You can make a case but your need to make a case, not just state something you want.
You need to bring links and arguments.
Oh it’s so terrible people don’t use it super often to orbital strike with GBUs. GREAT example!
Yes and SM3 and SU-34 are UFOs in their BR ranges, got it.
6x 65Ds is the best thing you can get until you reach top tier aircraft.
You have no evidence to suggest it doesn’t?
It’s also totaly not the first plane of all BR’s which features 6 f&f missiles.
lack of evidence for existence is evidence that it doesnt exist
if you want to prove something doesnt exist you look for evidence that it does
its not
Which one did i miss?
And what for ?
Even if it’s fake it being in the game isn’t a question until something comparable in performance has been added. This is not my opinion, it’s what Gaijin does.
1 Like
a7d and probably 1 or 2 more
Okay, same Br though.
And same tech tree, which just underlines the point beeing made.
huh, thought it was 10.7
Okay idk, then i was right anyway since the first A10 is 10.3…
what point? that the 65d built in seeker isnt terible?
I remember having to play night maps with a Mig-27K and not being able to see anything even at 3km. Yet this man is complaining about having 6 low resolution IR cameras strapped to his plane. Must be nice…
1 Like
the one with 65ds is 10.7, the premium is lower br
Yes i know im not talking about the IR seeker, i mean how the US has incredibly strong cas and better weapons at lower battleratings, but that is all fine.
you know that the US didnt have any night capable guided CAS before the a10 was added right? and after that the next option was f14b
I dont think you understand how terrible mavs are above 11.3 or so
I do, but you can make them work.