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?
You have to save this for the “Planned Battle Rating” threads.
1 Like
will there be AGM-88E AARGM for nations besides the US and UK?
Will other nations/planes receive something to increase their efficiencies in the nuclear thunder mode?
Nothing to announce regarding this currently. AARGM-ER was all for now.
1 Like
As and where required in spesific cases, it will be looked at. However its less about spesific planes and more about balancing both teams as a whole currently.
1 Like
That is sad to hear and I hope this changes, there are many players that don’t care to play the US/Russia and also want to see something different for others as well and not just focusing on efficiencies of “blue” and “red”.
Let’s give another example. The air combat BR of the f4j is the same as that of the adv, which means their air combat efficiency is similar. But the adv, without any air-to-ground weapons, has a significantly higher ground combat weight than the f4j, although the f4j still retains unguided weapons. You might say that the Typhoon has better radar and infrared missiles, plus more countermeasures, but I want to point out that the Typhoon’s heavy airframe drags down its air-to-air weapon advantage. The bol’s countermeasures can’t effectively interfere with missiles like the 92k, 9m39m, or 81 either. The low deployment rate of this kind of aircraft is for a reason—it’s completely unreasonable.
When the mode is in its infancy, the core matter at hand is balancing the mode and ensuring both teams are as balanced as possible (as can be in an asymmetric mode) and there is general stability.
What you are referring to is naturally something that comes later on. Not during the early stages of any new mode. So general wider balancing is something that should be expected currently, not more induvial tweaks.
Again, feedback on the mode is welcome in its dedicated topic, including suggestions for what the “something different for others” you want to see too.
4 Likes