I wanted to do that yesterday. But I didn’t want to boot up my console because I was actually playing command and conquer generals on pc.
The Kronshtadt would like to have a word with you.
Got you.
Absolute ankle.
Btw whilst looking for a picture of the su-9 on Google I found this and I thought it’s one of those models made for devblogs.
1 Like
It’d have its landing gear extended, but yeah, it looks similar.
1 Like
except this thing really has no place in WT
it’s only armament are 4 Manually guided AAMs
So a head on machine.
1 Like
imagine G.91 without ammo
I was thinking a Vautour IIN late without guns, but that works.
1 Like
Head on machine or Bomber interceptor. It would be a 9.3/9.7 right?
probably fits better tbh
never, 7.7 at best
Not that I’m defending the fake, but it says +5 more and the schematics might just be loaded in a different order than the vehicle tree icons. Kind of like how actual stats are different from the statcards.
Just to stir the pot a little more, we did have previous rumors of the AH-56 coming, which would fill the heli slot.
9.3 I reckon would be good, yeah.
But nothing could catch up with it at that tier. Reminds me of the times when the lightning got a lower br and it recked.
It reminds me of when the F-104s were first added.
1 Like
it honestly can’t kill anything at 9.3 and even at 8.3 it really takes an AFK pilot and perfect positioning to kill sth with it
1 Like
M1A4 🇺🇸
Leopard 2A10 🇩🇪
T90MU “Proryiv 4” 🇷🇺
T-14M “Armata-M” 🇷🇺
Ariete PT4 🇮🇹
Challenger 4M 🇬🇧
Leclerk 2M “Lanceur de baguettes” 🇨🇵
Merkava 6C 🇮🇱
Type 25A 🇯🇵
VT-6🇨🇳
STRV-126B 🇸🇪
Leak
Real
Not complete.
9 Likes
Head on Missiles are nice as a Second armament but as the only armament I really don’t see them being useful
1 Like