Gaijin having multiple standards? Breaking news, fork found in kitchen
2 Likes
We don’t need the evidence that it can use Aim-9M (unlike Aim-7P or Aim-120). So many people can’t get their head around simple idea that the loadout available to a plane might be a balancing decision, and not a historical accuracy.
So what I’m asking is to provide feedback to developers that you think it really needs those missiles at its current BR (or maybe you’re fine if it will go to 13.3 as a result, up to you). Especially now that everyone was able to test it on the open-dev server.
I think that has been most peoples point that the F14B and F14D should have AIM-9Ms at its current BR
Just look at the top comments in this thread alone (The thread we are in not the one linked)
10 Likes
Thanks, that’s what I’m talking about.
3 Likes
Why are you so set on choosing the worst possible choices for the F-14D?
What exactly is so OP about AIM-9M on an F-14 that would increase it’s BR so much? We already have F-15’s with 4 x AIM-9M’s at a lower BR than it, it will constantly see IRCCM and actually good Fox 3 missiles whilst you still keep it with completely inadequate weapons.
Also what’s with the reports about AIM-7P being denied for “it can’t utilise it’s datalink so it’s pointless” but in those very same reports it mentions datalink being a feature on the F-14D? Is this down to tech mods / BRM’s not being able to understand or just the devs not caring to look?
Hell just look at the stuff that’s just 0.3 BR above it. You have the premium Su-30’s which can carry 6 Fox 3 along with 4 x R-73’s.
This is genuine incompetency from everyone involved in the decisions made for the F-14D’s loadout and also it’s placement as solely a premium. Why bother asking for feedback if you are going to blatantly spit back in out faces?
No one is happy with how any of this is being handled all we get is the same slop responses that completely ignore the question it’s genuinely shameful how this has turned out.
There’s over 800 votes for a TT F-14D to be added alongside the premium version and not a single comment by anyone from the game’s dev team or from any CM’s.
How can you still believe the actions / lack of action about the obvious mistakes you have made is acceptable in any form?
22 Likes
Hello. Here are the points I’ve gathered and want to address as someone who loves Tomcat and has been waiting for the D-model for the past four years.
Here are all the points I want to make:
1. The Missing Equipment: The F-14D currently in the game is a premium model costing almost $80, and it lacks the capability to carry weapons such as the AIM-9M, AIM-7P, AIM-54C+, and AIM-120A. This is unacceptable to our community. It’s already bad enough that the highest-end model is locked behind a paywall, but you’ve cut crucial features from this aircraft and treated it like a B-model when it’s not. Your explanation that “we removed the 9M, 7P, 54C+, and 120A missiles to keep them in BR 13.0” is completely unconvincing. Currently, the standard weapon at BR 13.0 should be the AIM-9M. Therefore, using only the AIM-9L as an excuse is completely unfounded. A clear example is the SU-27 and SU-33, which possess both the powerful R-27ER and R-73 missiles at this BR level. If you argue that the J-37 also only has the 9L at that rate, then what about the AIM-120A? Even if the AIM-54 is also a FOX-3, I can only say that they are incomparable. The AIM-120 is superior to the AIM-54 in every aspect and cannot be compared in the current meta. This argument also doesn’t apply if you claim the F-14 has FOX-3, which is also a problem with the F-14B. In BR 13.0, the AIM-9M should be standard for the F-14B and D without any excuses.
2. Regarding the AIM-7P, your claim that the AN/APG-71 doesn’t support data linking is unfounded, despite the ample evidence we in the community have presented. It’s supported that this information has been disclosed without violating any laws, especially this document from this international source: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/navy/ntsp/Aim-7p.pdf, which states that it can be used on almost all F-14 models and clearly specifies the units that will use it. This is highly unusual. You’re acting as if you’ve read the document and then claim “insufficient information,” which I don’t think is a valid excuse.
3. Although there were plans to install the AIM-120A on the F-14D, it ultimately didn’t enter service. But since you use the principle that “as long as there’s testing and pictures or documentation to show, it can be included,” why haven’t you added it? Just like what happened with the Yak-141, KH-38MT, or even the non-existent F-16AJ, there’s more evidence for the F-14 and AIM-120 than for the F-16AJ, which is just a picture in a magazine.
4. And finally, the AIM-54C+ should be the most important weapon on the F-14D, because the F-14D has stopped using the AIM-54 A and C models. The new launch rail on the F-14D doesn’t have the cooling system of the older models; it’s designed only to support the C+ model.
Point number 2 concerns value for money and what people were waiting for and expecting. 1077 people, or perhaps even more, expected to see the F-14D solve the problems in the F-14B and A, but this is what they received: the best model for $80 to access. Not only that, it’s a near-identical copy and paste of the F-14B from TT, with nothing better, and a waste of money. This is what the community is extremely dissatisfied and angry about right now.
Solution
- Add another F-14D option to the TT. This is the F-14D ROVER III (AKA F-14D BLOCK 1) or the upgraded F-14D(R) BLOCK 1, used by the VF-31 unit. It should be armed with the AIM-9M, AIM-7P, AIM-120, and AIM-54C+, maintaining a BR of 13.3 or 13.7. Rename the premium F-14D to F-14D Early, armed with AIM-9M, AIM-7P, and AIM-54C+ at 13.0.
2. Change the premium version to the F-14A Late, armed with AIM-9M, AIM-7P, and AIM-54C+ at 13.0, and add the F-14D ROVER III (AKA F-14D BLOCK 1) or the upgraded F-14D(R) BLOCK 1, armed with the AIM-9M… AIM-7P, AIM-120, and AIM-54C+, with the BR maintained at 13.3 or 13.7.
Hopefully, this will be resolved as soon as possible, with respect and for the benefit of all parties.
13 Likes
amazing balancing , what about the premium su30s on 13,3? They have r77/p12s which are arh , r27er best sahr in game , r37 and pl8b both ir with irccm , plus hmd and great flightmodel. By your logic these planes could even be 14.3 if its about “balancing issues” the f14s flight models are heavily nerfed and aim9m only works if you know how to use it.
9 Likes
Please note that I’m not saying it will get BR raise automatically because of that. If missile addition is to be considered, the latest statistics of B will be looked upon and re-evaluated, like it happens with every such scenario, nothing unique here.
The are multiple reasons for better missiles, i will start with my argument for aim9m and later for aim7p.
For aim9m:
f15a at a lower 12.7 br has a better flight model and x4 aim9m.
mig29g/0.13 at the same br 13.0 has x6 r73.
su27/su33 at the same br 13.0 has a better flight model and has x6 r73.
yak141 at a lower 12.7 br has x4 r73.
tornado f3 late at the same br of 13.0 has x4 aim9m.
f2a at the same br of 13.0 has a better flight model and has x4 aam3.
f15j at a lower 12.7 br has a better flight model and x4 aim9m.
j11 at the same br 13.0 has a better flight model and has x6 r73.
mirage2000c-s5/4 at a lower 12.3 br have magic 2.
f16a OCU at a lower 12.7 br has a better flight model and x6 aim9m.
Belgian f16a at a lower 12.7 br has a better flight model and x6 aim9m.
jas39a at the same br 13.0 has a better flight model and x6 aim9m.
Now for the reasons it should get aim7p:
f18c early/swiss f18c/cf188a at a lower 12.7 br gets x6 aim7p.
mig29-9.12/g/9.13 at a lower 12.7/13.0 have x2 r27er.
yak 141 at a lower 12.7 br gets x2 r27er and x2 r27r.
su27 at the same 13.0 br gets x6 r27er.
su33 at the same 13.0 br gets x8 r27er.
j11 at the same 13.0 br gets x6 r27er.
f16adf/mlu/italian adf/belgian am at 13.3 br have x6 aim120a.
mig29smt at 13.3 br have x6 r77.
su30mk2 at 13.3 br have x6 r77.
su30mkk at 13.3 br have x6 r77.
jf17 at 13.3 br have x4 sd10.
j11a at 13.3 br have x6 rvv-ae.
f16d barak at 13.3 br have x6 derby.
Aim9m and aim7p are necessary for the f14d to remain competitive at 13.0 due to the armament of the competition.
16 Likes
And AIM-54 didt competitive in current meta. Now every one know how to nocth it. Its not like the past that its very strong weapon.
1 Like
I understand that but we are simply pointing out that you are providing a f14b with an all aspect radar and label it as the f14d super tomcat , where’s in real life it was an entire different plane with a better avionics and computing system , we have provided countless bug reports with sources and they were all rejected not because non-accuracy but because “balancing issues” , yak141 never equipped any sort of missiles and f14a iriaf was never able to implement r27er so there is a clear bias here.
5 Likes
Thats mean F-14B and D need to fix current armament.
1 Like
lmao they are both f14b , only one of them has an all aspect radar
4 Likes
Thats rigth. Super Tomcat its 2000 model that should get new armament now.
1 Like
All I can add to the loads of comment already is I really wanted to buy this, like really really wanted to give you my money gaijin.
However, I just can’t justify it in this state and the level of bs attached to why it’s being brought to the game in such a poor way too.
You could have had my spare money again snail, but this just means I’ll be spending it on weed and coffee instead
9 Likes
And most people want 9M 7P 54C+ even 120A for F-14D. For a bit it should get 9M and 7P.
5 Likes
You know he ain’t gonna read all that. 😂
Considering the BR of the Su-27 family of premiums, and the f14B being 13.0 and the f14a Iriaf at 13.3 it sounds like you are admitting that the BRs are horrificly compressed. So maybe try uncompressing them (and no MM won’t suffer so don’t even start with that) and giving this aircraft the load out it carried and put it at 13.3.
Everyone would be happy.
5 Likes
Always the best choice.
The f14 is DOA like many before it. Pointless even trying… as unless another review bomb they dont listen to anyone.
1 Like