will be a benefit for Laser guided missiles but remains same for IR FNF.
I think theyll update IR track lock range as well
I think it won’t, but we will see. gaijin is really sensitive about attacking range, they currently forget Laser missiles with iog or gps because people seldom use it.
How about we don’t?
You could quite easily just limit the payload allowed to be taken into ground instead of sabotaging those of us fond of air to ground in air modes.
Why do something that’s unbalanced and unreal when you can do something that balanced and real?
Why remove something that is real, and only problematic in one game mode, when you could just limit the count (or the armament) from that game mode? Why do you have to remove it in its entirety so that those of us who play ground attack in air modes can’t use it? Or, shock horror, encourage the devs to add air defence threats capable of contending with it.
We all know no one is using a Kh-38 for ground attack in Air RB when you have GNSS Grom-2.
As for Air SB, you have again… grom-2 and Kh-29TE.
A topic for another thread however i and most of all players are in agreement that we need more spaa.
1 Like
So because you don’t think that a use case exists, it should be removed. Grom does not strike moving targets, Kh29 is short range for moving targets on account of how far back those targets are present. Kh38 facilitates this far better. But I would note you’re focusing your attention on Russian ordnance, and ignoring the fact that following your logic of “remove what I don’t like in one mode instead of limiting it from that mode” also removes AASMs. Which removing would make Rafale terrible for this use case, as well as making the Mirage 2000D RMV even worse at the role.
We should not be limiting CAS just because ground can’t cope. We should not be removing things just because ground can’t cope. These are incredibly selfish positions on your part. There are dozens of ways to resolve this that don’t include screwing over the people who enjoy CAS in air. But you seem intent on not doing that.
oh i never said it doesnt exist. thats just your failure to understand common wordings.
i said it is OP. a stance the majority of WT players share.
no kidding. its a GPS guided munition. this is highly effective for use against pillboxes, stationary targets (which are the majority of all targets in air battles).
if you bothered to read my first post fully, you would realise that i call AASM hammers OP as well.
you thought you had a point there lol.
my logic is this: “maintain balance”. simple. even for a child to understand. No nation has the standoff capability that russia and france have. so until it is the same for all nations. keep it out of the game.
its not about what i like or not. balance is the keyword.
oh wow… so removing a slow guided bomb will make two aircraft obsolete!!!
damn… its a shame they dont have any other weaponry…
rafale:
mirage rmv
youre arguing that CAS should be allowed to reign with impunity. not in Air RB/SB but Ground RB/SB as well?
the removal of these two weapons will not destroy CAS nor air battles. But it will make ground battles a lot more balanced and worth playing.
Youre the one who is selfish.
for now, you are an extreme minority. not many share your view.
I suggested balanced replacements for taking away the Kh-38 so that people like you could consider it
But you seem intent on not doing that.
3 Likes
im seeing more and more contention between RU and other nation players who are still locked in debate about whether or not an aircraft could carry said missiles and how GRB top tier is ruined even further.
While i wont deny that Maverick-Ds and Gs had their time of rule, the sheer stand-off capability granted by the 38 is purely unfair for enemy players. the 6xAGM-65 loading aircraft should have a higher BR in GRB as well.
remove the 38 and add the ACTUAL counterpart to the AGM-65. the Kh-25MT and MTP.
they have similar enough statistics to be balanced and allow for similar stand-off capability as the Mavericks
in fact, aside from HEAT warheads, the MT and MTP are STILL better than any Maverick because they are Mach 2.2 missiles but limited to 20km of range (at best case scenario)
2 Likes
“you can’t change this because it affects my gameplay in particular”
that’s… something
1 Like
With new information that has has come out since a few weeks ago about the AASM Hammer-IR as well as the recently popular topic on the existence of the KH-38MT, we have come to find that their IR seekers are not supposed to function like the IR seekers on the AGM-65s.
Hammers specifically rely on IOG and GNSS all the way up until 1.5km from target after which they acquire IR lock.
Kh-38MT also works similarly but the ranges of the final lock on i am personally not aware of.
given that, the hammer may not need to be removed, but merely altered to fit its IRL specifications.
the Kh-38MT should also be made to be accurate to IRL (if it even exists).
My thread is for the latter in both cases.
KH-38 is an un-needed weapon that is unbalanced. especially when alternatives exist which are also powerful but far more balanced.
-
TV guided Kh-25
-
TV guided S-25
-
IR guided Kh-25
-
IR guided S-25
-
Laser guided S-13 (REDFOR brimstone lol)
S-25IRS looks decent. It would be enough for what we really need.
1 Like
I still think about Kh-59/Kh-59M with APK-9. Its not thermal but it have two way datalink so you can make corrections when it will get closer to target.
https://ruslet.webnode.cz/technika/ruska-technika/letecka-vyzbroj/protizemni-rs/ch-59-as-13-kingbolt-/
https://ruslet.webnode.cz/technika/ruska-technika/letecka-vyzbroj/protizemni-rs/ch-59m-as-18-kazoo-/
Gaijin seems to be avoiding MITL methods for now… hence i think they dont need to add the pod.
This statement is absolutely true. Grom-2 or UMPK for bases and against ships Kh-29TE due to bigger warhead.
(that one death is friendly fire)
1 Like
Without the pod, the Kh-59 wouldn’t make much sense, as it has the same seeker as the Kh-29T but the missile itself is subsonic. But Kh-59 maybe later when they will start with MITL. It have time. S-25IRS is much more interesting right now. What thermal gen it have?
1 Like
The counterpart is the Kh-29 iirc. Kh-25MT would still be really good.
But my bet is that we’ll see the Kh-59
Some aircraft can carry it on pylons that are not occupied by the Kh-29, hence giving them an extra FnF AGM basically
As for the 25IRS. I’m not sure.
I’ll hace to see.
25mt would be for the a and b.
25mtp would be for the d and g.