I’m curious what you all think about the AIM-120C (likely the C-5 variant that’s in the files).
This was datamined recently:
Do you guys think this is necessary?
Do you think it’s coming soon (eg. this patch, in the summer patch, or later)?
I’m kind of on the fence about the 120C-5. While the R-77-1 is a nice upgrade over the R-77, does it really warrant a better AMRAAM? I don’t entirely believe that to be the case, personally.
If you thought that was an insult then my guy, you haven’t entered the real world yet lmao
Definitely a Summer thing
For some airframes, no, but others… maybe?
Like Tornado F3 Late could be given Aim-120C5s and moved back to 13.3/13.7 where it would then cause less of a compression issue in the downtiers whilst not being DOA in uptiers
Ok bad-ss lmao
I say September maybe december
Nah. The difference between AIM-120 B and C is the same between R-77 and -1. Wouldn’t be too difficult to see it come for the Tonka and Tiffy next patch.
Just says since I’ve been called far worse even in rl but you don’t see me crying lol
This has been answered several times. I understand you may not agree with it, however spamming it over and over is not going to change the answer.
It was always planned for the F-18 (Pre MLU) to come and the later modernised variant later. These are two very different aircraft with meaningful differences between them.
This later version will have multiple improvements over the base F-18.
Weird ask, but does anyone know of a forum made poll larger than this one?
Wondering if I set any new records
damn, you’ve done well getting votes
You again failed to answer my questions, so why does the Finnish hornet have to stay 14.0 without HMD despite the US model being better in nearly everyway? In what way is that balanced? So its pretty clear why the community is upset. Again why not reduce the BR if you didn’t plan on making it on par with the US model. The difference between the pre MLU 1 is not as big as the MLU 2. We’re talking HMD and IFF over A2G function restored. 9x and later Aim 120 and BOL CM pods, so agin why not make the Finnish F-18C actually have a decent BR or just give it the HMD.
The fact that the devs continue to ignore the blatant lack of balance and actual care for what the community wants make it seem like they have a bias against Finland.
I originally thought some botting was happening because there was an influx of 200+ accounts made within 10 minutes who all voted almost the same thing.
Turns out someone posted it on Tieba so a large portion of the Chinese community came in to vote, that was pretty nice.
I also hope if it happens, it happens sometime soon.
Mostly so I can know whether or not my hopeium was justified, with seeing what one came, being (personally) disappointed it was an Aussie Legacy or being happy/excited it was the CF-188.
but this is all still wistfully thinking.
BRs are always subject to change. If it performs poorly then it may well change. As of right now it remains a very potent aircraft with 10 x AIM-120.
It feels like a repeat of the Gripen situation, they could’ve added the Jas-39C to Sweden from the start but chose to give us the A instead so as to force us to grind for another plane just to get access to Fox-3s. This is just a little worse as you’re now expected in future to grind another 420,000rp for HMS and some ground ordinance.
Far worse than a bad-ss?
Ok tough dude on my internet airplane forum.
Now lets shut up before we get banned again.
As the Harrier T10 is a lot weaker than the AV-8B(NA) and on par with the performance of the Sea Harrier FRS1 at 11.0. Will its BR get corrected?
So balance isn’t a concern? Again at thay point why not just give it HMD and IFF from MLU 1 so that it actually matches the US model more closely? You’re essentially asking numerous minor nation players to do poorly in it so it can sit at the BR it should be. Because that works so well…
Do the devs even know that the majority of the Finnish air community wants HMD so its essentially on par with the US model or do they just not care
All BRs are subject to change. So once again, if a vehicle does not perform well at its BR, its subject to moving.