China’s Z-10ME does not have LDIRCM and is equipped with four Stinger missiles (which matches its current in-game implementation). It also has not purchased the AGM-179, yet Gaijin implemented it anyway. The Z-10ME is clearly superior to this newly copied AH-64E. I don’t understand why Gaijin is doing this—it will only anger more people .
Before China got BA11, AH64E might be good, but after that, I only wish the Chinese AH64E could get Hellfire for 11.7, and also I wish to get M1A2T instead of AH64E XD
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
@HondaCivici
I don’t believe whatever Gaijin releases is the truth, so you must be speaking your own beliefs as I never said any of the things in your post.
So why do you think whatever Gaijin releases is the truth?
Why do you argue for the sake of arguing?
Why would you not complain about the AH-64E not having correct weapons?
Manufacture documents are king for knowledge on machinery. Gaijin isn’t a manufacturer.
I personally hate arguing. I prefer discussing perspectives and learning things.
I of course would complain if a universal platform suddenly had different non-parity weapons.
Also @SaratogaCV60 you replied to the wrong person as I never once mentioned the AH-64D MKIII program.
Don’t you know that when china placed the order for AH64E, the name of this aircraft was still AH64D BLKIII?
LockMart claims that a software update can make even AH-64A’s compatible to fire JAGM-MRs.
It is assumed, and it’s a safe assumption cause this stuff’s gonna be secret to us commoners not on maintenance teams, that maintenance teams keep software up to date.
Whether it’s Strykers [this one I know they do] or far more importantly aircraft.
That and AH-64D MKIII was a designation to the program that started prior to 2011.
January 2013: AH-64E.
1 Like
The need for software upgrades also falls under the category of upgrades. But no one will upgrade the ammunition that has not been purchased. Therefore, it is completely impossible for china’s AH64E to have the capability to use JAGM.
1 Like
Software updates include security updates. Militaries are going to do this regardless.
Unless you’re implying Taiwan hasn’t updated their AH-64E’s software in over 2 years… that’s a serious security accusation.
Each upgrade is customized individually, and there is no such thing as pushing the same upgrade content to all aircraft. If they haven’t purchased JAGM, then they won’t use the upgrade package with JAGM content. You should understand that nothing is free. You have to pay for everything you get.
No idea why they do not give Brit AGM-179.
Did not find intel that Japan and China should have AGM-179.
🧐 doubling standards every day 🧐
no LDIRCM,no agm179,only Hellfire is ok,but cannot have 179 and LDIRCM.
I can accept an AH64E without AGM179 and dircm to fill the queue around level 12.0 in the Chinese tech tree. This is obviously more realistic. But since the gaijin wants it, what can we do?
Do like Chinese does when they stop Thai from getting VT-4 and it work for them they get their results.
IDK why I am getting pissed off on why China is getting a good vehicles that’s kinda OP (Oplot as a Squadron Vehicle and now AH-64E same as US AH-64E) I’M PUTTING A NEGATIVE REVIEW ON WAR THUNDER RIGHT NOW!
(Gaijin might need another Review Bombing same as 2023)
Obviously, gaijin will pay attention to the groups that generate a lot of sound. This has nothing to do with fairness; they have always done it this way. There are more German player among the players, so when people feel that some vehicles are weak, they tend to improve German vehicles. This is the same for China this time. So if you can gather a sufficient force in the domestic community to put pressure on gaijin, this will obviously work. However, arguing on this forum cannot break free from the gaijin framework. You may need some “off-the-cuff strategies”.
2 Likes
For me，the sensitive period has basically passed. I fully support both the Chinese and Japanese tech trees gaining access to the Abrams and VT4 in the next update, or the Abrams could come a bit later. However, I still need to state that the Japan-Thailand issue and the Taiwan question cannot be equated. While it’s correct that you support Thai players getting the vehicles they want—especially more acceptable amid the de-centered tech tree setup next version—I cannot agree with the premise of your argument. Though it’s foreseeable you’ll remain active on the forums, I want to remind you that Gaijin clearly does not oppose the one-China principle, at least publicly. Therefore, using the Chinese tech tree as a basis to discuss other sub-trees is not a valid comparison. The ones who have been behaving badly are always those gaijin who randomly disrupt the technology tree, rather than any of the players on either side.
2 Likes
Here the hard part westerners like us continue to beat the sht out of each it not easy to unite like Chinese what happened about economic change was miracles but that long ago never happen since then that why we continue to still under gaijin boot and double standards treatment is unacceptable to any game community and anyone shouldn’t let that slide easily.
This kinda doesnt make sense since the F-15J for example has the functionality to carry GBU-8’s yet doesnt recieve them because “japan never had it” (but gives it 9M’s which Japan never had) so kinda contradictory
This is really bad, and I understand that players come from all over the world, so it’s hard to reach a unified voice—but I still hope everyone can succeed. I think Gaijin has indeed made significant adjustments to the Chinese tech tree this time compared to before. These adjustments can be said to be compensatory, going beyond the traditional scope of balance and making other players feel unbalanced. However, if Gaijin had properly considered the development of each tech tree from the start, such incidents that harm others’ interests to satisfy another group wouldn’t have happened. Still, I believe this incident will finally let most Chinese players feel like they’re experiencing being “meta pioneers” of the version and find satisfaction. In the short term, say one to two years, as long as Gaijin doesn’t mess things up again, there shouldn’t be such incidents that affect the entire community and other tech trees. We’ve always been willing to wait—as long as there are no principled issues like Taiwan independence.
2 Likes