how am i drifting the argument? i’m giving examples to your own speech :)
1 Like
bring nothing new to the game…
what the f18F have the F18E already got.
you can cope however you like, the answer will remain the same.
not under consideration but still remain a future possibilty.
Would save yourselves a whole lot of trouble if you just commit to grinding the better air tree :)))
2 Likes
right “better tree”
when it’s the USA its not hard to be better tbf. The “saving grace” of it is just the F-22
That’s an entirely invalid counterpoint to this discussion, you shouldn’t have to grind out an entire other tech tree to get a vehicle identical to ones operated by the country that PRODUCED them orginally. It’s bafflingly dumb that somebody would have to grind through an entire other tech tree because they want a plane exactly the same as those operated by the country they already have, just because gaijin wants to force players to either grind an exorbitant amount, or make them wait for unrealistic amounts of time to be able to get what they should have had access to already.
1 Like
hes not saying that the f18f is better than the f18E…
Right… but you already have that jet in your tech tree though. An additional seat and all for what, style points? It doesn’t do anything more for the USA tech tree that the E currently does.
Let me put it this way: if Australia had purchased both variants, do you think Gaijin would’ve bothered adding both? Or just the one? Because they both literally do the same thing. Nothing changes except weight, which makes the F the “worse” variant
but…but…its looks cool and 300 people want it…
Take it like this, people want more freedom to choose their vehicle, and adding a foldered twin seat version of a plane is an easy addition that would satisfy that simple desire. Its unfair to think people should grind whole trees to have access to vehicles that they should’ve been able to use already.
1 Like
1 Like
1 Like
Quite literally
1 Like
Lads here see other people wanting some variation or option to research additional somewhat unique looking vehicles and are PERSONALLY offended.
You’re not gonna be the one researching both the E and F pal, why are you so adamantly against that lmaoooo
6 Likes
^
For the people fighting for their lives against this concept, it is completely unrelated to players that dont want the vehicles, since you can skip them and pretend they aint even there.
4 Likes
1 Like
uh where did this even come from? lmao? you call me out on “drifting off topic” when
i’m exactly responding to YOU, yet you’re allowed to bring up WW2 vehicles with a completely different argument? nobody said the 18F was better than the 18E. Additionally, just as it say in the quote YOU provided, “people wish to see choice and options.”
this is literally the whole point of the argument lmfao. we want gaijin to change their mindset when it comes to the rationale of whether or not a vehicle should be added.
3 Likes
well well well. i quoted the thing on red yet your brain cant find nothing to say and bring a whole differente subject.
its red you cant not see it lmao.
We saw that, but we’re saying that it doesn’t need to be notably different if it’s a foldered vehicle. Maybe we need to start highlighting what we say in red?
1 Like