It should be destructible, but have it be well protected by AI, and it would be protected by player AA. This would give players a greater initiative to use SPAA, maybe a bonus for surviving radar? Would also allow some planes to be used for their intended purpose and overall increase depth of gameplay. I think the radar should not respawn but be towed from 1 of 3 different bunkers/camps so there is a 3-5 minute window where spaa can’t use the outside radar. this would go both ways obviously. Total of 4 radars in my idea, I think if you lose and no radar saved = no bonus, same for win with no radar left. Loss with radar left gives slightly less than win before modifiers (basically you saved some friendly radar but you lost the battle, so it’d still be a failure) , win gives more reward before modifiers for saved radar (you not only won the battle but minimized the friendly losses, big success)
True, but the idea of the crew being unable to fire their missiles through interacting with the launcher literally bolted onto the vehicle they operate does not make much sense (especially when the missiles literally have a mode that allows them to act autonomously).
The wording of the official Raytheon and Kongsberg websites on the NASAMS HML also goes into the extensive level of datalink the system is designed to have, and their “ready-to-fire” capacity. All Gaijin would need to do in the case that the HML can’t fire from just the launcher vehicle is model a single portable datalink terminal/computer/radio on the dash or in the hands of one of the crew to allow for an in-vehicle “fire missile” button. Which again assumes that the launcher doesn’t have the capacity for an emergency launch built-in, which it probably does.
That how I do it with the SUs a lot lmfao. I just spam stingers from the lav one after another with different leads.
Or if you’re me, you smack a 122 8x in the side and it just.wont.DIE lol
You asked what it would be used for and I gave you an answer and you’r mad that I’m right.
Fair
Lets all just agree to disagree on this one.
Something else of note is that the AMRAAM-ER (a -120C-8 w/ the 8"dia. Plus 5" motor replaced with the new 10" Norwegian Propulsion Stack ) was successfully flight tested back in Febuarary.
And it’s air launched counterpart AMRAAM-AXE (Air-launched eXtended Envelope), is in development though would by necessity it likely reduce carriage capacity, and probably not be able to be carried internally by the F-35B, or on recessed stations due to the increased diameter and length.
This is a legit problem that should be fixed in upcoming updates when Gaijin adds more modules