Major Update "Hornet Sting" - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 4)

Game Discussion General Discussion
6705

To explain some of my points

click here for many words

1- I was referring to the fact that the coming Netz and for example the F-4S before they standardized the features on the Phantoms ingame are flat out upgrades over their “free” counterparts in some aspects without being worse in others.

2- is about the Harrier T.10 vs the AV-8B (NA) (and the Su-25T/39 to a certain degree)

3- well, the thing is that Brimstone 1s weren’t laser guided either. Gaijin could have made them IR homing or given them a TV seeker and it would have been just as much of a fantasy fiesta as it is now.
This is more about Gaijin adding the Kh-38MT, acknowledging that certain CAS weapons are too powerful for the game, but then refusing to get rid of the biggest offender (the Kh-38ML should be enough)

4- the fact of the matter is that the Pantsir is both a CIWS and a SAM with more range than any other nation currently has. They haven’t adressed this imbalance ever since the Pantsir was introduced even though a nerf was warranted for the longest time.
Giving everyone something comparable or even better than the Pantsir would be better than nerfing the Pantsir, of course

5- yes, initial BRs are determined by specs, but for adjustments afterwards the specs seemingly are irrelevant

6- I based this mostly on the fact that the Gerpard 1A2 is 9.7 using the same Stingers, while being much better at defending itself and that the LAV-AD has access to the Hydra pod, making it a great multi purpose vehicle. Sure, the having tracks gives an agility advantage, but in terms of overall mobility I am fairly certain that agility vs speed (and being amphibious, even if that is extremely niche) is a somewhat fair trade.
I’m not saying either of them is bad, rather that I can see more of a reason for the LAV-AD to be 10.0 than for the Stormer AD.

8- I know it isn’t overall compression, but moving certain vehicles down in BR increases the compression in certain BR ranges. If there is a better word to be using here I would welcome a suggestion.
Your point here is true as well though, power creep is a growing issue as well.

9- yes, SPAA needs to catch up, but pushing the ground BRs of every top tier plane down to 12.7 seems like a very poor decision to me.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Even though people seem to disagree with you a lot, I still value your input.

Spoiler

It’s almost like everyone is allowed to have an opinion and others don’t have to agree with it, hey

edit: added a spoiler to make the reply smaller lol

2 Likes
6706

Of course they can’t lol
Doesn’t matter that they were the first ones to pull it off ;)

6707

I saw an opportunity to test my ability to respond tactfully to see if I could, and I’m glad it seems to have worked.
I appreciate your explanations, so thank you.
It’s good to read the reasoning behind your thoughts.

1 Like
6708

But it would lose 2 7P to balance it out

6709

Early version did use avionics from the lavi and im pretty sure the radar as well

6710

F/A-18A would be better at 12.7 with 6+2 or 4+6, since half the planes in 12.3 are CAS aircrafts who does not have a clue of what is energy fighting or what is a SARH(GR.7, GR.4, JH-7A, K2K), or fighters at least half a generation behind(EJK, F-20A), the only two that can put up a fight then has to rely on their missiles(BISON, M2KCS4) and getting their better missile off first

6711

Eh, C early could lose 2 AIM-7P and replace 9L with 9M and be fine

6712

The F/A-18C Early should receive 9Ms and then move to 13.0 really, it would be the closest US counterpart to the SU-27, not that it is particularly close, but that high missile quantity, high AoA, low T/W and lower speed, platform would be interesting to see for the US at 13.0

1 Like
6713

If it loses the 2 aim-7p it could get 9m and stay 12.7 though I think

6714

Indeed, at the end of the day it is depression again, but the few 11.7 aircraft would much apperciate the lack of hornets chasing them down. A-10Cs and Su-25SM3 has 2 IRCCM missile and nothing else really

1 Like
6715

It’d be too good for 12.7 even with that

6716

They also have a lot of flares

A-10C has 4 9M too

6717

yeah, I can tell you now, I’m very much looking forward to playing the F/A-18A, given its new BR at 12.3 I think it’s going to do very well

6718

let’s not pretend that the A-10C is comparable to the F/A-18

2 Likes
6719

So C early to 13.0 with 9M

And A to 12.7 with 9M/7M combo (which are same as 7F tbf)

Remember that A has worse engines too

6720

I’m not saying that, just that A-10C and Su-25SM3 wouldn’t be suffering too much from 9M’s

6721

evidence?

6722

The A and the C Early have the same engines, or at least they did when I last checked

6723

9M have very strong IRCCM it would get 2-6 9Ms and 2-4 AIM7Ps you saying the Mig29 at the SAME br should get 4 to 6 R73s?

1 Like
6724

How does that help your case though, two rarely used 11.7 aircraft not suffering too much isn’t really a great argument