I personally feel like a F-22A Early with 9Ms, 120C-5s, and no HMD would be a cool addition if the MICA gets ungimped and the Eurofighters get 120C-5s. It would trade HMD for stealth. Although idk how bad stealth will be for the game so we’ll have to wait and see.
I don’t really think 9Xs, MICA-IRs, etc. are needed yet so I’d prefer to wait.
Stealth is either going to do nothing and make US mains mad, or its going to prevent anyone else from firing any BVR missiles at them and will make everyone else mad.
I seriously doubt they’d find a decent middle ground and as a result, I just dont see the point of adding it. Its not like the US are exactly lacking in top tier aircraft currently, let alone other aircraft that could be added like later varaints of the F-16, F-15 and F-18
I still advocate that planes like the SHAR FA.2 and Hawk 200 series would fit in the top tier stuff, or would have if gaijn didnt just go warp speed on this stuff too much, though tbh its a lot like when gaijin left the 50s into the 60s then 70s, a huge number of what would have been meta/high end fighters got left to the sideline for “speeding to the big names”.
I dont think we need mach 2 for viable top tier, it helps to get into the battle, but it isnt vital.
While “natural” to get more, the excessiveness of their “more” is kind of idk… weird and cruel at times, especially when it means you have vehicles which would have been meta for minor nations at 1 point now being “average” due to the creep, gnat or hawk 80/100 series would have been really good aircraft if added at the right time, now? Well… we needed to speed run to getting to the F22! The UK can make do with its Javelin when everyone else got supersonics! xD
Wouldn’t a year for the aircraft work for all?
There are probably package names for the upgrade but i dont think they make up versions names
Had to edit because just about everything i can think of 10.3 up for sweden is a made up version of the aircraft with a real version name
Stealth for the 22 would probably be good on EC maps or for sim. But on smaller maps just useless.
Most upgrades have a name associated with it. But I was thinking something more universal and already used. Gajin has used a year before for tanks. What stops them from using it for aircraft?
I think in some the cases, they simply dont want to give a specific date or variant because it forces them into a specific set up for the aircraft, with little room to change it later.
for example
Tonardo F3 Late I think explicitly has the “late” not “AOP” or “FSP” prefix because it allows them to change the loadout. We could go from the Aim-120B to Aim-120C5 on the aircraft and it wouldnt necessarily be inaccurate to the aircraft because a specific variant wasnt given.
Likewise, one of the excuses given for the Tornado Gr1 being nerfed to have the Mk101 engine is that the Tornado GR1 isnt from a specific date and is an amalgam of the GR1 throughout its service. Its the biggest load of BS ever, given not even the “early” Tornado IDS like the one found on the Italian TT have the Mk101 engine, but if they actually gave a specific date for the Tornado GR1 (such as the fact it has TIALD and therefore is from the mid to late 1990s, about 15 years iirc after it got the Mk103 engine) then they couldnt artificially nerf it
As an SB main, that has me most concerned, though I am also always matched with the US, so would only be a concern if we get the Su-57 as well.
But having spent the last 4 months with a blind radar due to bugs. The idea of it not being a bug is rather terrorfying
i assume your thinking of russian tanks, T64A obr 1971 is a real designation for example and thats the one we have in game
It’s that right there why I want an aircraft date. It would be much easier for me to not waste time on a bug report just to be told. Hey that aircraft is actually this year go do something else.
Yeah… Likewise it can be used to force bug reports through that have been denied for “reasons”
Which then means they could use something like the upgrade version like blk numbers.
I had that recently as the M1A1s armour matches the M1A2s armour in some places with certain shells, I do not feel like arguing the armour but either way it should no do that unless its the HA version or a upgraded 90s version but because its just called “M1A1” I have no idea what version its meant to be and thus my report was denied although correct
Yeah which feels like an slap in the face when spending hours looking for valid documents.
Admittedly i didnt have an intention to nerf it, that was more of a side bonus thing as i did want to find out what version it was and that was the best way i knew how lmao
Honestly no clue. Could be all AI, to respawns etc. It would prob be up to devs/ beta testing as to whats most engaging.
But if conceptually you’d want to fit in weapon teams/ squads into the game, it seems to work quite well ( by mostly utilizing aircraft ordinance mechanic for squad management)
Imo it’s better to have a TT with multiple even slightly different variants than half-empty TT. Although such planes are better to be placed in folders, when it’s possible.
For example:
【F-104S → F-104S.ASA]
→
F-104S.ASA-M
→
F-16ADF
While we have such variants, respective planes shouldn’t be limited in any way, like ASA-M receives its AIM-9L/I-1, which would be its key feature compared to other F-104S. (F-16ADF gets its AIM-120B instead of AIM-7M it didn’t use in Italian service).
I think it’s much better to have something new to grind each update in your favorite TT than having nothing, even if it’s just a slightly different variant (even if it’s at the same BR like RET.8 Tornado for example) or in my case I’m happy even with copypaste.
Which is why they should’ve added T1 and F1 Typhoon/Rafale since then it would not be an issue
So a waste of time they say
