I forgot about the 1400hp, that thing is eating good
2 Likes
infinitely prefer it over the T80BVM, really sad cheaper won at the end of the day
1 Like
I’ve been begging Gaijin to no avail since they removed the IRST21 sadly :(
Gaijin give me the T-80BVM obr.2022 and my wallet is yours.
Ah, that’s fair then. In the meantime I think there is a lot of other things that can be added first then.
For Malaysia this could mean expanding further down with rank V options like the CL-41G or MB-339AM, and looking at the tree as a whole there’s still an ominous Indonesia shaped hole in the fourth line
1 Like
We seem to just be moving goalposts over and over at this point for some sort of point scoring or “gotcha” at this stage. The actual constructive purpose to this topic or discussion I’m not really sure of.
Yes, it was quite clear by the aircraft I listed, all of which fall into the same category and typing and all arrived from the same time period onwards. These Swedish aircraft above were some of the only strike options for the Swedish tree in its infancy. The same is not true of the British tree with the Hawk. Which has a plethora of strike capable aircraft around that BR.
The Hawks were perfectly in line with all the rest of the similar advanced jet trainers of a similar age and category, which were all planned to arrive over a similar time period.
1 Like
We will be looking to further expand sub tree options for the Japanese tree using its newer nations at all ranks where possible yes. Mostly to fill roles or gaps that domestic Japanese aircraft couldn’t or perhaps not as well.
One of us is.
The point of my original comment was that it is hardly surprising that there is high demand across multiple nations for more Hawks when people have been waiting 10+ years for the aircraft to be added, and saying ‘eh we’ve done 5 so we’ll call it a day for the moment’ can’t be expected to be a hugely satisfactory answer when in actuality those 5 aircraft only really cover 2 variants, and one is essentially a direct copy-paste (which I support as a premium, but using it to bump numbers is a little disingenuous).
Definitely not right off the tail of adding 5 F-16s to a single nation (France) in that same time period with no apparent issue.
complaining
There’s no surprise at all. But equally there is higher demand from many of those nations for other aircraft too.
We also sadly cannot base our demand for future aircraft additions solely on the opinions of those within this topic, which I’m sure you can appreciate, can often be a little skewed and not representative of the wider playerbase as a whole. Even just taking the British playerbase on this forum for example, which can rarely not often agree with itself on what it wants.
People also waited 10+ years for many other vehicles too of even larger popularity than the Hawk. But the Hawk itself has seen 5 examples added over the space of just over a year. More than even some of the larger aircraft series receive in the same period of time. So to say its somehow not had sufficient treatment of some kind compared to everything else is not quite right at all. Its precisely because of said demand we have had what we have had. But that also doesn’t mean that because there is a warm reception here on the forum, we can continue with the same aircraft in quick succession constantly. As not everyone agrees or appreciates that at all.
Its entirely reasonable to have a break between some. As too many over a short period and the warm reception quickly wares off and turns into “your just copy / pasting / spamming”. When approached from this perspective and not simply more of a personal opinionated one (which I appreciate everyone has for any given vehicle), its actually quite logical to understand why we wish to space them out a bit.
Particularly as you yourself point out:
Its in addition to the above I mentioned, this is another consideration as to why we do not wish to “spam” Hawks.
1 Like
Unrelated topic, I hope to read about expansion of ECM to more aircrafts, particularly NATO vehicles as well in the upcoming CM disclosure blog.
2 Likes
Better as in more mobile and better gun handling ? Very narrow options
that felt a bit targeted
where F-15EX blog
Plz dont forget the bmpt plague , do not forget how many good vehicles got their reputations ruined because of bpmts nobody touches vt5, m10 booker , cv90s and ajax anymore because they happen to be in the same br range as the bmpt
mandem its true
1 Like
Gng just play plz-05 with sap , true godgun
There’s one thing that would be cool as a TT vehicle.
3 Likes
Making MB-326B a premium was an awful decision in the first place, Italy still has a huge gap between props and jets in the regular tree (from 6.3 to 7.7).
As the least armed MB-326 variant it would be the best in the regular tree covering that gap. Another weird decision was not to introduce MB-326K in two Italian variants with a regular RS-25 we have in the tech tree and a premium RS-24 (Viper 540 engine and Aden cannons). Looking at RS-25 having initial prototype camo researchable, I guess we will never have RS-24.
Anyway I hope this gap will be covered as soon as possible, especially since there are still planes like MB-326E, Fiat G.82 and SIAI-Marchetti S.211, I just hope you don’t waste them to be premiums or events.
Plus I’m still waiting for a multitude Italian props missing, as far I understand the addition of Hungarian subtree ones shouldn’t affect the development of Italian models, right?
1 Like
all british people on this forums can agree we just want a BESH and Challenger fix