You’re aware this just introduces a lovely contradiction in that case, no? One where a vehicle gets a free pass at X thing because balance but another vehicle doesn’t get a pass for thing Y because reasons.
Of course, that still leaves the question of whether LA’s new weapon/ballistic computer allowed it the use of more modern Mavs or not unanswered - but even it it doesn’t, again, we already have aircraft in this game that are given weapons they could not use simply to make them better.
Case in point, there is really no reason to not give ICE tripple mounts for Mav Ds, the next best alternative to it is pretty much just as useless, so just do it and make the ICE better.
SAF JAS39C is no different from other export Gripen C’s. That’s more than enough reason to give them these missiles because this capability comes as standard. I dont think F-4F or F-4F KWS LV specifically had ability to use triple rack Mavericks “from factory”. Do you have proof that weapon computer could even allow for more than 2 Mavericks?
Mirage 2000-5F for example cant carry for more than 6 missiles irl because weapon computer doesnt allow for it. Same with F-16C Blk 50 and carrying more than 6 A2A missiles. There are available triple or twin racks for AIM-120 but is the weapon computer is not capable of operating with more than 6 of them.
It’s not as simple as you think to just slap a triple pylon into the plane.
Now you’re just changing the goalpost. We’ve moved from “never used” to “couldn’t use”, and I’ve given you examples of vehicles that could not use their in-game equipment (Ariete due to its cannon not being equipped with K900 breechblock that was needed to fire DM53 or French Tigers with HOT-3s without an ability to fire them). Do tell me why you keep disregarding those, but are willing to make the F-4F ICE an exception - that’s some pretty disgusting double standards. Btw, do you have evidence Gripen C’s ballistic computer can use Mav Gs? This goes both ways.
It’s not as simple as you think to just slap a triple pylon into the plane.
Ah, must be why so many vehicles in this game just do that?
the fire control system.has to be able to work with the triple mounts which is easy on aircraft that were made with those in mind
the F4F, or rathwr All F4Fs were build in the early 1970s without the ability to use -any- Mavericks and only in 1983 when they were first upgraded their new FCS received the ability to carry 2 Single AGM65 mounts
since this ain’t a standard F4E at no point in time we can assume they added any of the standard F4E systems that would allow for the regular ordenance of an F4E to be carried we have to assume that these Phantoms were technically unable to use the triple mounts for AGM65s
If you guys wanna argue against ICE’s triple racks based on a technicality, I can do the same back to you.
we have to assume that these Phantoms were technically unable to use the triple mounts for AGM65s
@someweirdname I get that, but there’s already many exceptions that have been given stuff they could not use just to make them not DOA in X gamemode, ICE is simply the newest member of that club.
Hello, i have to step up here.
Mavericks are modular missiles. The inside and soft are the same for all the versions. What changes is warhead and seeker. Soft stays the same.
You can at any time change warhead, seeker and add safe arm if needed, it will not change how plane sees it.
2 more possible shots from deep within the enemies Killzone aren’t cutting it
and neither does that change it’s DOA status at all, this thing is made to fight and will have to do just that in the game, 4 more mavs on Unrealistic mounts aren’t helping there
The developers attention is currently focused on the vehicles and content within the current major update. Its possible some other reports may be resolved by the time of the major, but typically all attention is on the current reported issues and feedback.
