It doesn’t need to go up because it would be the perfect counter to the 33s and 27s
3 Likes
Community: “Hey, we are kinda irritated that you just made the F-14D a copy of the F-14B, and refused to give it 9Ms and better air-to-air missiles.”
Admins and Devs for no reason: “We are going to mass delete your complaints, say you have skill issue for not wanting unhistorical 9Ls and outdated Sparrows, and then proclaim this is a win for the TRUE COMMUNITY, and not you fakers who discredit Gaijin!”
22 Likes
Gaslighting at times can be real lol.
6 Likes
They only respond M-F. Very rare on a weekend they trying to save there sanity.
OK I saw they posted 7 hours ago in R&R. Yeah they just are avoiding the topic, or more than likely just focusing on certain topics.
10 Likes
Honestly if the B was the premium and the D was TT. This wouldn’t be on fire as much.
5 Likes
Yes
1 Like
Tbh let him the 9L and 7M, i only want the Aim-54+
1 Like
I think there’d still be a fire about it. Giving a plane those missiles at a BR that constantly sees fox3s and IRCCM missiles is terrible. Legit ZERO REASON why this plane can’t have the 7Ps or 9Ms. Hell we have an F15 at 12.7 with 9Ms.
F2A with 4 AAM3s and SU33 with R73s and 27ERs (IOG AND DL which the 7M doesn’t have). Tornado with 9Ms and AIM120s, premium SU30s with 4 IRCCM missiles and 6 ARH. There’s no excuse for Gaijin.
13 Likes
Oh I’m not saying there wouldn’t be a fire. Just not as big. Not giving the jet missiles available at 12.7 is mind boggling.
3 Likes
Agreed. 🤝
And I’m a huge F14 fan. It’s just so depressing they’re neutered in this game.
10 Likes
Hello fellow snail lovers.
I’ve already posted this in the General Discussion forum, but I feel this belongs in this thread too. I’d like to bring attention to something that I’m sure a lot of people feel quite strongly about. The recent revealing of the F14D coming to the game. I will keep professional despite my very strong feelings toward the addition of it as a premium. I would like to propose a common middle ground.
Proposal:
F14D(R) - Premium:
Same loadout it has
F14D ROVER III - Tech Tree Vehicle:
Same flight model and other characteristics as the F14D(R)
Added ROVER III upgrade (Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver)
OPTIONAL UPGRADE(S): Added AIM-120A/B capability
Premium vehicles should SUPPORT progression, they should not REPLACE it. As a community, we want these iconic and highly requested vehicles to remain a part of progression, to make the time we spend playing this game worth it. We want these “End of an Era” vehicles to be a part of the grind, and to continue to be obtainable through gameplay.
Thank you for your time and consideration, feel free to give me your feedback.
9 Likes
I think you have a point.
There would be complains like for many planes that are wrong or intentionally with half their normal available armament for “balance” , but not to the volume it is now.
At least the premium wouldn’t be better than the TT , with the option of updating it in the future.
Now even if they update the armament you’ll have even greater difference from the TT ones to the premium.
4 Likes
More than the amraam why don’t you give it AIM-9M and AIM-7P?
4 Likes
To be fair ALL Tomcats they have to get proper 54s according to data and not that crap they have now.
Here we have the 54A of 4,3 mach , being faster than 54C of 5 mach because they can’t understand (or want to understand) that it has very different flight envelope that gives it the capability and the raw engine power of mk60 engine may make 54A faster at low altitude , for 20-30 km depending on the shot , then should get overtaken and 54C carries more energy after that point as well making it more leathal in longer range (we are talking for a missile you can shoot at 70-80km easily).
They have it at 17G single plane overload, while it’s 25G dual plane. They can’t figure dual plane? Fine , that’s more of modeling HOW IT TURNs… not how much it is able to pull.
Now all FOCUS to what i’ll say.
R-27 can hit 35G in DUAL plane… They gave it that value in game , even if they can’t model it in the model (however i have a feeling that the way missiles do in game, they go diagonal…it’s just the banking isn’t modeled anyway, feel free to correct me if i am wrong, i’m not home to check). For 54s it is a problem , right? And now i’m not supposed to think of BIAS?
Come on now… let’s be serious.
And then we go to what 14D MUST have 54C ECCM/sealed because it couldn’t carry 54C because it didn’t have cooling to use it and not to mention both 54Cs and 54C+ were upgraded to 54C ECCM/Sealed by the time 14D was operational.
54C ECCM/Sealed has different electronics and different radar (same tech level with 120A if anything) , PD (C had too, but …), different warhead .
So instead of asking to fix a mistake with another mistake, why don’t just fix the mistake.
If you fix that, with 9M/7P additions it would be fine at 13,3. Hell, it won’t be better than the premium Su-30s … it will just have a fighting chance.
On another notice,
what happens with the radar. APG-71 should have biiger range than AWG-9 at all levels, not lower.
14 Likes
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