You’re right that is fair, does that even work on the AI though? Don’t they just track SACLOS?
i think it kinda works, they use their radar too, but only to keep lock, they ignore the trees, the clouds and sometimes even the ground, i was hit by an iTO from behind a hill cuz the missle went up first then got down on me, and the size of the SU30 dont help much
OML just remove the pantsir and replace with TOR
1 Like
I would really like the other 40 mm variants
dont forget about the way they implemented the spyder. or the bardelas.
both could have been amazing vehicles, but no, they dont care
2 Likes
I don’t think the russian planes/Chinese should get their kh31, they are far too powerful, modern spaa already struggle to intercept a load of 6 kh38. So why should they get 6 that fly more than twice as fast?
The kh 58 is more than enough and closer in performance to the agm88c.
2 Likes
31 is the Russian arm for their Su 30s. 58 is only available to export configurations.
If you want a better AGM 88, get Gaijin to stop avoiding the implementation of MMW as though it were the plague.
1 Like
Wow, what a statement, you just proved his point
F-15 absolutely shits on the F-14 in a df.
Not to mention 9Ms won’t be saving you there
This might escape you, but some of us want MMW seekers modeled. AGM 88 is not going to be improved without them being modeled, but few enough of us are making the case for the improvement. Now it impacts yanks, something might be done.
The addition of explaining why 58 is actually not adequate (it is not cleared for native platforms) alone for the tree is just useful information to have to understand why it is the way it is.
There are several Nato aircraft who have missiles “made for them” that isn’t implemented because of balance. So why that shouldn’t be applied to Russian aircraft is stupid.
1 Like
MiG-29 and the R-73:
1 Like
Kh31 at the lower ratings requries the seeker to be matched to the threat. NATO does not have this requirement. Kh31 at toptier is the ARM for the toptier aircraft (58 is not cleared, thus cannot be added in any way that matches practices set forth). AGM 88 fulfils the role of ARM on toptier aircraft. The variant of AGM 88 may be less than ideal, but it is still present. Removing 31 would remove ARM from Russian toptier.
If you want the parity gap to be closed, encourage better modeling of SAM guidance (as any sane person ought to), or the implementation of MMW seekers to introduce better ARMs to NATO.
1 Like
Only way kh31 should be able to stay in game is if its banned from grb. Even when ai controls the best Nato spaa (samp/t) it fails to intercept them reliably. And we all know how cracked the ai is in spaa in the nuclear thunder. So how will it be fair when a player controls it if the samp t missile sometimes even miss the kh38 missile.
1 Like
Guidance is not the biggest problem, it’s range, in your mind it’s ok for two nations to receive weapons completely incomparable in performance. Gaijin took all this time of modelling ramjet for just two nations but MMW is off limits. They have employed selective realism in the past but can’t introduce an AGM88G without MMW?
1 Like
All Nato spaa use the same band radar, and doesnt get its irl capability to switch band, so your logic is irrelevant.
What is mmw?
Furthermore, not only is the kh31 incomparably good to the agm88, it gets 2-4 more
Your longer range options operate a MMW seeker. We could argue that it should be implemented without MMW, but hell would sooner freeze than they listen. Ramjets are not modeled purely for these weapons, Ramjet testing is required for a number of future additions.
Checking your statements against the state of the game would do you some good. If you want those features, push for them.