I ask again, gameplay wise it’s an issue because?
Just like how all sarh are monopulse seekers, and how all arh has identical seekers, it is simplified for gameplay reasons. Listen I don’t wanna defend gaijin as much as possible, but even they have to balance gameplay and realism.
they can adjust BR and implement the IRL countermeasures to this stuff to make gameplay still acceptable
Maybe if Russia wasnt so far behind in tech, they wouldnt need more modern stuff.
How about we add stuff when needed and not artificially nerf stuff because “i want to see the name of this missile”.
idk, the fact they still havent added single-use active decoys and towed decoys shows clear bias towards USSR, since afaik the only similar russian system is a towed decoy on the MiG-31.
Yeah. if I claim
“I want to see ASRAAM badly. we need it now. don’t worry, we can copy & paste SRAAM and add A in front of it! oh! don’t forget about adding IRCCM copied from AIM-9M too!”
It would be extremely diabolical, and Everyone might spam comment with pictures about ‘silly Britbong joke’. XD
We need to add things only when we are ready.
IMO, I think We don’t need AIM-120C-5 for fighting against R-77-1.
How long do these decoys last?
Why would we need to give more buffs to US aircraft?
Yes. People demanded the brimestone so gaijin butchered it so that it could be added. Now no one is happy.
They didn’t butcher KH38, R27ER, R27ET etc…
Hasnt the motor on the ER/ET been wrong since it was added?
They also need to give all IR agms their irl lock ranges instead of everything having a copy/paste.
The target does get filtered and the missile does switch to pulse mode, but remember what they are going to implement for 3rd gen pulse radars next patch? The thing when they will still lock targets going hot/cold and shitting out chaff based on speed difference between (for all intents and purposes, stationary) chaff cloud and rapidly approaching plane? Imagine the same thing but for angular velocity. More or less like angle-gating works currently when target is below horizon. But above horizon. And in pulse mode AKA “lol he tries to notch that”. Would be pretty cancer and reinforce ground hugging meta probably even past the heights of IRCCM/27ER era.
AMRAAM is at least the least nerfed. PL12 got 20km range cut, 30 for MICA, R-77 got way higher drag than IRL which is proven to be unrealistic. Just about everything in WT is nerfed, and AMRAAM is barely on the list. Su30SM is buffed unrealistically, yes, but not in R-77-1 field, more so in the loadout part. Same could be said about Su27SM.
First, I am talking exclusively about R-77-1 to AMRAAM, not dragging anything else in, cause I do hate KH38 as well. R-27 vs AIM7M I’d take AIM7M every day of the week, R27ER is a different story, but all the carriers got bad radar and RWR when it was the best RH missile. R-27ET is a fools game, only works when a stupid F15 tries to spam AMRAAM, otherwise MAW should save u if not for a random flare appearing somewhere. I agree with the Fox 3 bit, but just like the 40m multipath, it is part of Gaijin’s ‘meh balance’ logic. IDK why, but just dodging ARH is annoying, just make it harder.
Not sure exactly how long they last. At the very least 5-10 seconds if I had to guess.
And they should get it since it’s a real thing that they had.
Don’t forget that Kh-38 is added to jets with 0 proof of its use. So GEN-X decoy should be no issue. But gaijin is biased towards USSR so they aren’t in-game.
Kh38s have been utilised in the conflict which must not be named, and there is some documentation pointing to it being used on the new Su 30, but it was definitely utilised on the Su 34. The platform that hasn’t used it was the silly frogfoot, to my knowledge. Which was used to test their addition.
Though I would note if the game was biased to Russians, AMRAAM would not be added with platforms that can give it more range and efficacy than Russian ARH AAMs have been received on. Also 77-1 would have come in sooner, especially with how it is modeled presently as slightly worse than the AMRAAM outside of a very specific situation.
I meant that there is no good proof that frogfoot and flanker ever used it.
And as for AMRAAM, they kind of had to give it, since everyone would freak out if they only added R-77’s. While an en-masse survivability nerf like this will not be noticed by as many people.
There are also other platforms that didn’t carry particular ordnance that was added out of the sake of balance and/or making a vehicle worthwhile. So it is entirely possible this was the case for Su 30, found enough documentation to suggest it compatible, made it worthwhile as a purchase/grind (remember, Gaijin aim to make money) by adding the 38 to it, and that’s how it ended up here.
But again, the claim of Ruski bias does ignore the fact that 77-1 has still been modeled as worse than AMRAAM (even though it should be notably improved over the AMRAAMs we have), the years of dominance America held at the top of the game, etc etc.
Don’t overly care about the Russian/American player angst, but we can at least be honest :p
Ruskis have advantage in air to ground and surface to air options, but that’s about it. Yanks have advantage in Air to Air, generally not needing to get within the range the Ruskis are vaguely effective competition.
Since F-14, the best F-16 wasnt American, the best F-15 wasn’t American, and more recently, the best strike eagle wasn’t American.
So US hasn’t even had the best version of its own jets.
Russia only has those advantages since they refuse to give GBU-53 and CBU-105. And still have not added SLAMRAAM as pantsir counterpart
Those platforms you listed were brought to parity, with the exception of the 16, but the only notably improved version I can count is the French one. American platforms are still far more effective than Russian platforms in air to air, and have been since prior the F16.
So to reach parity with pantsir, you want a platform with conservatively twice the range? For surface to air to see parity for Russia and America, you will likely have to wait. For air to ground parity, I would also think you’d need to wait for parity of a2a platforms. I would note that a platform that is more agile, yet lacks range compared is the only other one to get relatively similar range ordnance in the form of the AASM.
F-15I still has 120 more flares. And F-15JM is still slightly lighter with better IR missile.
If they add a later Panstir to balance it out vs SLAMRAAM that’s fine too
Only thing here that seems to matter is the countermeasures, but already carries an excessive figure. Though these minor changes don’t really seem to defeat that the yanks have held more or less supremacy with their tree, when compared to the Russians, leading to asymmetric balancing where they’ve better air defences and air to ground, but notably worse air to air. But that gap is closing, so I suspect we’ll see better air to ground for most trees soon. Until that gap is closed, not sure it’ll be resolved though.
We won’t be seeing better until surface to air platforms that are comparable are ready for everyone else, I’d wager. It would be exceptionally unfair to cater to the yanks and ruskis with this kind of rubbish.
But I’ve to rest, the hour is late.
In ground, this matters more since on the F-15E you have to give up 120 countermeasures out of 240 to mount a target pod, while for F-15I it’s 120 out of 360 so an a2g loaded F-15I has the same number of countermeausre as an a2a equipped F-15E
There is also SPYDER and some other air defenses everyone could get. SLAMRAAM has multiple operators too.