It was removed because it was MMW would be stupidly broken and would have to be severely handicapped to be balanced. Not to mention that the EFT has 18 of them.
So yeah MMW brimstones on the EFT would put the Su-30 to shame in terms of how broken it would be.
Best they could have done is add the brimstone with a placeholder IR seeker like on the maverick and limit the F&F variant to 6 max on the EFT.
Exactly this. They went completely fantasy with the brimstones anyway so theres no reason to make them straight up the worst top tier A2G weapon. If russia gets a weapon with a made up seeker then why not give the brimstones the same treatment
But they didn’t do that. Instead, when it comes to a Russian missile, nobody seems to worry about how overpowered it is. That’s an example of Russian bias for you.
Kh-38 has not been OP since the major update dropped.
And Kh-38 was OP alongside Hammer and AGM-65 until the new SPAA was added.
Thanks for proving no Russian bias.
And of course Kh-38 is superior in a vacuum.
3 OP missiles at top BR until new SPAA was introduced.
agm 65 was nowhere near as busted as kh-38 lmao
brimstone should be un-nerfed (at top BR specifically)
I mean the Kh38 caused them to add the new AAs almost single handedly.
Now only 1 or 2 of the new AAs are truely good (SLM is stupidly strong and CLAWS is decent) and all the others are mid or even sad, but at least some nations got good new AAs.
I was launching outside of SPAA range with AGM-65s from 2022 to October 2024, and again recently in early 2025.
I stopped spawning CAS cause it was boring being unkillable.
Brimstone can be un-nerfed when those jets are put to 13.3 or higher in ground.
agm65 usually takes 2 hits to kill (on an MBT) where as kh38 is able to kill people who are grouped together and as far as brimstone is concerned i mean only the top BR planes should be fire and forget and the others should stick to SAL
Brimstone with the initial UFO flightmodel of the EF was more than capable, people just didn’t know how to use it.
Thats why you dive down on tanks to hit the roof.
Acting like the Hammers and the AGM-65s are somehow on the same level as the KH38MT is laughable. The KH is much better in literally every regard and the other 2 do actually exist
@H_ngma
You replied to the wrong post cause you literally repeated my take.
Post has been updated with more details.
anti air cover makes this risky at best (not that there shouldn’t be some risk involved)
No? Alongside would imply that theyre on a similar level which is just not true at all. Comparing the 3 weapons shows a bias since the one thats already a lot better than the others is also the only one that doesnt exist irl
@H_ngma
You inferred that.
So are you arguing against my claim that Kh-38 is superior?
Or are you agreeing with me that Kh-38 is superior in direct comparison?
bait used to believable
The difference betwen the Kh38 and Hammers is the speed and the explosive filler. The last (in the Hammers) is more then enough. And tbf the hammers had GNSS long before it was addet to the KH.
Btw Kh38L do exist, and it is used in the recent conflict that shall not be named.
Thats true, you can only do it when it’s clear.
Again no. Youre purposefully misunderstanding my comment. Your claim that the KH38 is op “alongside” the hammers and mavs implies that theyre on a similar level which is just wrong. Me arguing against your comment does not mean that i think that the Kh is not op i just disagree with you putting all 3 on a similar level.
@H_ngma
Missiles being OP does not make them equal.
My posts say Kh-38 is superior in direct comparison.
Zero of my posts say they are equal.
Your posts are the only posts in this entire topic that have the word “equal” with those three missiles.
" the only difference between them are the only 2 things that matter in the game" (since seekers are pretty much the same in game). No one is complaining against KH38s in general but the MT version is the dubious one