Gaijin is really wierd when it comes to giving Britain weapons it didnt actually use even though equivalent airframes do for other nations (i.e F4J(US) has Napalm F4J(UK) does not). Though does the opposite all the time (Only Britain should technically have PW4s on their Typhoon)
Britain reserved the right to use Napalm and its entirely possible that the Harriers, Jags, Phantoms and even maybe the Tornado could have used them. But nothing concrete. Only the Buc and Sea Vixen have it specifically listed in the manuals (and has been reported a while ago as I said, but still nothing). CBUs are the weapon that mostly replaced Napalm though and then Brimstones replaced CBUs.
So the issue becomes. Will they? Im not massively fussed that they havent, but it does create quite a notable im-balance imo. Especially when things like the Tornado have to try and race an F-4S or Mig-23ML with Napalm to a base. Khorne is right, maybe the better solution is to just nerf Napalm. But still. Theyd be fun to use and were considered the primary weapon for dealing with tanks by the Tornado Gr1.
Tornado GR1 preferred weapons - Shared by Gunjob previously
So quite a vital part of our loadout is missing. If nothing else. I think they could test it via a test event. Because turth is. No one knows how they would actually perform/affect GRB.
Well. Large AOE weapons in GRB will be a huge pain, a literal “clustf*ck”. But just about every nation has them…
Methinks Napalm to the UK and/or some sort of work on Brimstone to not make it OP as hell with ground radar tracking might be the best way to go for now.
Oh heck yeah. In the context of a test event. Absolutely. I just know that live, in GRB, a lot of people are going to get TK’d, and I’m not sure what symbology is going to be present in using them, if any, but it’s going to be hard to know how to even get a good drop with them I’d imagine. Will be super fun. Especially if the Tornados get those big a$$ dispensers on them.
CBU worse than 2000lb for destroying a base no? Bunch of small scattered explosion within a certain area, not as lethal as a wide pathway of fire or multiple huge explosions against structures
Maybe Nagato or Tosa at June as Japan is the one who didn’t receive capital ship at March?
Modernized Nagato would be higher possibility as fits to ‘famous and powerful’ battleship, and my personal (unreachable) wish is to remodel Mutsu based on modernized Nagato modelling.
We have to suspend reality a bit at some point. You drop napalm on a base. It lands and hits a field or a courtyard. Somehow a concrete structure burns down in seconds to get the “kill”.
CBU dispenses, and like lets just say 25-30% (I’ve heard it’s up to 66% in some cases) bomblets don’t even explode. And even then, they’re all mostly small shaped charges. At some point it’s the gameplay, not the “simulation”.
MW-1 would be very funny. Unfortunately, Britains JP233 is more an runway buster than an anti tank weapon.
But yeah, I do think if they had speed restrictions and min and max alts. They could be greatly mitigated because they would be very hard to deploy safely, and spread could be mitigated by a late opening and thus quite a narrow dispersal. But yeah, would need to see it to test it
Napalm will kill anyone in the area and damage anything that can be affected by fire. Would probably cause survivors there to clear out therefore “killing” the base
Yeah, and to that I say screw it. Let’s just balance the gameplay at this point.
E.g. Soviet/Ru CAS is in it’s absolute golden era right now, and is frankly unbalanced. But if giving every other nation the equivalent (or near) and SPAA is what it takes to keep the gameplay balanced, I’m all for it.
During the Falklands the Argentine forces on the island had a fuel/ammo dump that was dispersed to mitigate the damage from regular bombs. A flight of GR3s attacked it with CBUs, the first one destroyed most of it. The “bases” look an aweful lot like an ammo dump or foward supply base and so would in theory be quite vulnerable to CBUs
Buc S2 and Sea Vixen 100% had it listed in the manuals (and was reported 3 years ago) but Britain reserved the right to use it. Jag, harrier, Phantom, Hunter and maybe even Tornado, probably could have used it at any time, but was replaced by CBUs
What does the effect of napalm on a base have to do with doctrine? I am fine with more equivalent SPAA of course but I don’t see what that has to do with damage of weapon type
Anyways, it would be cool to see CBU in next April fools
Time for “Some” to read the rules when posting documents on our Forum… we rarely see anyone providing proof of declassification…
3. User’s obligations regarding Restricted Information. If the User publishes the documentation which may be reasonably deemed as Restricted Information according to this Military Restrictions Section or has been earlier regarded as such, the User shall provide sufficient evidence that the information no longer falls within the scope of Restricted Information as defined above (e.g., a valid source from the list specified in paragraph 2(ii)(d) above, a statement on declassification, etc.), or otherwise prove the legality of their publication.
ATTENTION!If there are reasonable grounds to believe that you failed to comply with the rules of this Military Restrictions Section, or your post otherwise contains Restricted Information or other content prohibited to distribution, the Administration, at its sole discretion, may remove your post, and in some cases - suspend your Gaijin account up to permanent ban (e.g., if repeated or severe violation(-s) have occurred)**.
Yeah, but we’re still doing a lot of inference here. It’s the gameplay that counts, hence why I don’t really care what approximation arrives at justifying that CBU’s or Napalm can kill a base. In that aspect of the game, it’s trivial.
Regarding doctrine, I’m talking about the UK’s limited doctrine on Napalm shouldn’t preclude it from being able to carry it on their planes.
Regarding SPAA and CAS, I’m speaking to GRB. We have to keep in mind, one weapon added in one game type, thus far, means a weapon added for all game types, and CBU’s in GRB would be way too much for GRB, right now.
ive seen many documents posted over the years, but even more so recently… so not just one case
When something has been posted by Staff, it would be cleared…
“No idea the source though”
That is part of the problem with many people posting documents, if something has been posted by Staff, then at least it should be stated that it has been posted Staff, but if some have no idea where something came from then it should not be posted until they can find out
