the Swiss F18s from what I have heard were built without the ability to carry any kind of guided A2G
Godvana has already answered that. No, they do have the ability to carry & use A2G (switches in the cockpit, no mention of removal of the capability in any document related to the procurement, etc), they just don’t because Switzerland has simply never procured any new A2G ordnance.
Quite a bit wasn’t finished when the dev server was closed, like TERMA pods still had placeholder model.
Objective performance doesn’t care about your opinion. If the Mirage 2000 is better or worse than something, it is better or worse than something.
ok bro thanks for the answer, i really hope for a surprise when the update finally comes to live server.
Not entirely true sweden does use RB75 and RB75T for their Gripens, the only Gripens not using AGMs in any capacity is the SAAF Gripen. So idk how people get this idea that sweden gets special treatment for the Gripen when it was the SAAF Gripen that got missiles first and received AGM 65G first.
Besides the Gripens are all cleared to use the munitions shown on SAABs page on the Gripen. Alongside older munitions so by gaijin standards its fair game as they can use them.
I can always link it!
There’s also a poll on the research mechanics of the reworked subtree system going on right now. I’d appreciate getting as many votes as possible to get a better idea about what other players would prefer to see.
The only one I can think of is this
The T-90 Trophy could be seen in the vehicle selection list
oh fair enough I hadn’t seen any photos of it with MAVs I guess thats another plane off the list of fantasy loadouts lol
this one , it was involontarely shown , later removed from there official site , but for SOME reason the twitter post never got changed
Interesting
Me when the trials to replace it they did zero test with A2G on it against the Gripen, Rafale and Eurofighter because it can not use it and never can unless made to
The reality is everyone’s conception of copy/paste depends on both the specific vehicle in question and the tree its being introduced to.
A very minor variant of someone’s favourite vehicle that they love playing being added to the manufacturer’s tree? Exciting!!
Fairly significant modification of a vehicle someone doesn’t like or doesn’t enjoy playing going to a foreign tree where it blocks their grind to the things they do want? Furious! You can pretty much watch exactly this happen in real time whenever Indian stuff gets announced for the British tree.
Gamers on messageboards rarely talk from the perspective of game design. Normally they only think from the point of few of a game player, and usually only their own personal narrow gameplay perspective. Even Gaijin’s word of god game design philosophy isn’t the objective truth that Deathmisser is imagining will cause people to shut up. There are multiple valid ways to design a similar game and reasonable people could disagree.
Also, people tend to more often see the negativity of something rather than the positivity of it. That might also be a part of it
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
my stance is, does it come at a BR where there is a lack of tanks / planes and does it help to fill that gap? if so great if not? then it shouldnt be mandatory to research
T90 Bishma, luckily is a squadron tank so I dont need to research it, but its at 10.3 a br where the UK has 4 very good MBTs
Mig 21 Bison its an alright plane and sits at a decent br, its better then the F4J thats for sure lol
OSA sits at a BR where the uk already has 2 pretty good SPAAs and should be foldered so player don’t ave to research it
?
Mate that is you
The trails for replacing the F/A-18C in Swiss service that took place in 2008 it states that i quote “The Swiss air force does not have the strike capability on their F/A-18C/D. For that reason we could not compare directly the performance of the 3 candidates. We decided to skip this chapter for Strike missions assessment.”
Like they have said it them selves it can’t use it as if it could use it they would of used it in the trials to compare because they had the weapons to test as they test the other 3 that being the Gripen, Rafale and the Eurofighter but no it COULDN’T USE A2G
The pods that they have used on it and just the recon versions of the pods and are used to identify targets in the air not for LGBs as it can’t designate
What?
Swiss service that took place in 2008 it states that i quote “The Swiss air force does not have the strike capability on their F/A-18C/D. For that reason we could not compare directly the performance of the 3 candidates. We decided to skip this chapter for Strike missions assessment.”
They state the same in the Reece section for the jet (Switzerland acquired TPODs only in 2010). This reads more like; “they don’t have any weapons so we can’t compare it”.
The pods that they have used on it and just the recon versions of the pods and are used to identify targets in the air not for LGBs as it can’t designate
AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR doesn’t have a “recon version”, what. The Swiss ATFLIR is identical to a US ATFLIR unless proven otherwise.
I dont play sim but imagine that. Bhishma, T-90A trophy, T 80 U and the actual T-90A going side to side. This will be like abwehr towards the end of war where there are more allies or soviet agent than actual abwehr agent.
People seem to forget about the RB75T for some reason
