I already spaded the fox awhile ago. After I made the post asking why the fox isn’t 8.0, next to the fox, the USh and it were the easiest nukes I had ever gotten, both were ironically stock at the time. Perhaps it was a bit do luck, but the fox it a rather powerful tank.
I really want to play the AMX-T090/930 but at 8.0 it’s not worth it
the CVRW just lends itself really well to the aggressive flanker playstyle while also being able to take some quality potshots from further than you would expect. I killed a leo 1 from over a km away with APHE when spading the scimitar so its very doable with the sabot.
My first nuke was in the fox and I’ve gotten close to them in it more than any other vehicle however as you struggle with the XM800 I do think there was a mix of being more confident in it (you’ve seen what players can do in the thing, knowing how high its potential is can really boost you) and some real luck.
I take the thing to every BR from 7.7 as it does quite well no matter where. it just cant handle facing stabilised vehicles and is quite dependant on enemy skill when you are facing them
This bug report was “accepted” a year ago and they still won’t do a thing about it, even though it would be an extremely simple and fast fix…
Yeah… I cant think of a single greater buff for the CR1/CR2s at this moment in time and the fact that it is so damn simple… Its baffling
It that reason right there I am not expecting my bug report 65Ls to be fixed until 2030 if the game still going by that time.
Yeah… its one thing when complex bug reports go ignored (I have one about 8 months old now, regarding a bug that affects every single aircraft HUD that has sight modes, yet to be fixed) but its another when its really simple stuff, like removing the sooty exhaust from the Harriers.
I really dont understand their priority system
Yeah mine will be as simple as changing the value from 10km to 23.
See, too many characters need changing, maybe they’ll increase it to 19km because they just have to change 1 character
That’s where i messed up. Oh well too late now.
They have been, it’s one of the safest airframes ever built. Especially when you do the flight our per accident metric. Not to mention there’s about 5-6 crashes over like a thousand built.
And you’d be making the right choice lol
For how much they cost, if shouldn’t be as high as it is. Record to date is 29 crashed /incidents. Out of 1000
For how much it costs? It’s cheaper than both a rafale and a typhoon. Which would probably be the premier non 5th gen fighters.
“According to LockMart, the worldwide F-35 fleet [hit 811,000 flight hours in March of 2024]
That works out to 1.6 crashes per 100,000 flight hours. About six crashes involved injuries of varying severity, amounting to .73 injuries per 100,000 flight hours.
The number of fatalities is one in 811,000 flight hours.”
It’s one of the safest airframes ever made. It is an absolutely overwhelming success of a platform. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
I just used data. And stated I’m surprised it’s not safer. An opinion, based off a fact. I never said it was bad, but after designing these things for X amount of years, I expect better.
You expect better than a plane cheaper than its competitors that out performs them, and is safer than just about every air frame the U.S. has ever deployed as a fighter since the jet age? It has half the incident rate of an f16 or f15.
What else should it do?
It’s just an objectively bad opinion, which probably means it’s not based on any real analysis or you’d know this.
One is far older than the other, time will tell. At least the F-16 didn’t auto eject the pilots lol.