Not at all.
Its however very clear the F/A-18C can fire AIM-9M and is in keeping with the current top tier aircraft we have in game.
I’m a bit surprised that IRIS-T and AIM-9X were only added on ground units this time, whereas they originally were aircraft ordonnance and would be viable for e.g. late Hornets, Typhoons…
Is that something still to come, or at a later stage? Do you have anything you can already share on this?
IRIS-T and AIM-9X are very much above and beyond what we currently have in terms of IR missiles for air. So they shouldn’t be expected super soon for aviation.
6 Likes
Same thing happened already with the tc1’s on the antelope. Though those aren’t actually great.
Will toss this up here solely for the sake of the poll so folks can vote on it.
Another loadout diference is the low-drag-pylon that was specially developped for swiss air force, allowing to mount AIM-9P and AIM-120B on any station, including wingtip-
Given what @Smin1080p_WT said, i will file a bug report for each individual dev error.
- For the 120B i have documentation of the procurement BR92 and BR2011
- For the low-drag-pylons I have photos that confirm it. I won‘t get ghe blueprints from R**G
5 Likes
[DEV] LL Lwf AIM-120B missing on Swiss Early Hornet // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] “Low drag pylon” missing for Swiss Hornet early // Gaijin.net // Issues
[DEV] Swiss F-5E missing Flz Lwf LL 63/91 (AIM-9P-5) Sidewinder // Gaijin.net // Issues
1 Like
As a reminded - Only one BUG per Ticket otherwise GJ closes it.
@Schindibee I’ll help you on the Cyrano. There is plenty of documentation. Is no TARAN-18 in game yet. I doubt that they will implement it if its not yet in.
This is honestly a horrible way to go forward with the game…
Not only are you copy and pasting the most popular vehicles to every techtree, now they will also have identical loadouts, just because the same vehicle in some other military could mount those weapons.
This will also be directly against the way you have been accepting weapon suggestions to vehicles in the past.
3 Likes
If this is Gaijin’s new guideline, that’s acceptable. However, their standards are inconsistent—Finland’s F/A-18C MLU2 hasn’t been equipped with AGM-65 missiles like Switzerland’s late models. So why isn’t the technical perspective considered in this case?
If the initial, least capable Finnish F-18C late model is unable to carry air-to-ground munitions due to technical limitations, then the upcoming F/A-18C MLU2 should face no such technical hurdles. So why is it still missing the AGM-65 missile capability?
3 Likes
i think you asking wrong person about this question
@Smin1080p_WT why f/a-18c mlu2 doesnt have agm65 on dev? it was done on purpose due to technical limitation or devs “balancing” decision, or it gonna be added?
…
1 Like
Well, in this logic, should the American F/A-18C early be equated in terms of engine, countermeasures, and radar with the Swiss F/A-18C (Premium) since it is technically upgraded to such a capability? You do realize the difference between the two (better engines, twice the countermeasures, and better radar) confers a large and unfair advantage in terms of strength of vehicle right?
4 Likes
F/A-18C (Early) Missing AIM-120A // Gaijin.net // Issues
When the American F/A-18C first came out, I made a similar bug report and received similar treatment lol.
3 Likes
But this is what you wrote earlier:
So compatible means open to consideration.
I know the AIM 9 X (no matter the Block) is way to good for air to air rn and will change the game, once it’s implemented (bc basically unflarable)
I think the main confusion here comes from the observation that those missiles that are considered too powerful in air to air usage (AIM-9X, IRIS-T) are actually coming to the game as SAM’s, and this at a much lower BR (12.0) than they would have in air (at least 14.0, probably higher).
this is not my point here.
That part ist juust to show that I understand it not being implemented for air to air uses (or air to ground)
Im afriad your misunderstanding.
Just because it is compatable, that does not mean its under automatic consideration to add.
AIM-9X is naturally not under consideration anytime soon. So merely because somethings compatibility is possibile, doesn’t mean it will come. (Even when we reach a stage where AIM-9X may be something in game).
3 Likes
A Hornet is a Hornet. Technically they can use all of the same stuff as one another. Whether or not a nation bought/built the capability for the plane to use the weapons should determine if they get the weapons or not.
Otherwise just make every Hornet the same regardless of nation.
Where was this attitude when the Veak AA for Sweden lost its VT shells?
Or really for any change to any vehicle?
If it wasnt so frustrating it would be amusing to watch Gaijin dance all over fence of historical vs balance.
I get not adding a single weapon that would throw out the whole balance of the game.
BUT
Gaijin did literally just that when they added long range air to ground missiles when the current Anti Air had no hopes of countering them.
So basically, Gaijin does as Gaijin wants. Regardless of game balance or historical accuracy.
2 Likes
Its precisely because of game balance that AIM-9X is not coming this major. Which is what the context here in my answer was about.