A few late WW2 vessels, at least for the allies could be added with 15 inch or below. But some nations, yeah ,will need the 16 inch guns
Wait, hold on. I have a couple questions based on our previous conversations.
If I’m reading this correctly, you’re fine with Gaijin twisting historical accuracy for favor of balance? If so, are you still of the mind that all pylons on an aircraft have to be filled for historical accuracy?
I bring these up because from my understanding, you don’t approve of an IR only 4x 9L/AAM-3 loadout for XF-2A (or F-2) because the other 2 extra pylons wouldn’t be equipped. Even such omission was done for the sake of balance and can be rectified later.
I swear I’m not trying to pick on you lol, just trying to understand and discuss with folks who don’t want the XF-2A/F-2 added any time soon. Last time the argument was the engines the XF-2A used were from the Block 40 and such better than the F-16A Block 10/15/20 engines at the time. Fair enough, but now it’s the radar again which was already discussed as “could be sidestepped” with a few reasonable options. Certainly less egregious reasonings than the ones used to introduce the F-16AJ.
3 Likes
I suppose if we really think about it, Japan is the only country that can’t get anything new without increasing gun caliber again. The US still has 2 battleships with 14-inch guns left, and aside from Nelson, no European country used anything larger than 15s. So perhaps we’ll get Tennessee and Queen Elizabeth in this upcoming patch and then a Christmas surprise with our three big treaty evader classes.
I mean I think I know what is next.
Rank 8 ground,
Hungarian aviation line,
Closed beta testing premiums for the next nation.
Yeah, and we still dont have an even spread of 15 inch guns for all nations, so a few 16 inch guns at 7.3 with the same balancing fix they applied to the 15 inch guns I dont think would be all that big of a deal. They also have their own inherrent weaknesses, like low speed. But it is interesting to think about what they could add next to naval. I hope we dont get too many more inter-war/WW1 vessels. King George V BB could be really interesting instead of Queen Elizabeth BB
My answer will remain consistent:
All AAM pylons according to the manual, are to be filled.
Manual, & in rare cases photographic evidence, are what’s required as evidence for what AAM pylons are and what to put there.
XF-2 with armament capability has 8 AAM pylons, of what capability IDK.
And yes I’m aware of Mirage 2000 5F that lacks MICA RFs on its belly pylons. I’d say it should’ve waited until ARHs, but the fact it didn’t clearly saw benefit with it getting its HMD & 4x Magic 2s correct.
IDK, maybe 8x IRAAMs are possible on F-2, and if they are then I’m fully behind it being added at any time.
There’s the matter of AESA; I’m still opposed to such an important aircraft being introduced with a broken radar like this is 2019 again.
@Deathmisser
F-15s, Gripen, F-4F ICE, 2A7+, T-90M, maybe SEP2, etc.
A lot of potential for closing the year.
Are you okay with EJ Kai being introduced with just 9Ps and ahistorical 7-E-2s?
Google gets me this:
Spoiler
Which means 4 IR missiles only. If you really wanted to, you could add dumb bombs like the Mk.82 to the inner 4 pylons as optional (just like all armaments are optional with custom loadouts right now).
That’s inevitable isn’t it? It’s an iterative process and there’s no way Gaijin will get it right the first time. Maybe they introduce it as accurate as possible and realize it doesn’t fit gameplay and has to nerf it. Or perhaps Gaijin introduces it nerfed and realizes it would be fine if it was accurate to real life. What’s better, buffing something later or nerfing it?
2 Likes
Outdated (and not even from an actual source). Generally A2A loadouts contain 4x IR + 4x SARH / ARH, neither more or less of all three missile types. SARH / ARH on Station 2 / 10 were scrapped due to wing cracking, capability was not carried over to production F-2 as off now.
2 Likes
Is there an updated version somewhere for reference? I’m not well versed in these, though I could have sworn I saw one of these in the old forums during discussion in some magazine pictures.
1 Like
Only this - The one you posted is from an hobby model building set.
Spoiler
2 Likes
Gaijin will likely make AESA more powerful than it actually is at first, it’s almost a guarantee.
No other game developer has attempted to simulate AESA yet, and much like when radars were first introduced being too powerful, I expect Gaijin’s implementation to be too powerful, but closer to where it should be than when radars were first implemented.
Gaijin doesn’t nerf radars, they make them as accurate as possible then change BRs if it’s less or more.
God knows I want this aircraft alongside every other amazing light fighter more than most.
And god knows I’ll be the first to complain if F-16C Block 60 comes to War Thunder before F-2.
At most at the same time, otherwise after.
I just expect a PD radar that doesn’t need to mechanically scan left/right/up/down for the first implementation. They can refine it afterwards of course, but this seems logical.
Asterisk with that because this update just nerfed some radar and RWR capabilities by making them more accurate.
Likewise I would love to see the F-15J soon as well. My only point is the only thing stopping the XF-2/F-2 from being added is other things taking priority in the development pipeline, not that it can’t be added pretty much anytime now.
3 Likes
Argument can also be made that the new RWR also “nerfed” all radars. and future additions like CM overhauls and ECM will also “nerf” all radars. I also think they need to take a pass at things like ground clutter. Needs a good deal of polish.
one thing i’ve noticed about AAM pylons, the XF-2 is that it can be equipped with 2 missiles in 1 pylon for what i saw they were AAM-3’s and it could carry an insane ammount of missiles
At least I think it is impossible to become stronger, because Su-35 is still using pesa, gaijin may weaken aesa for balance reasons
Gaijin does not weaken radars.
F-35 uses AESA. The only country to use PESA in fighters is Soviets & Russia.
All others used phased-array PDs with few today using AESA.
At least we know that the Russian Su-57 and MiG-35 are using AESA. There are far more AESAs than PESAs in 4++ aircraft in the US and CN.
Su-57 is, Mig-35 isn’t. A future Mig-35 variant will be using AESA, but it’s not in production yet.
The current service Mig-35 is like an F-16C Block 52.
PESA radars sucks tbh they are very easy to counter and are very limited to only lock 1 target at a time
But here is a Russian game and they will make the PESA stronger than reality
2 Likes