IF we limited vehicles to only “necessary” additions, then we could easily remove half the vehicles in the game. I simply listed a potential (and likely) addition to these nations, and the benefits they’d provide to said nation. Idk why you felt the need to make such a big deal of it.
Britain doesn’t need the hornet
Britain has gotten vehicles from nations that operate the hornet, even if they’re not considered sub trees
Britain is therefore eligible for the hornet
That is my entire point. They CAN get it, and I am stating what it provides them.
True, but with a maneuverable cas you have the option to pull up close to the pantsir and give him a surprise. Although its not the case for harrier, firing pgm makes you a slow target (imagine being subsonic in a tornado in high air)
I mean if you want to hit a pantsir outside its range using a pgm, that would require insane amount of height and is basically impracticable
but yes before the incredibly pointless and stupid detour.
Sweden, Germany, USA, Britain are the likely candidates for the F/A-18
Of those nations
Sweden - Benefits because their CAS options are just, mid at best for their BR
Germany/Britain - They either lack a top tier FNF Jet Fighter or their options are worse than the competition
USA - It might replace the F-16C, maybe.
Air RB wise it’s pretty much pointless unless they give it 120Cs and dont give them to any of the existing platforms that could operate it.
(15E, Typhoons, and Rafale were added too early imo)
Did I say that the Typhoon is bad? no?
I simply stated that relative to its competition it is still at a disadvantage. That is my ENTIRE POINT
I never stated Britain NEEDS the Hornet, I never even stated that I want the Hornet for Britain. I simply stated that it does provide something for britain, and mentioned it because of the fact that Britain is one of the nations eligible for it.
Jesus christ what’s wrong with this forum. You can’t talk about anything.