No. Not for any historical or balance reasons but just cause anyone who buys the Premium just deserves less.
I see no problem with it only having 7Ps and 9Ls when the 18A is only going to have 7Ms and 9Ls with less A2G options.
And the AIM-7P is still a direct upgrade, the IOG/DL makes SARH missiles drastically more consistent, to the point of being better against single targets than even an ARH.
Why is that? They pay for the game, and if noobs want to buy their way to top tier, this isn’t the only way to do it, I mean I personally bought it because this was as close as it gets to the very specific Gulf War Hornet that I’ve wanted for ages, and I have disposable income so why not treat myself.
Not everyone that buys premium is a scourge on the game, and everyone that does is contributing to the game’s further development which you and everyone else benefits from
This is exactly why it should have 9M, currently the premium one makes the tech tree one pointless, they’re at the same BR but the TT one is just worse
You and I must be using different ARH missiles then, seeing as you can guide one on to target the same way as a SARH, just it’s more reliable
Cause pushing it up in BR, which 9Ms will do, will just put more premium noobs into ARH matches where they will cope and complain with their skill issue, and hold back any improvements top tier systems should get, such as IRST or visual launches.
Unless you need to be shooting at multiple targets, leaving your radar tracking an individual target will improve an ARHs odds of hitting even in a notch. SARHs with IOG/DL take this a step further as they actually have narrower gates than ARHs and so are more likely to hit someone that doesn’t notch perfectly, or leaves it too early. Currently, the R-27ER is actually the most difficult missile to avoid because of this, it’s just rare you get into a scenario where you can just laser someone with your radar until it hits, without having to maneuver in return to avoid a missile.
The other aim7’s in game can’t lock in TWS (or I’m just using it wrong)
They’re already going to be facing ARH missiles at 13.0, 13.3, and 13.7 regularly. The 9M gives them a better chance of surviving that though
How will this hold back game development in any way?
The Devs are not going to implement correct systems for ARHs when a majority of the community is coping about them while they are underperforming.
Properly functioning 9L would already do that.
great, and how are the bug reports on that going?
And this is just blatantly untrue, besides the fact that there is already an ARH capable premium, as well as the SU-33, the devs aren’t going to take complaints of people who don’t know how to play the game seriously, there has always and will always be an issue of beginners buying high tier aircraft and sucking in them, the F/A-18C isn’t suddenly going to change the whole dynamic of that just because it got AIM-9Ms
not really, 12.0+ is just ruined by Magic 2 slingers (or even MiG-21 Bison and Frogfoots R-73) who usually shoot sub 1-2km and kept abusing multipath but if you’re good on preflare or in 12.7 MiG-29 or Yak-141 (decent radar missiles) is still bearable, idk how guys in F-16ADF and AIM-7M tho since I’d assume the playstyle would be similar in F/A-18A and C Early.
And yeah in contrast I’d enjoy 12.7 way more as you don’t have to deal with advanced eurocanards of Eurofighter and Rafale and even F-15E plus at times you can get fair downtier/midtier due to how many players spawn in 12.0 premiums like F-4S, Mirage F1C-200, MiG-21 Bison. IRCCM isn’t that scary of a deal it’s just some people lobbing it in short range while it has capable to shoot far just to score easy kill that can’t be counter by flaring on such range
Wait, so the TT F-18A and the objectively better premium 18C will share BRs?
Lmao, Gaijin does it again.
Should just give it 9M and 7M and call it a day.
nope to late. Gaijin isnt greedy they are making money to pay their employees. Its a business first. keep that in mind. Devs dont work for free
They are gready because its at the deteriment of the game itself.
They could make more money in other ways, like different premium account options that would be more expensive but offer more rewards or other QoL features, and work on better game modes and game balance so players actually stay instead of leaving and spending their money elsewhere
The AIM-7 is no where near as good as the R-27ER, even after giving it IOG + DL with the 7P, and the AIM-9L isn’t half as good as it used to be, it’s flare resistance is awful now, it is almost always 1 flared.
All together that means that while the Russian 12.7s are bearable thanks to the R-27ER and R-27T/ET, the western equivalents are just bad, even a 13.0 uptier is a challenge and 13.3 or 13.7 are awful.
Whereas with the 9M, those ARH slinger do become a bit more manageable, not to say they’re a good matchup, but with current BR compression, neither 12.7 or 13.0 get a particularly friendly matchmaker
143 votes and counting
With 72% in favour
8 in every 11
Other
I despise the lazy use of “early” and “late” designations, so would rather have either F/A-18C replaced with a different variant.
Its an error, it will be 12.7
TBH, they could change the name to A+ and it would have almost no effect on the vehicle, but it being a C is fitting IMO
Though we are likely to see more of the Early/Late names, given that there are some airframes that have been in use for 50 years now, and variants that have been in use for at least 30 years
I imagine for the most part they will include the upgrade program in the name where possible, but it isn’t always possible and so the Early/Late tag will always be possible.
PS. I still have no idea why it’s the F-14A Early though xD
207 votes
In the case of F-14s, still understanable because their modifications were so patchy that there were hardly any Tomcats that were 1:1 identical, even in the same squadron.