Asking for planes to have loadouts that they carried neutered is just dumb. Especially since they had much heavier loadouts available. Don’t like the 250kgs?, Here have a 1000kg (both bf110 and stuka r-7 can carry this bad boy)
If you don’t like the CAS, get in a fighter and fly circles around them. If you leave them with air superiority that’s a player problem.
Show us official documents about the P-38 loadout capabilities.
The P38 J had the following loadouts:
I don’t have to give you anything other than what’s sourced on the wiki page because Gaijin has had the data necessary for upwards of a decade. Anything I provide they’ve already seen.
Stop trying to waste my time.
That’s from the wiki, and it’s also useless.
What a plane could carry is irrelevant, what matters is what they did actually carry. I have yet to see one allied players show official documents to prove what the planes carried, only unnecessary whining and anecdotal views on what they should have.
Then you have no argument. Simple as that.
i’m just here watching this shit show on go 
Personally I’d forget up bombing the p-38 and just put in the jug as a ground attacker, better loadouts for it.
i know for a fact that the razorback jug could carry bombs, rockets and drop tanks all at the same time
Many planes could carry a lot of things, but if they did is another story entirely.
And in the case of the P-47, scroll up. It didn’t normally carry bombs.
If down the line we get customization to select bomb loads, that’s fine, but we all know the only thing that will happen is that people will choose the most massive bomb-load and suicide bomb.
You have yet to present a single source either
Ah yes apparently it never happened and it was all a conspiracy. The ww2 footage thats everywhere was photoshopped this whole time. Lets ignore that you’re yet to provide “actual documents” and you would obviously deny all facts that prove you wrong until you find the “documents” that prove you right.
Also, thats not from warthunder wiki 
Scroll up. Taken directly from the manual for P-47.
Not to mention I’m not the one asking for anything to be changed, YOU are. The burden of proof is on YOU to prove to US your point, not the other way around.
not how this works lmao
i never said what year, also Thunderbolt, 1945 - YouTube here is some official USA source for 1945 thunderbolts
Yeah the burden of proof really does work that way. If you ask for something to be changed, it falls on you to prove why it should be changed and why it is historically correct, not on me. I’m not the one asking for change.
You literally posted a checklist of what ONE P47 was armed with. And are using this for justification that ALL P47s were armed like this. Are you really that delusional?
Show me proof otherwise.
Again, the burden of proof is on you to back up your claims with substantial evidence seeing as you are the ones asking for change.
