It’s called a data sample, but you apparently have no idea what this means so i’ll just say, game is game. You aren’t even aware that you have far more ground kills in your 16C than the ASSTA 1 which is just hillarious, but quite frankly, this is all damn irrelevant when 16C is simply far superior and the fact that ASSTA/MiG-29G are barely adequate doesn’t change (which has been my point this entire time, want the medal for missing it?).
And no. Germany doesn’t need a subtree. Frankly I assumed they would get the Netherlands and their F-16 and have said that many times. After that ship sailed, no, they arent getting one and frankly don’t need it. Same with a fictional Gripen.
Hard to take you on face value considering you’ve claimed before that US subsidized Germany’s Luftwaffe ngl (that one already robbed you of any creditability you have ever had on this forum).
Show me a single picture of a gripen with swiss roundels, ill wait.
Burden of proof is on you, no point in switching it onto me, unless, of course, you can’t prove that Gripen wasn’t trialed.
hint:
Spoiler
Guess from which trials this is, you have just one chance and if you fail, then I’ll officially consider you to have an intelligence level of a pre-schooler, because everything you’ve shown me today & before is barely enough to distinguish you from one.
They planned to buy Superhornets which are not going to be coming soon. If Germany gets a Swiss F-18 it shouldnt have any A2G capability
By your logic we should remove A2G capability from the British Gripen since SA has never actually had Mavericks.
Though this is all just me playing around with that horrible logic of yours, cus as long as the host country has the ground ordinance in question, the sub-tree jet(s) will get 'em.
*Mains nation that had vastly less jet airframes than US, suprise suprise less jet airframes ingame
Pot calling kettle black be like, sit down USboo ;)