Where BlogDev?
For what? They probably aren’t going to announce the April Fools event until the first of April and there isn’t going to be a vehicle event while the April Fools one is going
1 Like
For the December update, obviously.
1 Like
Similar happened with Finland, they could have used that time to bring in the Gnat and Hawk, nope.
2 Likes
I could see them testing stealth high-alt bombers for April fools.
Pretty much already have with the 117.
I mean like B-2 ect
i’m coping very hard for a strategic bomber and cruise missile vs long range SAMs, although i will concede it wouldn’t be the mose dynamic gameplay for an april fools event
Would function pretty much the exact same. Depending on the stores given.
I saw people guessing the (previously leaked) strategic bombing and WW missions for AFOOLs, any thoughts? Seems plausible.
Edit: make it take place in rocky pillars and give all su-30s that camo
I’m hoping to see the multi component sam systems for the event.
1 Like
As a korean would be said T-50TH even before Korean tree(whatever independent or sub) comes out, as already experienced on Vidar
Whatever they will be testing, it’s not going to be super obvious. So, even if they are testing mechanics for a new mode, the April Fools mode doesn’t have to resemble a SEAD, Strategic Bombing, World War mission or whatever mode.
Of course, if they have you take control of vehicles that have complex equipment on trailers it is going to be easy to tell what they are testing though.
However, there is also a possibility that they aren’t going to test anything this year, as not every April Fools event was also a test for something new. Or it could be something fairly insignificant, like last year.
1 Like
That doesn’t even sound like an April Fools mode. You gotta think more wacky and/or unrealistic
The name “KAI-50” is strangely prevalent in the WT forums, and I remember laughing out loud when I saw the name “KAI-50” in a “leak” that someone had made using Discord and posted here.
1 Like
I don’t know where you’d put this one tbh, it’s a harrier 2 without a TGP
The T.10 does everything this one would do with a TGP
I guess it could be a Shar FRS.1 (Late) equivalent at the same BR?
I’m really not sure why a Harrier GR.5A would even be added. Sure, it would be nice to have a Harrier II between the GR.3 and the GR.7, but the GR.5A, at least to me, is too limited in its capabilities.
I would rather see them remodel the current GR.7 to the GR.7A and add another GR.7 with more limited load out options (AIM-9Ls instead of Ms, less advanced Mavericks, less BOL like they did for the T.10)
Yeaaaah, basically where my head is at.
Though isnt that the T.10 at this point?
though I would quite like to see them swap the T.10s Mk107 engine out for the Mk105 (which would be a nerf) but swap the Gr7 out for the Gr7A just for the Mk107. I think the higher BR version should have the better engine. Not the other way round.
That being said. the Mk107 engine would also be a core part of the Gr9A. So would be good to leave it.
The T.10 is a premium. There is nothing wrong with a TT vehicle being basically the same.
About the engine, I absolutely believe that a 12.3 Harrier deserved to have the Mk 107. The GR.9 might be less special then, but they have other things they can do to make it a notable upgrade over the GR.7A.