Both F-18Cs at 14.0 are identical in radar missile capability, and effectively equal in WVR due to the AIM-9M.
More so the Gripen A was added much too late. It should’ve been the F16A equivalent but gaijin decided to wait far too long. We still dont have a single C model in game. We have fake amalgams gaijin created because they had no idea about MS nor actually making the Gripen C an actual C model. Additionally if you think about how the Gripen performed when it came out the A would’ve been the same BR as the C even without HMD. Again many of these problems are caused by gaijin taking to long to release equivalents to smaller nations. F-2 is one that should’ve been here not too long ago.
4 Likes
Exactly the same as I do with the Finnish.
I was admittedly a bit disappointed not so see the Swiss Hornet, but then if I’m honest to myself I’m glad, because we at the current state of WT would only get them with AIM-9P-5, not wit the AIM-9X, AIM-120C and HMD (which would push it beyond the current 14.0 maximum, I think), but still with AIM-120B and thus certainly higher in BR than the current US F/A-18C early.
So I wait, hoping for a future addition of the upgraded variant.
1 Like
[DEV] Prior Finnish Hornet used F/A-18A engines and both now are equal so unless you spade the Finnish F-18C i will ignore your comment. I doubt they buffed them past the 8000kg thrust but if they did ill take back my comment but that should be wrong.
I would feel much better, if for Switzerland, GJ finally decided to start a proper tech tree, like for Finland. With regards to the BR, the Finnish Hornet is no slough, for sure. I thinks its a good competitor. I maybe would lower it at 13.3 because being the initial AA version. The MLU will get to BR 14. I think that would be the better thing to do.
Considering the fact that AirSB will have 13 to 14 together, there is zero change or advantage in being at 13 or 14. It will always face EFT or Rafale.
The only factors that can make you better, Crew Skill at max and aced. And yourself being an ace.
If I can outperform an EFT with my F-5AG in AirSB, is because of two factors. Me and the opponent player who is just not up to it. And the F-5AG is by far not up to the EFT.
Training, training and training on a single platform and not hundreds of planes.
I think the problem you also keep ignoring is in terms of gameplay the Gripen is lacking in arms, 4x Fox 3 is the smallest at 13.7 and many people were hoping for something to help change up gameplay for the better. Unfortunately this Hornet fails to do that and rather makes it seems gaijin has no interest in giving sweden and adequate 14.0 so at the end of the day we still lack a equivalent vehicle and gaijin will use this to ignore fixing the TT which is why they wont drop it in BR. The Swiss F-18 on Germany (assuming they get the rest of the swiss air) will only bolster the 14.0 the EFT is still an option and a much better option.
I understand you. You are missing something like an EFT in the Swedish tree.
Norway got its F-35A irl. For sure that will end up in the Swedish tree when it comes to WT
Not gonna happen, the F-18C is definitely better than the Su-34 but its more so a decompression. Id say 13.7 would be a better place to start and moniter its performance since it then has the chance to avoid EFT/Rafale ect ect. Not always but a chance a Su-27 will nuke the F-18C with R73 or at least i would lol honestly the current position of the 1994 F-18 makes me not really wanna bother, ill just grind the US models and throw my Danske flag on it and call it a day.
So wait 6 more updates or 2 years for a stealth fighter? Also Norway still isn’t confirmed and not a suitable idea to.put hope in until stated otherwise by gaijin. We have Gripen NG/E which is the equivalent to the late EFT. Raven Radar, 9x A2A hardpoints(7 meteor and 2 IRIS-T), new engine, MAW, IRST datalink new A2G. Why would we ever need to wait for the F-35A to be our equivalent to the EFT? We have an option available. Ive been waiting for NG to be our equivalent for the current roster for 14.0 which is more equivalent in flight performance just add Meteor and IRIS-T to the E model when we finally get to those.
1 Like
We could add a Polish F-16C Block 52 or Slovenian F-16V Block 72
What why? What does that even have to do with Sweden or any nordic nation?
True, I ignore this, but here’s why: I always am only interested in the aircraft themselves, not if “a tree needs them” or not. This probably because I don’t worry about grinding, and I think me flying Sim exclusively affects my view on this as well.
But, I also understand that if one looks at it from tree and progression viewpoint - which is a perfectly valid waypoint - the “surrounding” vehicles in a tree play a much more significant role, and thus the way the vehicles are added (and which versions)matters much more.
You’re right, at least according to datamines the F-18C and F/A-18C Late now have the same engines. I guess it’s just an X-ray bug, as well as the modifications showcasing the wrong numbers, at least on my end, not sure if it’s similarly bugged for you.
Because GJ has mixed and matched tanks and aircrafts for some nations all over the place by copy & pasting. A Polish F-16C Block 52 is available for C&P immediately, while the F-16V would be fresh development.
I try to view all trees from a progrsssion standpoint amd their role in ground RB. Its why I’ve been beyond annoyed with the handling of Deutsch air. CAS has been a much needed aspect for a long time and the 2 AGM65G on the KWS is hilarious for gaijins reasoning when we’ve seen them forgo realism/historical accuracy for balance. Even more so when seeing how gaijin handled Brimstone.
The Swedish air tree has lacked a decent vehicle for 14.0 since the previous update and an equivalent 14.0 for rhe current air brackets since F15C. Only thing i was hoping for is an actual Finnish Hornet and not just a US export model. This hornet does nothing for the tree except add another over BRed plane to the roster of poorly handled vehicles on the nordic air tree while telling the players to just wait 6 months for a vehicle that will be a higher BR because it will get BOL. Its a slap to the face and a joke when it comes to fixing what the tree needs.
1 Like
We have Danish or Norwegian F16AM block 20 that would fit at 13.7 which make infinitely more sense than Poland or any Slovenian user. Even the Argentinian F16 would make more sense considering they are our (Danmark) F16’s though idk if they have been handed over yet. Both Norge and Danmark are not currently claimed by any nation and would make more sense with the Swedes.
The Finnish F-18C doesn’t even have a radar gun lead indicator so to say they haven’t put any effort into the Fins is honestly the most unsurprising thing to me…
I agree with you that the F-16A MLU would make sense. Would love to see them. I fear that GJ will add a F-16 RNoAF as a premium for 80 bucks.
The Block 52 would just have been better, therefore my suggestion
Block 52 makes no sense is the problem. Thats like Germany asking for a Polish F16. If the F16 was a joint project maybe but its not and thus doesn’t make sense. All of us the Nordic nations have more ties to each other than anyone else and so are more realistic options. If we go by your logic the helicopter tree wouldn’t need trial vehicle to exist.
Perfectly fine with that.
The logic that GJ follows is not always the logic would would like it to be.