1 Like
In spesific cases? Im not really sure what your main point is here?
We are not going to be spesific questions like “will X nation get a squadron jet” or something. Its got no comparison to BVVs recent answers.
I don’t believe it was said at all anywhere here that we have never confirmed anything ahead of time. Simply, I was answering that we are not going to be answering very spesific questions or confirming things ahead this far head of time for the next major when we are only two weaks after the previous one.
Please take a look agian:
Again, what relevance does this have to what was answered here?
The question is, what makes some majors able to get confirmation or questions answered far ahead of time versus this upcoming major?
good for u then but don’t forget the last 50 years of air tech
If you can please link me to a relevant example where two weeks after a major update, we have confirmed something like what was being asked here:
Then I would be happy to explain the context of why that answer was given at that particular time.
However its really not clear what the question even is here, as you are applying random confirmations from different times, contexts and matters entirely (some Q&As, some feedback responses, some BVV responses) to a random question about the next major in the RR topic.
There are many, many different reasons why something may be confirmed ahead of time. Such as BVVs recent commentary on the ongoing development of Nuclear Escalation. That does not draw the same relevance to a random spesific question on the next major in the RR topic.
More than happy to answer spesific questions here, but this feels like some sort of “gotcha” attempt.
may we know what these fixes are or will there be a “its fixed” tomorrow?
Any fixes will be listed in full within the changelog as and when they come.
1 Like
Not at all, just an attempt at understanding the inner-workings of Gaijin’s feedback system.
Let me clarify. Gaijin (not you in particular) answer popular feedback far ahead of the next major, whether it be in the form of Q&As, etc, correct me if I’m wrong. So if he repeats his question, and others join in on asking that question repeatedly to you, would it not be possible that the question ends up getting answered ahead of time?
please smin, as for AARGM-ER, will this be available in the same numbers as AGM-88C or more since it can be taken on double bomb racks?
and will the F/A-18E and F be the only platforms?
Irl are they the only platforms?
2 Likes
yes but you never know, worth asking
1 Like
This is correct. Via official news, BVV response and other larger mediums generally. Not randomly here in this topic in most cases, unless there is a spesific element we can on a not so large subject.
You appear to be asking if its possible we will answer a question if its spammed enough times artificially here in this topic. Which is not how it works no.
1 Like
I would have thought that the US would have had them in service on the F-35 and F-15EX. I find it somewhat funny that the best NATO plane in nuclear thunder would be F-18, I really wasn’t expecting that.
2 Likes
Its too soon for spesific loadout details currently. We were just announcing that its coming as part of the means to balance the mode.
3 Likes
F-35 is currently under active integration efforts. F-15EX does not seem planned at all for now
with the double racks F/A-18E could get up to 10
1 Like
AARGM-ER could be on only some specific NATO planes, may I ask why the only confirmation given to increase the efficiency of “blue” side was the announcement of AARGM-ER when there are many other planes in NATO?
1 Like
that is true, other NATO countries should be getting AARGM
1 Like
Yeah, if other NATO countries can have AARGM then sure, but there’s also other stuff that NATO could get to increase their efficiencies too.
Because this is the primary advanced modern Anti-Radiation missile for “Blue” nations.
3 Likes
Why is Gaijin so rough with BR adjustments? To give an example, it’s well known that the J10A has a BR of 13.7 in air combat history. There’s no doubt that the J10A’s air combat capability is greater than the F16ADF and C10, right?
But in the history of ground combat, the J-10A has the same BR as the C-10, and is even lower than the F-16ADF. Does that mean the F-16ADF has better ground attack capabilities? Not really. The F-16ADF can only use its cannon for ground attacks. I won’t even mention that the J-10A also has anti-radiation missiles. So what kind of logic supports giving the J-10A a lower weight than the F-16ADF?
Or are you saying that a C10 carrying just one SPICE1000 bomb or two guided bombs can go toe-to-toe with a J10A?