I know that theyre based on each other but youre still not providing any evidence that they completely share their entire weapons compatibility.
Because its the most nothingburger description they could come up with?
Not moving goal posts btw. Just answering AI slop with AI slop and thats what my slop said.
The Su-35 & one other Flanker has been photographed with training Kh-38s, & there was a photo floating around of a Flanker with a non-training Kh-38; newer Flankers to Su-35 like SM, MKM, & SM2, unless proven they don’t use the same or improved avionics [MKM quite literally uses improved avionics], or has to be proven that the avionics were slashed specific weapons… in a solid state era of avionics where all it takes is maintenance team doing programming.
[Su-34 is not a Flanker for randos joining.]
While I’d find Su-30SM/SM2/MKM dropping in BR from 13.0 to ~12.3 for ground interesting, I haven’t been worried about fixed-wing CAS at top end for years personally, & since the new SPAA systems for team play.
AH-64Es, Mi-28NM, & Z-10ME provided a much larger threat to ground forces than Flankers.
Kh-38MT’s primary use case is air simulator & Nuclear Escalation to me, so any removal to me isn’t related to ground battles.
So I remain indifferent about Kh-38MTs.
They cost far too much to consider using in ground battles, on top of being on a platform that is a higher BR than my tanks.
Adding them to any lineup is a net negative based on my hardline Spawn Points management strategy.
None of this of course has anything to do with alleged bias, because Kh-38MT’s haven’t been alleged evidence since early 2025.
Edit: Adding this proof that Smin states older systems need proof from that specific system or older systems, aka states that the armament has to be relevant on the specific type of aircraft when speaking of older aircraft; such as the case with F-15A & the newer F-15B [which isn’t in-game at this time].
Of course this only indirectly relates to this topic; as the comparison with Flankers would be F-15A [Su-27] & F-15B - EX [Su-30MK2 - SM2].
Literally asking for classified info.
I can’t post nor that I will. But if you think otherwise, try to prove it to me and let’s if i am wrong. Even with just AI slop.
Good that you showed because it just make my point more sense.
So? Everyone else gets stuff denied that’s classified. Just ask every single nato tank armor.
It really doesn’t but I’m not suprised that you think it does
Image #2, smin say the brochure need to be specific. Which in this is with details.
Image #3 literally says that the brochure should have the variant that is compatible be named in detail.
Now you may believe and it’s your right to do as so. But you can’t prove otherwise, just try to see for yourself. Go ahead waste you time. Anything I said in this convo you can’t prove it wrong.
But you will try again and again because one person can never learn and will not try and that how simply baised person is.
Thanks for providing that to prove everything in my post as correct, I’ve edited my post to add the screenshot as well.
Yes and do you on this brochure in any way shape or form see that the SU30SM can carry KH38MTs or that all Flanker variants share the same weapon compatibilities.
No and No.
At least try to not be dishonest for once in a comment. He states that the armament has to be relevant on the specific type of aircraft. NOT that all newer versions just get handwaved and only older versions need proof. Which even if he was would beg the question whether the Su30MK, MKI and SM constitute older and newer versions of the same plane in the same way F15A or F15B are.
Lmao imagine flagging this post, because you’re getting called out for dishonesty.
Refer to here
And what exactly am i supposed to see here?
Su30sm first version is su30mk.
Not to be mixed with su30mkv
Ok cool? There is still neither anything about the KH38MT or the SU30SMs compatibility with it in said brochure so were firmly at square one where weve been since Apr 11, '25 9:44 AM.
No im the one talking to a wall here. The brochure does not mention the SU30SM in any context to the KH38MT. Therefore its, according to the things Smin posted, not eligible to get it, because the weapon has to be specifically mentioned in relevance to the exact aircraft type. It does not matter that the SU30SM is related to the SU30MK unless stated otherwise.
That is the entire point ive been trying to convey to you this entire time. I really dont get why this is such a hard concept to grasp.
Even Ariete was busted on release with a great round, fake blowout panels, and overall good characteristics.
I stand corrected then, Im wondering how community reacted to those “blowout panels” back then
They ignored them.
& when the blowout panels were removed the playerbase complained that the Ariete was “nerfed”.
Should have aimed for the ammo like forums told me, damn…
Will try the gunners left nutsack at the correct 34.256° angle next time, maybe that works
