a tone that tries to negatively reflect a certain nation.
I could list numerous things that SAAF got over the Gripen A, like AGM65A VS the SAAF B model, or the SAAF getting paveway instead of dumb bombs, but yes sweden bias.
Once again, it was not my intention. I used Sweden to compare the weapon because it’s the only nation I know (aside Hungary) who does not has G mavs. If I knew the Thai one didn’t have them then I would use them as an example too. It was not meant to be directed towards Sweden, more so me thinking that the Gripen slowly got it’s weapons from other countries. It’s the only reason why I mentioned them. Considering balance is now more to “similar” planes such as EFTs all having Brimstones, I said that comment as it would make sense too.
Once again, sorry, but that was not what I have intended to do
Edit: About your RB75T comment; no, that was not my thought process behind it. I didnt say it because it was heavier and therefore could be carried, but because it was Swedens last Mav they had. Once again, this is not directed towards Sweden. Please understand that is not what I meant, as I honestly have nothing negative against Sweden
Sorry but thats absolutely terrible idea. C gripen with ARHs, no matter how bad, shouldnt be facing 12.3s in downtier.
2 Likes
Then it should recieve the Aim-120. There no reason to give the jas39c a worse and historically inaccurate missile kit.
then give it aim 120.
besides theres the premium F18 at 12.7 which has a close in performance missile and far more of them, its a better plane as its not relying on the aim 9b of fox 3s.
id even say the 12.3 hornet can outplay the SA gripen pretty easy
Define whats a “close-in performance missile” because i played both AIM-7Ps and Derbys and theres day and night difference.
they dont randomly lose track like the sharter does. Genuinley I do better with aim 9M than the darter
1 Like
yea 100% lol, I run 4 9Ms and 2 Darters
1 Like
Russian main will tell you how R-77 is worse missile in the game nothing come close when it actually R-darter is worse missile in the game.
until the typhoon came out i genuinley would just take the harrier GR7 to top tier as it handled it far better with the amount of CM and being able to VIFF
Dunno what to tell you.
If you said that Derbys/Darter have weird flight trajectory, yea i can see that, but never had issue with Derbys randomly losing lock, if anything they kept it the same as amraams.
Maybe even better on Kfir because the AESA radar at least work when compared to Captor-M, lmao.
Worst fox3* the fireflash is the worst missile in game
1 Like
The Gripen radar isn’t the Captor-M (criminal what gaijin did to the captor), The Gripen uses the PS-05. Anyway the R-Darters seem to have the chaff resistance of an R-3R or decide that the air is a better target than the plane you sent them at.