Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
1. Where did you get this misinformation.
2. In RL F-16s except a very few cases always carried the drop tanks.
Just because for the 3D models drop tanks do not exist do not wish to wish BS, nonexistent capability. capabilites.
3. F-111s because of operational range in practice carried only 12x500 lb, or 4x2000 lb.
In late stage of ODS with 0 Iraqi threat they could allow the 2x2000 + 6-12x 500 lb.
Why does that matter? Because Madmat told you it does? The SU-24M loadout clearly assumes an SU-24M with no droptanks even though its fuel load clearly assumes its carrying drop tanks.
The SU-24M would lose half its bomb load or a bunch of fuel if we held it to the same standards we hold the F-111 too.
But Eugen wanted a reason to arbitrarily nerf American air and not enough people are savvy to see the conjurer's trick they played with the numbers. So people think it matters.
The SU-24 and Mirage 4 weren't much bigger or smaller than the F-111. The only reason it looks like they were super bombers compared to the F-111 is people can't see through such an obvious con job.
First and foremost this is a video game. There has to be a balance.
If you want a "I just wanna slaughter POS soviet equipment and watch a corrupt and rotten army crumble to Western Europe" then go ahead and mod it.
If you want an actual military simulator with real ranges, armor values, and weapon statistics, go on the war thunder forums and collect all the sensitive data that gets leaked there and mod it in.
This game would be impossible to balance and play if PACT were actually PACT and NATO were actually NATO. The amount of prisoners you would have to detain from PACT countries would probably crash the game or make a few players max out points on just MP slots.
But why can't we balance via costs? I feel that should be the natural way.
We have F4's flying with the bomb/cluster loud out of an F5....we have the AA F4 missing 2 of its aim 9's and flying with 5 sparrows when it could only carry 4
F4G's (the most capable SEAD platform ever made) using ♥♥♥♥♥♥ shrikes in the world of Harm and AGM78.
We have a F-16 with complete ♥♥♥♥ 500's when it should be carry 2000's or more then two cluster bombs.
We have F-16's that should be using amrams not sparrows and the USAF pretty much never ran the sparrow on the F16. heck only a very few ADF;s could even fire them. Don't give us crap about the amram numbers. Its a 3 year build up remeber? Just like the KA52 you added or the Mig 31 tooling around Germany low altitude with its 1990's missile
Madmat/Eugen its really clear you could care less about fixing anything non Russian bias based at this point.
it's a game, not a reality simulator.
It is crafted for balance with historical fact as a guide, not a dictator.
"The F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters carry the AIM-7M Sparrow."
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104575/aim-7-sparrow/
I don't know what game you're playing, but the Ka-52 is not, and never was, in WARNO.
You don't want or need an aircraft (especially a fighter) to carry a full compliment of every missile possible - aside from the exorbitant cost it would be, more weaponry means longer loiter time over the battlefield, and your 300-ish+ point aircraft's going to be flying in circles over enemy AA for longer while waiting for targets to become available, making it much easier to shoot down. (Or, savvy players will wait for you to fire most of your missiles before jumping your uber-jet with multiple fighters that are 1/3 of its cost).
Alternatively, you DO fire all of your weapons and successfully evac, in which case you're waiting 30-40% longer than other fighters to re-arm and re-load.
"Just evac your jet before all its weapons are gone", you say? Congratulations, you're paying premium price for a weapon you're not using effectively (commentary on real-world US military doctrine not withstanding).
the nearly all USAF F-16 where not wired to take the Aim 7. At the time it was never meant to be a fighter. Only a very FEW ANG units with the ADF A model version of the F16 could and did use the sparrow. It was not till the early 90's with F16 Block 25's and the pairing of the aim-120 does it become true BVR fighter.
Id love to have an F4 with usefull bomb load or a Wiesel that worked, or a F15 that actually had its 4 sidewinders.
We doing reformist memes now, FR? Besides that, I do agree that having US aircraft perform anywhere near to what they can actually do means that most US decks could get away with having empty ART and AD tabs. They'd be pretty busted balancewise even though my inner jingo-john wishes they were.
Whenever stuff like this comes up in military affairs circles it's from clowns like Pierre Sprey and John Boyd (among others). They're referred to as the "Reformists", and love to ♥♥♥♥ on platforms like the F35 and have helped keep stuff like the A10 on life support even though the USAF has been trying to get rid of em for decades. These guys are to Military affairs what Gwyneth Paltrow is to medicine.