Thus why the term seal clubbed was coined because of the “CL” sabre.
Man, but how to prove you think F80A should be 7.3? You asked me to check that, which made me trust it was a bad plane, even though it was your first jet plane. To be honest, I even prefer to use A2D.
By the way, if K/D and winrate can’t prove the plane’s performance, what can be used?
@USA_PilotsAreBad It was never the Mk4, the Mk4 was added in September 2019.
It was the Mk5; and the Mk6 [BR 9.3] was added with T-2 in March 2019.
The only thing I remember from the CL13 incident is version 5 going to 9.0/9.3 right before T-2 was brought to the game. It was the fastest Sabre, my mindset at the time was “Well, it’s a better F25.” from the analysis I’ve seen as I wasn’t doing my own analysis on aircraft yet.
Also, F-5A having countermeasures isn’t a gatcha, it’s consistent standards as there’s manufacturer manual and photographic evidence of a non-upgraded F-5A having countermeasures, all F-5As are the same electrically as proven through countless OEM manuals as well. Same exact reason F-104S and some F-104Gs have countermeasures, and Tornado GR1 has PGMs, same standard.
For there to be double standards F-4J UK would have to be given VTAS HMS and AIM-7F without proof it can use them, and Tornado GR1 wouldn’t have PGMs. So your post at that stage has only proven consistent standards, as much as you might’ve wished it didn’t.
I’m strict with rules. If someone tells me a rule I follow it to the letter [which causes issue if they have hidden rules that contradict the rule they told me].
I’ve gone over ALL of War Thunder’s vehicles with a fine tooth comb over the last 6 years and not a single deviation from their set rules.
They talked up the F-16AJ, but when they implemented it they just added the demonstration YF-16 that flew in Japan and renamed it “F-16AJ”, a real aircraft with its real limitations potentially named incorrectly.
The F-5A countermeasure “controversy” is the reason many F-104s have countermeasures, is the reason Tornado GR1 has PGMs, and a whole host of other additions to production aircraft verified by pictures and OEM manuals in historical reports.
Glad we’re in agreement on this:
I think pointing this thing out seems out of the main topic though,
We don’t call F-4J/S ’ as ‘F-14A at 12.0BR which turns slightly sluggisher’
Because Phantom is Phantom, Tomcat is Tomcat, Sabre is Sabre. and Phantom can’t be Tomcat.
I understand your metaphor, but I think it’s very horribly structured.
‘Maverick lovers’ and ‘Iceman lovers’ can’t satisfy their desire while flying F-4J/S. because F-4 isn’t F-14.
also, F-4J/S don’t have the ability to carry the [famous & infamous AIM-54] and utilize it with AN/AWG-9 radar.
1 Like
No, what I told you was:
Which is me telling you that I’m clearly not a bad player that you can brush off by just saying “oh clearly you have some issue with the F-80 specifically!” one glance at my vehicles should tell you I don’t “struggle” against anything. That argument doesn’t go far when you have receipts lol
Anyway, topic is about the 8.0-8.7 range and I’d like to get back to that. 7.0-8.0 jets are also messed up but mostly DUE to this 8.0-8.7 issue.
1 Like
I was not referring to anything regarding what you think I was referring to. I was referring to the somewhat recent event where a player organized an effort for his squadron to tryhard in 1 specific demonstratively bad plane to see if gaijin would uptier it purely based off the few weekends they played it (all of this is iirc)
It was the CL13 Mk4.
1 Like
Still, the F-5C in USAF service didn’t receive that upgrade. They served in the USAF for a very short term during the Vietnam war. then those F-5C were moved to RVNAF.
Also, Taiwanese F-5A had no CM at all when first it was introduced into the game. they got buffed at ‘New Powers’. which prem F-5C showed up with AN/ALE-40 CM pod in the same update.
Still, with the ‘SAME EXACT REASON’ Taiwanese F-104G on the Chinese branch failed to grab their CM.
another double standard, eh?
You tried to defend Gaijin freely, but you ended up with providing another double standard of Gaijin against minors.
What a coincidence.
No no no no. You read and misunderstood my reply oppositely.
if F-5C received their silly AN/ALE-40 due to ‘there is a third-party upgrade plan for them. and there is some F-5 which got received that upgrade too.’
then F-4J(UK) should’ve have silly AIM-7F with VTAS HMS because ‘american F-4J can use them’
But Gaijin gave F-5C CM but no AIM-7F to F-4J(UK) at the same time.
Also, about the Tornado problem, Tornado GR.1 tested PGM properly and there is a picture about it too. if you really talk about GR.1, then it has nothing to do with F-4J(UK) or F-5C.
As long as the F-4J(UK) and F-5C problem was just [example of Gaijin’s double standard], Talking about these problems longer will cause derailment. (which you love to do, of course)
so I am going to submit another example which is fitting at an 8.0 BR radius.
- 'Every Meteor with clipped wing design is placed on 8.0BR because Gaijin thinks those differences are side-grading.
- in the meantime, CL-13 Mk.4(F-86E, F-86A without slat) granted single step higher BR than F-86A-5.
Sadly Gaijin didn’t. ended up with Buffing F-86 and MiG-15 with bias.
while nations with no F-86 or MiG-15 in their branch are left to rot in hell.
Once again, delusional. If any of the 7.0 jets deserves to be 6.7 it’ll be the Kikka or 262 first and foremost.
It is more of a yak 23 equivalent, both are better than any saber of mig15
yak23 is not better than 15bis or f86f lol
Its a tad slower but it is a far better dogfighter, if the yak23 would go to 8.0 it would seal club hard
yak23 should be 8.3 at least, and 15bis should return to 8.7 along with f86
being able to turn better doesnt mean much unless you’re playing against bad players who just arent aware all they have to do is not turn with the yak23 since it lacks an engine
That’s not how it works, yak23 climbs almost on par with the mig15bis with a good roll and a ridiculous energy retention. In a saber you will engage in dogfights sooner or later, doing only high-speed strafes only works against bad players too. For the meta the yak23 is better than both, yak23 is fine at 8.7 and every mig-15/17 and sabre variant should go up by 0.3. But compression is still horrendous around those BR’s
tbh I really miss 7.7 Yak-23 XD
Play the meteor mk3, it compresses a lot, but boy does that thing outturn props. Only a rocket plane on fumes will outturn it
How is Sea Jesus?
After wing ripping changes, I assume it is pretty cracked now.
Stronger engines but heavier, the mk3 at 7.3 is the best rate fighter jet in-game. Even better than every prop it faces.
You didn’t supply the allegedly failed ROCAF historical report, and I didn’t find an accepted one written in English so no double standard there.
China is also not a “minor nation”.
Also glad you admit F-5A/Tornado GR1 were tested with their weapons later in the post.
We are not LARPing as air forces, we’re playing manufacturer pieces.
Some manufacturers, such as Lockheed and Panavia Aircraft GmbH, put inherent capability in specific models as seen with PGM and countermeasures; other manufacturers such as McDonald Douglas made major changes on the same base model of their own aircraft. An F-4E is wildly different if it was 1978 or 1990. Whereas a Lockheed F-5A is no different from 1960 to 1990. The F-5C is an F-5A with in-air refueling.
With F-86s being BR 9.0 at this time, CL-13 Mk5 was moved to 9.3 in July 2019, after the introduction of Mk6:
CL-13 Mk.4 is introduced at BR 9.3 for Italy in September of 2019, and shortly after moved to 8.7.
October 2019: F-86A-5 moves to 8.7 to be the same BR as CL-13 Mk.4.
A collection of BR changes from January 2020 through November 2022:
Spoiler
January 2020: F-86F-25/30/35 move to 8.7. MD452 to 8.3. F86K to 9.3.
April 2020: Etendard moves from 9.3 to 9.0, and MD452 to 8.0.
June 2020: G91 pre serie moves from 8.7 to 8.3.
August 2020: CL-13Mk6 [not 4] moves to BR 9.7.
October 2020: Mig-15Bis ISH and Mig-15 moves to 8.3. F-100D moves from 10.0 to 9.7 [the same BR as CL-13 Mk6 now].
December 2020: No changes to non-AB 8.x aircraft.
January 2021: F-84Fs moves to 8.3. Mig-19s move from 10.0 to 9.7.
May 2021: A-4E moves to 8.7. CL-13 Mk.4’s BR is still its release BR of 8.7.
July 2021: Sagittario moves up to 8.3.
August 2021: Sagittario moves up to 8.7. AV-8A moves to 9.7.
September 2021: Sagittario moves to 9.0, Mig-15s move to 8.7 [dunno when they moved to 8.3]
November 2021: No changes. CL-13 Mk5 is still 9.3. CL-13 Mk4 is still 8.7, never changing BR.
F-86A is 8.3 at the time of November 2021:
February 2022: No changes.
May 2022: F-86Ks move from 9.3 to 9.0, Hunter FGA9 moves from 9.7 to 9.3.
September 2022: CL-13 Mk5 is moved from 9.3 to 9.0.
CL-13 Mk6 is moved from 9.7 to 9.3.
CL-13 Mk4 is still 8.7, same as other F-86s.
F-84F-40 is moved from 9.3 to 9.0.
November 2022: Mig-19s move to 9.3.
CL-13 Mk4 only ever changed BR when it moved from its release BR of 8.7 to its current BR of 8.3.
Flight model differences between: Mk4, F-25, and A-5.
Honestly… the slats barely do anything. I expected more of a difference.
