No, those are definitely your words suggesting exactly what I presented.
1 Like
You completely ignored all my points about why the speed is good
2 Likes
But you do not explain why.
In game there is barely a difference between the 3 versions.
Unfortunately the French F.1C-200 ended up being a premium instead of a Spanish or Iraqi one but that simply is the situation.
Let alone the fact that what can outrun you can’t out turn you. I suspect this individual is unfamiliar with BnZ and interceptor playstyles.
1 Like
How so?
You are ignoring everything everything but speed as far as I can tell.
BUT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. The F1 CT is not at all the same aircraft as the C or the C 200
Really now?
I have explained why, but you don’t want to hear it, so you don’t comprehend it. I am sure these other lovely individuals could point to my explanations and you would still beseech the void to say it isn’t so.
As far as air to air is concerned it pretty much is.
Personally I would have prefered to have C in a early configuration, with CT and C-200 being the later tech tree variants with a Iraqi or Spanish variant as a premium.
But in this case, why wouldn’t we remove the weapon from the F15E? It also has the same air-to-air weapons as an F15C.
I’m am pretty sure I disarmed the arguments you brought forward only to be answered with nothing but empty phrases.
That situation is not comparable at all.
“Empty phrases” is a funny way to respond to critique highlighting that you choose not to engage with arguments that do not support your position.
Alternatively: We should just remove the A10 early and A10 late because those designations mean effectively nothing but a historical distinction on payload, and according to this individual we can’t have that.
1 Like
What do you mean? Since yesterday you’ve been telling us that because the ground attack version has the same armament as the air combat version, the air combat version should be artificially nerfed. If I follow the same logic, I propose that we remove the AIM-9M from the F-15C and put AIM-9Gs in their place.
Exactly what you did. Excuse me that I am not willing to scroll up now and pick out comments if you want we can boil the argument down to your response to removing Magic 1 and putting the plane at 11.3 or 11.7 depending wether Super 530F stays for example.
You said it would seal club which I disputed.
Then what?
Not at all.
I would support having Magic 2 removed from F.1.
This is neither a nerf since the Br would be adjusted accordingly nor would it be artifical since Mirage F.1C served mostly without Magic 2 if I’m not mistaken.
It would however fill a gap in the tech tree, take off the edge regarding uptiers and make for lovely gameplay all without seal clubbing lower Brs as I have pointed out in soon to be reaching excruciating detail.
It would give the F15 a more favourable BR spread, after all.
Then you were presented with evidence which you chose to ignore because it was not charitable to your position with the excuse that we were wrong, whilst failing to distinguish where we wrong. Does that catch you up? I’m happy for you to review it and find fault with our positions that isn’t just screaming into the void that “It can’t be so”.
I’ve argued with folk like you plenty enough to just keep dragging this back to the fact you’re ignoring arguments you don’t like.
1 Like
I follow your reasoning: since the air-to-air weaponry is too similar, we remove the historical weaponry.
2 Likes
You simultaneously also follow the reasoning that the similarity stands to be changed in order to achieve a more favourable battle rating. However, I suspect this individual might do to that argument what they’ve been doing to mine.
2 Likes