Yes. Also need to get rid of Russians out of the company as a whole. Atleast for the useless ones which is like 99% of them
MT isn’t affected by GNSS, just like all other IR weapons.
3 Likes
Me when I lie for like 100th time, in every single thread
1 Like
Imagine being this ignorant lol.
2 Likes
I don’t need to imagine, you’re living example
1 Like
Nice to hear what your true intentions are.
1 Like
don’t think they said MT. ML is definitely affected.
People complain about the X-38 which does not allow them to play on the tank and at the same time there are people who ask for something similar to be given to others
1 Like
Kh38 is both several times the rate of closure of the Brimstone, and carried in sufficient volume to oppress anti air systems that have even a vague hope of engaging the launch platform. Brimstone receiving fnf capacity, even if not the LOBL capacity, would not bring the closure rate close to kh38, but would allow a brimstone carrier to contend with the newer AA systems as well as allowing them to carry a weapon that whilst not exceptional in the current climate would be at least usable.
1 Like
I’ll just leave this here
1 Like
For the sake of demonstration, stat cards are being assumed to be correct, as I cannot be bothered validating it.
Stats of Brimstone:
Stats of Kh38:
Kh38 is far faster, maintains a far greater range, and if you look at the card; it also has a far heavier warhead that is guaranteed to remove a target even on a near miss (which doesn’t happen except in smoke). This contrasts with Brimstone which has a fraction of the speed, has less burn time, a warhead so pitiful that even with 3 salvo’ed to a target you’re still gambling on if it actually kills the target.
This is before we even consider the speed bleed of the 2 (a stat missing from the card) and note how much easier of a time kh38 has with getting through Surface to Air threats. Seems like the loadout of 6 Kh 38 MT is pretty comparable to the propose FnF brimstone loadout in efficacy.
3 Likes
If you are assuming I am opposed to Kh38, I am not. I just want a more supported version of it in place of the MT, which would be facilitated by bringing in MMW seekers to the Brimstone, and also finally make tornadoes worth playing. Would also facilitate scarier AAs coming in, which I want so there’s some threat to fly against.
Short and long of it, only horse I have in this race is aiming for accurate depictions of armament, independent of who has their mitts on it.
Do you want one player to press the spacebar 16 times and get <16 frags?
1 Like
I didn’t think you were biased to one side but just happy that you are trying to balance the argument
1 Like
At best, 16 individuals targeted would result in 4-7 or so kills on account of the nature of how brimstone hits the target and how the warhead interacts with the tank. Which at the outer bound is 1 more than Kh38, and in the more realistic assessment is 2 less. Most targets would have several missiles dedicated to them, which would still not guarantee the kills but would have a higher probability of a knock out, and the number would still be less than a kh38 carrier.
This is before considering how easily shot down brimstones are, as compared to Kh38s closure rate and approach angle being harder to engage. This does bring up that whilst Kh38 is harder to shoot down, it is more costly to the launch platform for one to be shot down than say 1 brimstone missile if more than 1 is dedicated to a target. But the less brimstones dedicated to a target, the more likely of the target surviving with the only real outcome being that the launch platform was mildly annoying.
Is this not enough!?
SPAA will need to use all of its missiles to fight off 1 PLAYER
You have an interesting vision of balance.
2 Likes
In the best case scenario, it brings it onto parity with the Kh 38 carriers. In general, a salvo of 16 brimstones against 16 individual targets will still perform worse than a Kh 38 carrier. Not really sure what your issue is here when I am highlighting that it would become a direct competitor to the Kh 38 carriers.
Compared to a Kh 38 player where even with their entire armament, the closure rate of Kh 38 makes it virtually impossible to defend against 2 or more. Especially if more than 1 is intended for the AA platform.
1 Like
̶W̶e̶ ̶w̶a̶n̶t̶ ̶b̶a̶l̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ We want to destroy more ground players.
That’s why it needs to be removed from the game.
1 Like
Or it needs competitors in the form of AA directly intended to deal with long range threats like it, which we are getting in the coming update, and in future updates to follow.
I primarily use these weapons in air modes, so not sure that strawman holds up.
And how are things going?
1 Like