Hence why a4e and su17m2 didnt get their arms
We talk about count not presence
My bad then
1 Like
BR defines armament!
( or maybe not )
so why didnt the F-15A have the AMRAAM when it was still 13.0
bc the BR dosent defines the armament
Good question, Balance.
My humble answer.
ALSO 4 9M`s
no its because the BR dosent define the armament
Its because 4 AIM7 and 4 AIM9M`s.
Unless gaijin wants something at a specific BR, then its armament is artificially nerfed to match said BR.
For example, Tornado GR1 denied any ALARM because they claim it would increase the BR pass 11.7. They even claimed that a limited loadout of just 5x ALARM would result in at least 12.0
And Yes, the F-15A did carry AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, but only later in its operational life after receiving specific mid-life upgrades.
So proves my point.
and?
at 13.0 there are aircraft with 4 amraams and 4 9Ms
by your logic that is the 13.0 armament
and yet the F-15A didnt had it when it was at 13.0
My answer above
it dosent
it goes against you point
you are contradicting yourself
Prove it does not Prove my point?
Situational dependency, both Are correct According to gaijin, IF the vehicle have certain armament but at wrong BR without their Armament actually implemented it they WOULD implement them and change BR.
If it doesnt, it goes all the way around.
That is my Personal opinion point of view.
your point:
so with the AMRAAM clearly being a 13.0 weapon why dont all 13.0 aircraft have the 13.0 weapon
you moving the goalpost when confronted about that point
(guess what we have a later version of the F-15A as the initial variant didnt had countermeasures)
so you are admitting yourself that you are wrong about your statment
I said ( BR defines armament!
( or maybe not ) )
Never said, Never proven.
Its all related to gaijin, What i am saying is that is my opinion.
that was you moving the goalpost the 1st time
no actually i proved that
iam right and you are wrong
and if you think otherwise prove to me that every 13.0 aircraft has fox-3 missiles