Only minor issue though, Gaijin has thus far not added wing tanks for the F-4. So youd have to choose between the nuke or a fuel tank.
1 Like
I though they had
1 Like
Unless ive missed it, nope. Still have to choose between a gunpod or fuel tank in ASB
Just checked, F-4E (TT) not yet
1 Like
Not a full solution, but you will get a “little” bit more range by using 105% thrust instead of 110%. And even 101% or 102% (just high enough to engage afterburner [reheat lul]) will still give you a lot more speed, with a notable reduction in fuel consumption.
Again, I fully agree this is not a fix. Wing tanks at least or just making the F-111F the medium nuke carrier.
1 Like
Still not fair when ussr has a su24 which its faster than phantom and has 2 drop tanks.
My solution would be let the F-4E carry only the 5kt nuke and replace the a-6 with the f111 and give the 30kt nuke.
That is what I said too brother 😉 The reduction in afterburner is just a stopgap until changes are hopefully made.
I just posted this in reply to you guys lol 👇
1 Like
Or add the F-111F outright. Don’t need to remove anything. One side having a single extra vehicle, especially when the F-4E is worse than the MiG-23 in the event, isn’t a huge issue. I’m already running my own F-111.
To keep things balanced I would say both teams to have same amount of preset vehicles. Anyways the a-6 its dogsht and nobody use it, slow and only 4 pylons. A-7 better in any way.
Psdt: what loadout does f111 has?
The total number of vehicles in a game mode with infinite respawns has a limited impact on overall balance, particularly when additional aircraft do not introduce meaningfully new capabilities or playstyles. Neither the A-6 nor the A-7 is comparable to the Su-24 in capability; they are much closer in role and performance to the Su-25. In that context, adding the F-111 serves primarily as a counterpart to the Su-24 rather than introducing anything novel. It helps even out the capabilities available to both sides, rather than creating an imbalance.
It carries a wide range of unguided and guided close air support ordnance, giving it strong ground-attack capability. Although it lacks anti-radiation missiles (HARMs), it would still provide the US side with a supersonic low-level strike bomber similar in role and performance to the Soviet Su-24.
These are of particular interest.
1 Like
has anyone taken the map from the event and turned it into a user mission yet?
i also wondered on why the USSR has Su-24 but US has the A-7. My best guess is that they wanted them to be “attacker” aircraft to delete SAMs with new missiles, but the realization of the SPAA that shoot down even anti-radar missiles easilly put a huge cross on that. So then the Su-24 become a fast bomber with nukes, and the A-7 just didnt fit same role as wasnt intended to.
OSA is cracked right now, thing is intercepting everything