Source would be nice?
I love how question about existence of seeker turned into complete fictional missile
‘Oh the seeker exists’ and ‘it’s a modular system’ are not proof of existence for the system we see in game, if theoretical configurations are denied for NATO tech, then why not for USSR stuff?
Do a search and you’ll see
That ‘logic’ doesn’t fly around here, you need solid sources to prove your point
I love how missiles of one rocket family turned into theoretical configuration
Dude its just easier to say. “the in game configuration of the existing booster and warhead part with the highly dubious seeker is not fit for implementation according to gaijins rules” is just annoying to type every time
You need sources to disprove the existence of the missile because it’s clearly been used in conflicts
The KH38ML has been used in ukraine mate, you’re confusing your own (anti-TOS) examples
Aren’t we talking about 9m317ma?
We’re talking about both, the same dogshit ‘they are compatible with this madeup seeker’ argument applies to both missiles
More like it’s more louder then say missile with questionable configuration you clearly trying to win opression olympics here
Be more dramatic please.
In this game, it’s harder to justify historical buffs to equipment than to campaign for (and defend) the addition of fictional, OP weaponry
If it’s dramatic i just accepted the rules you people have brought.
Have to be proven
Jesse, What the Fuck Are You Talking About?
Do we have to have the “cant prove a negative” discussion again?
How do I prove someone else’s headcanon, if the sources and documents simply don’t exist and i’d be trying to disprove what some gaijin developers cooked up, with nothing to work with?
I wish this game was more pve and not PvP with factions that way 80% of these incredibly insufferable back and forths would never happen
I wish this game was actually more realistic and balanced the vehicles BRs according to that then i could just play top tier and dodge all RU players.
