Hopefully the Devs can start looking at planes for that soon then.
As of right now, all people want to see, their tech. leading to both host and sub-tree people fighting over additions due to the lack of space, mixed in with the “only would be added if needed” leaving people who want to use those nations disappointed said favourite peace of tech used by them didn’t come.
There are no counters to plenty of ordance used by the top tier jets the kh–38mt doesnt seem to be unique in that
That’s why they add missile Iowa to tank Granits for the team
This wont be the case. As proven recently by the Tracked Rapier, which we always said was coming regardless of any Indian SPAA additions. Sub trees do not block domestic additions.
The arguments of people fighting with each other are not based on anything we have said, but peoples own disagreements or interpretations of personal opinion on what they want / do not want to see in a tree.
Is there any plan to protect ground from more advance jets?
We detailed this in our plans for this year:
So how come the Fi nish F18 wasnt given A2G, you’ve given the SAAF gripen preferable treatment when the A model came in yet you ignore it for the F18? Its almost like you guys fully expect to skip the MLU 1 and just go to the 2 so sweden is stuck with no equivalent CAS. Additionally another 400k rp sink which isn’t foldered because the tree is too small and you’re running out of ideas. It just seems like a constant kick to the teeth with the choices given to the Nordic air tree.
I might be getting things mixed up so apologizes in advanced here but wasn’t a few weeks ago when you said rank V for aviation for Britain was full I.e 13 vehicles is the max.
So with those 2 SPAA’s being Indian doesn’t that same logic applies to ground too ?
Yeah so will it be with the f-18 update or will we just have to wait as it gets worse and worse before heavy sams get in the game ? How long is close how long is testing.
As we have already explained, because the A2G MLU package was part of a later modernisation that is planned to come as a sperate vehicle. The current version did not have any capacity for it.
As it has both does this mean we will see the difference between the 2 models? If not there is pretty much no difference in game.
Also will we see other CAS weaponry for the F/A-18Cs like the LJDAM, AGM-84E, AGM-154A, or anything of the sorts? Along with this is it possible for us to see anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon? It would be a fun addition in air sim for the F/A-18C.
Its never been said it was “full” and nothing else can come there. Simply it was not the highest priority part of the tree (EG don’t expect a swarm of additions there anytime soon).
Two very different things.
Not at all. As evident literally in this major with Tracked Rapier.
The vague we understand we made a problem with the meta and we will “soon” fix or its in testiing doesnt mean anything. Can we get a more concrete answer of what we hope to give ground the ability to protect itself and PLAY AS GROUND IN GROUND RB ?
Ok a polite “bog off” if you will, a rule which is specific to naval only and is very unusual for gaijin as it means they cant copy paste something into another tree
Strange spelling of HMS Royal Sovereign, but I’m not familiar with russian alphabet. May be the same ship from a different period of history but its a different name.
Would be more historically accurate too as the soviets left it in a state so bad it was incapable of firing so had to be scrapped
Its a slap in the face for brit mains that an undoubtedly British ship was brought to the game and intentionally locked away from playing it under its righteous flag.
Are there any plans to add lofting to the Aim-7P which it still lacks (last I checked)? Also does it have Datalink yet, I’ve heard it still doesn’t…
Having a new sparrow that’s a copy of the Aim-7M, which in it of itself is a copy of the AIM-7F wouldn’t be a very interesting or useful addition…
Hopefully we will see the expansion of hardkill APS and the long range SAMs they have brought up
I mean, I was referring more to those who want to see the tech form the sub-tree they enjoy, who the quote effects more.
But even then, they are grounded worries. As you have said, X couldn’t come because the Y area of a TT was full before.
LJDAM is currently under review. There is a suggestion for AGM-84E already up, but its not planned for this major for sure. That will depend on further review.
As of right now, there are no current plans for AGM-154A soon.
Ah fair enough.
I mean we wasn’t the one who brought up the SPAA’s, we were saying as a overall and future thing from everyone prescriptive not just Britain’s.
so Russian tor soon the then ?? no more 10.7 to 12.7 BR jump