Are we adding F-35A & GCAP to the list :-) ?
GCAP demonstrator when it flies will be doable as then I’d hope we find out more about the engines, intentions for the live weapons firings that BAE have confirmed are planned (weapons types etc), radar suite if there is one, EW suite if fitted etc etc. The current information doesn’t count as there’s genuinely no information about it.
Like at all. We just know its been under construction for like 2 years publicly (and like 5 years behind closed doors).
I am keeping a careful eye out as I’d like to dibs the GCAP demonstrator suggestion as the spiritual successor for my attempt at the EAP my beloved.
1 Like
Yeah I can’t wait to hear / see more about it. I’m assuming the both will be in the very left column
Hope you are ready for a minor mental breakdown when the SU-47 gets announced for this update 🙃
5 Likes
In theory this won’t happen, Smin insisted very heavily on the fact that it was never announced and doesn’t fit the criteria of implementation. If it was planned, he would probably just ignore us on that matter or make vague statements
If that happens I will send 100 printed copies of this to my local Gaijin HQ
Ace Combat ATD-0, designed by Mitsubishi aviation engineers / TRDI to create a hypothetical armed X-2/ATD-X (meant as pure unarmed demonstrator aircraft) for Ace Combat Infinity.
Spoiler
This is not a real aircraft, it’s only made for Ace Combat. It’s only brought up because somehow that’s still more reasonable than an Su-47 with fictional armed configuration would be.
1 Like
Funnily enough this is exactly what is happening. Smin flat out refused to say that there were no plans at all for the SU-47, instead very specifically repeatedly stating that there are no plans to speak of. In other words, non-committal ass-covering, as, if it transpires that the SU-47 actually is planned and being worked on, but they just don’t want to talk about those plans, then they haven’t technically been outright lying to the community.
Examples below, emphasis mine.
So I asked smin about this, and said, hey, why are you being so non-committal about this, it is really making it seem like the SU-47 is actually planned, and I got this response:
Oh, okay, so they won’t hard deny vehicles any more, it’s always going to be no plans to speak of, just to leave the door open for the future? Wrong.
They say they have no current plans for the EAP and yet refuse to say the same for the SU-47 without the extra bit of ass-covering that completely changes the meaning of the statement. They are still more than happy to hard deny certain vehicles, whilst being wholly unwilling to hard deny the SU-47. It is undoubtedly on the way.
4 Likes
Soviet vehicles have always had a different set of rules
5 Likes
It does fit the criteria unfortunately. The criteria being as follows:
- If Russian then it will come to the game no matter what
- If not Russian then normal vehicle criteria will be selected
3 Likes
I guess we will see
We have said multiple times we have no current plans to speak of for the Su-47 or the EAP. Both are in the same boat.
4 Likes
No, you’ve only said you have no current plans for the EAP.
As I said made clear in my above comment, the only statement you’ve made on the SU-47 is that you have no current plans to speak of, which very clearly rather significantly changes the meaning of the statement.
You have categorically refused to say ‘we have no current plans for the SU-47 full stop’, whereas you were perfectly willing to make that statement regarding the EAP only a few days ago.
Go and enjoy your holiday smin.
1 Like
The EAP has been treated no differently. You can see everything I said about it a couple of days ago:
I have just said that for you again. We have no current plans for either of them to speak off. Neither is different from the other.
If you are seeking some sort of hardline denial for the rest of time, thats not possible for the EAP or the Su-47. Because as we have said before, plans can always change as they have done before. But at this particular moment in time, neither are in any form of consideration.
Whenever we said that about any vehicles in the past, just for plans to change 5 or 10 years later, people took that as a “lie”. So we are not going to simply ever say nothing is ever possible for the rest of time that way. Just be transparent about our current plans.
I will thank you. I still however check in on my tags from time to time and this came up, which obviously needed clarification.
7 Likes
Fantastic, that is the first time such a statement has been made with clarity and without evasive and non-committal language. This is all I wanted to hear, thank you.
7 Likes
Are people still yapping on about EAP? Thought that would of been put to sleep by now. It ain’t coming whether we like it or not.
4 Likes
They’ll still be yapping about it after GTA 6
The issue was that the Su-47 had been rumoured a few times, with non-committal answers about it and the Su-47 is in the exact same boat as the EAP. So if one got added and the other hard denied, it would be incredibly unfair and hypocritical
1 Like
Rumours are often wrong, it’s fair game to leave gaijin in peace as long as they don’t add it, doing otherwise would be like blaming your partner because they cheated on you in your dream