He has a point
Sure get kicked after 2 ones. The problem was those 2 still died, not only that but this isn’t binary. You’re gonna have way more frequent teamkills with such system and it will be a problem that no one wants to deal with. The balance will also be a problem and it isn’t suitable for the game in the way you want it right now
Even if you kill just 1 person a match when it is frequent and constant people start to get pissed off about the weapon system. Support for the 114L is important imo
Guess we will be left to agreeing to disagree. You want artificial limits and I don’t want hand holding for laziness.
considering the game without so common aps and chaff smoke this is what it has to be or players on both sides will be pissed off about the weapon and it either can’t come now or can come in limited fashion. you can disagree with that but gaijin won’t really care. they’ll add it when they see it reasonable.
Ka-52 that’s useless in ground due to SPAA, just like Apache.
Su-30SM which provides equal CAP as F-15E and Rafale while having a slightly worse payload than Rafale, and arguably equal payload to F-15E.
Pantsir which can’t frag F-15E, Su-30, Rafale, etc due to its bad range for the CAS it’s facing.
Radar AGMs should stay out of the game.
AH-64E can come in with SPIKEs if you want F&F IR weapons.
1 Like
The mitigation most of us want for the tornado/typhoon is for exponential and significant SP costs after 6. (This also makes it easy as this is just 2 hard points) This way in gamemodes like ASB you can still run as many as you want without annoying hard limits.
Same could be applied to FnF hellifres or any AGM that was too strong
1 Like
disagree
i don’t think the idea that op systems should exist based on the idea that you pay for them with sp
you can pay for a vehicle that kills, however it shouldn’t be op
spawnpoints should be used for balancing non op systems
so just exclude the majority of air to ground weapons?
About the Russians. I understand what you’re saying but the thing is that the USSR is much more capable of these 3 things than any other nation.
Then remove all FnF AGMs from the game. It is unfair that some get them and others don’t. MMW would be barely more powerful than IR+IOG anyway, the only thing that needs mitigation is the fact that the typhoon could carry 18 of them when the average is 6.
Though in the Apaches case, you already have helis with 16x FnF AGMs
they aren’t a huge problem the way hellfire 114L’s would be. weapon systems are way more complex on their capabilities rather than “has fire and forget” or not
I’ve already told about them in my earlier replies incase you have forgotten
There are also other logical reasons however they would go too far into other vehicles where it isn’t the scope of this post
add them without LOAL then
France has 6 MBTs and 2 CAS platforms of slightly superior air to ground capability to that of the Soviets.
USA has 7? Free MBTs, and 1 CAS platform arguably better than the other CAS platforms due to 20 SPAA countermeasures known as glide bombs.
As for excluding radar air to ground weapons, the only way I can see them ever coming to the game is IF teamkilling is disabled for realistic and simulator ground battles.
1 Like
They haven’t done that with any A2A weapon for ARB/ASB, and TKs are constant
They haven’t since the teamkilling epidemic a over half a decade ago.
I just don’t see any situation where radar guidance is allowed without changing how allies are impacted by it.
No teamkilling, allies are given a clear warning that an allied missile is targeting them on the HUD, etc.
There’s no good way to allow radar missiles without fixing that issue.
Cause while a FAB-5000 can do some teamkilling, the fact that both the host radar and the missile radar sees all tanks as equal will remain.
And yes, you did mention missiles can distinguish radar signatures as a claim, but that doesn’t help when it’s Sweden vs Germany.
In this instance, Id just allow for some creative license being a video game rather than real-life and just give the missiles IFF. Might be marginally ahistorical, but wouldnt be the first time. Just look at AJ168s
we would still have a balance problem without the chances im suggesting
Whilst I agree, their full LOAL modes shouldnt be modeled, or at least heavily restricted, there must come a breaking point where they cant be continued to be denied.
(brimstones have the ideal mode for the game anyway being mode 2)
its frustrating as hell having no FnF weapons on the Typhoon for example, whilst Su-30s, Rafales and F-15s are lobbing missiles from well outside the range of any SPAA
what do you see as a major problem with loal?
That something like a Tornado Gr4 can buzz in below tree top level and do this
youd be able to do this with lobl too against moving targets or targets within 2.5km
and if loal was taken away you couldn’t engage stationary targets farther than 2.5km at all
however if they’re forced to use the camera to transmit the guidance data to the missile they wouldn’t be able to shoot 16 missiles in 2 seconds which id support