Smin1080p

Its claimed missing avionics that are under investigation (as they are on several other nations aircraft, not just the 104S by the way) dont stop it from using any of the wide CAS arsenal it has that makes it far better than both SU-7 variants for example

Its not my perspective or opinion. Its a matter of fact from the stats and performance of everyone coupled with the fact the Arietes remain some of the most modern, highest pen and most capable MBTs in game.

A huge major addition to the game with 22 models, but ok, lets ignore that.

Seeing as you yourself counted the German IL-28 and brought that up several times, I dont see how thats relevant here. They are additions regardless.

So even when you deduct the massive addition of the Italian Fleet with 22 vehicles, the overall the maths work out almost the same even when you are comparing a huge superpower nation with huge amounts of vehicles possible to add to a minor nation with a much smaller playerbase, smaller pool of vehicles possible to add and still has several of the best vehicles in game in its tree?

Im not sure what point you are trying to make here. Its simply impossible to give all nations the same distribution all the time. Even so, we still manage many unique additions but the second there is any patch where a nation ...

Not with this patch.

P-47 Razerback is probably the most requested WW2 aircraft since 2013 far and above almost any other.

USSR is getting the second variant of its SU-7 in a rank where the USSR mostly falls behind in CAS.

IL-28 DDR is not CAS at all really. Its a bomber.

And just last patch

Italy: 22 Ships + 6 Ground Vehicles + 2 Aircraft

Context matters.

Italy does not have a lot of CAS options and the ones it does have are already in the works. But they just had a bumper patch, which included a highly capable top tier CAS aircraft in the form of the best Starfighter variant in game thats about to get even better with Sparrows.

Italian Helicopters are also in development.

Please put all of the bombs into singular reports. So far we have just too much flying around here to keep track of.

Unfortunately its just not possible to add air / ground / naval units for every nation each patch. Even less so for the smaller nations.

We are a multi arms game, so whilst we appreciate that not everyone plays X, Y or Z, that does not change the fact that nations do have big content patches like Italy's was last update.

No.

Ive already explained why it wont have Chaff initially. Early GR.1s didn't have it. It will come on GR.1A.

Thats not how it works. "It might be", "it may be" are not how decisions are made. Facts and data are used and right now they are clearly showing its not possible to fence of both 9.7 and 10.0.

I dont believe we have received a report on the bombs yet. CVR-7 is under review with the devs. Additional warhead options may come, but certainly none of the 1993/4+ options that were being discussed in some places.

Not with this patch as you have seen.

All of this summed up is absolutely nothing to do with the Jaguar. But the BR range and its current maximum peak at 10.3, which we explained within the last Q and A: https://warthunder.com/en/news/6818-qa-answers-from-the-developers-en

Incorrect, it was a GR.1, then a GR.1A then a GR.3.

Once again, nothing to do with this topic or the Jaguar, but a matter of the BR range which was answered in the last Q and A.

There are not enough aircraft or players at this range to do this and maintain a balanced population, queue time and team composition.

They will come at some stage.

Its a little more complicated than just saying "they look the same, so add them both". I appreciate people want both, but its not possible to introduce both at once and certainly not possible to rush the GR.1A to completion now because a few people are unhappy with the GR.1.

GR.1A will come in time in some form, but for now we have GR.1 which is better than no Jaguar at all.

Perhaps you should have looked into the aircraft more and found out it was the RAFs main strike / CAS aircraft and not an "agile fighter" and adjusted your expectations accordingly?

Jaguar was not and never will be a pure fighter or air superiority aircraft. It was a strike aircraft with the means to defend itself. It was never supposed to go toe-to-toe with a Phantom. So when you put in that regard, of course is going to be disappointing. Its like putting a Firecrest and a Sea Fury in a ring together and saying "but I thought the Firecrest would be better at this".

Because the initial French version was better?

Perhaps compare the number of French jets in game to British ones and then reconsider that its hardly a crime France gets another good one maybe?

Very soon I believe. Before the major.

We are not going to reveal plans of upcoming updates and what is/is not coming this early.

The devs do and have. I asked because you are asking me and im not a developer. I cant just go to the devs and say "add the missing payloads".

Its very possible lots of these payloads are planned or already coming. I ask because for me to check, its best to at least present something rather than just waste time with "gib missing paylods" that mean nothing at all.

The Phantoms are top tier aircraft and superior to Jagaur. Comparing them to the GR.1 and saying "but they are better" is meaningless.

No we are not stripping Jaguar of its historical air-to-airs and even then it would not go to 9.7.

Once again, with this logic, why should we add any aircraft below 10.3?

Why would anyone that owns a FGR.2 want to play a new WW2 aircraft thats added, or a new postwar aircraft, or a new jet of any kind?

The answer is because its a new iconic aircraft. Its not always about being top dog and Britain have 3 of those right now with the 2 Phantoms and Lightning.

This kind of argument is basically saying "just dont bother adding any new jets unless they are top BR competitive".

GR.1 as its being in...

Jaguar International is a separate variant entirely for the export market based on a GR.1, but is not a GR.1. We have an RAF GR.1 variant as it was during the 1970s. Jagauar International =/= GR.1.

Please see my earlier posts. We intend to add GR.1A in some form later, so there is no reason to make GR.1 a clone of GR.1A with all the features better suited to that model.

GR.1 is correct as it is with its Sidewinders how they are.

Hello.

The Jaguar variant we have is an early GR.1 not a GR.1A. Thats a later variant which were progressively upgraded over time later gaining features such as the overwing pylons and other elements.

As such, its correct that the GR.1 we have does not have flares. These will come in later modifactions.

At the moment there are not any plans for this.

Early Lightnings would be even worse, with the exception really of the F.3 which has better performance, but trades that for a complete lack of any guns and only 2 missiles.

Then there are also the Frankenstein F.2 variants which could technically have up to 4 ADENs in some configurations, but an extreme lack of fuel..

So thats why F.6 as its the definitive variant.

Thats part of the fuselage and early GR.1s did not have flares.

You can see by the photos of the Sidewinder trials in Germany flares were not mounted.

This is a SEPECAT Jaguar International. An different variant of the aircraft.

As I have already explained, we have a GR.1 with its correct sidewinder mounting. Overwing Pylons, later engines and the later upgrades will come in a future variant (GR.1A).

Such as? Please provide evidence (sources) to what its missing and I can confirm with the developers.