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
As far as I am aware. Brimstones would not be limited to such short distances. Their onboard guidance would get them pretty close without issue.
yes sure but wasn’t the topic about the 114L
I agree brimstone mmw also shouldn’t be such a spam
The core problem is the same for both. MMW. Whatever solution is done for JAGM / AGM-114Ls for the Apache would apply to Brimstones too.
in a generalized sense however the restriction would have a real life alternative for apache which would also easily allow fine tuning balance and exposure times against hostiles in apache and while the brimstones should in practice be restricted in the same sense of not being able to spam missiles against radar targets, not sure what their alternative would be
Are nukes not OP?
special use case such as nuke is fine
i was talking about typical vehicles
I don’t really care I don’t think 114Ls should come atleast yet. But if you want to say SP cost can’t be used to balance you can’t be for nukes. Especially with the amount of power it has to end the game even as your team is about to lose.
Yeah OP system
nuke in a sense is op however when we are talking about normal vehicles, the spawnpoint system should be for balancing non op vehicles instead of making op vehicles into something like a nuke
however that would be an another argument whether the apache with hellfires should be similar to a nuke or not (as op vehicle)
my take is no, yours can be whatever
if you say yes i doubt youll find any support for it from gaijin or playerbase