No.
If its present in source material, then its down to the developers to decide.
Shells, like aircraft weaponry are at the developers discretion based on source material and always have been.
F-4F was not given AIM-9J automatically purely because it was present in the manual.
Tank shells, like aircraft weaponry are chosen by the developers based on source material, balance, gameplay considerations and position.
And if you wanted to go down the rabbit hole of "X vehicle never fired X", about 50% of tanks in game would loose their current shells. So this is not an F-4F vs XM-8 situation.
Because as I have already explained to you several times, there is no F-104S source material linking it in any way to that missile. So there is nothing for the devs to consider. Meanwhile the F-4F manual and weapons manual both claim its possible and photos of F-4Fs in the USA show the 9J training missile mounted. As such, thats more than enough source material for the developers to consider the missile based on the needs of the aircraft.
We have had this conversation several times over, in multiple topics. This is not the place to discuss it yet again, however if at this stage, y
Not at all. This is the same system in place for literally all tanks in game. Tanks from all nations make use of shells they never actually had or fired and also there are equally as many that dont have their maximum possible shells due to balance and other factors.
This is nothing new at all.
Cherry-picking the F-4F vs XM-8 here is meaningless. This standard is applied across the whole game.
Shells and munitions have always been based on source material, but ultimately at the developers discretion.
The two situations are entirely different. Again, comparing them when we have a whole game full of vehicles configured the exact same way to blame it on double standards really gets nobody nowhere. Its also not going to lead to a reconsideration for the XM-8 because you can point to the F-4F. Its entirely separate.
Ammunition has always been a developer balancing tool and has been the case in the past, can be reconsidered with time. Many tanks have gotten better shells coupled with BR changes. But again, this comes down to the developers.
Simply leaving constructive feedback as others have already done elsewhere rather than "bUt ThE f-4F" as thats not actually relevant at all here and has nothing to do with this tank or its shell choices.
We have already received feedback on its shell selection and forwarded those remarks. Again however, this is not confirmation of any possible changes as it remains down to the developers to decide.
Here, any other XM-8 topics, the crafting event forum topic or website comments. We check everywhere
Please excuse me if I sounded as though I was accusing you of that. You defiantly have not. As I said, its just a very poor angle to come from when expecting changes on the XM-8 as its irrelevant to the subject.
Because this is the initial configuration also taking into account relation to the VFM5. This is the intended start point for the vehicle as it enters the game. Depending on how it does and feedback on that, then the developers will review the case for new shells should they be called for.
Shells are down to the developers to decide on, that is the point. This has been the same standard since tanks were introduced. They are always decided by the developers based on where they intend to start the vehicle and what role they want it to fill. Right now, the XM-8 is where they intend i
USA has already had 2 top tier event vehicles in the last year:
https://warthunder.com/en/news/6808-special-operation-s-u-m-m-e-r-2020-en - F-111F
https://warthunder.com/en/news/6878-event-wargame-strategist-en - Merkava Mk 3
Not everyone can get a top tier every event.
Again, the comparison of the F-4F is not going to help this situation if that is what you are actually trying to achieve.
So lets please try to stick with the subject matter on the XM-8.
The same sources we already used on the VFM5 (that was already in game) and XM-8 family. This shell is a possible round for this family of vehicles and as such, is its current top round.
Arguing about the sources is meaningless here as the devs are already aware of the sources presented in this topic. They already had them.
Its not about finding a source to add the shell. Its down to their decision as I have already explained based on the balance of the vehicle.
We have no sources for the F-104S showing AIM-9J.
Indeed and all of the manuals that confirm that, those aircraft have it in game.
First and foremost, this is a topic on the XM-8. You were seeking answers on that vehicle, and receive them. However its very clear now, you were not interested in that, but solely to use twist my responses to redirect the discussion to the F-104S yet again.
When you can present any F-104S source that directly links it to the AIM-9J, as we have already explained, we would welcome the suggestion. So far that
Its apricated thanks. A separate topic already exists for that purpose and it has been answered several times. So there is no reason or justification for the same discussion here yet again when the answer is already available to those seeking it.
devtrackers.gg