Not really, all 12.0 Leos 2s use the dm53 but theyre still unique vehicles.
Air grind is vastly faster than ground.
where there is a will there’s a way
Spanish F18 for France to complete the copy and paste slop? /s
Kuwaitian F18 for Israel and Malaysian for Japan and we can all channel our inner Maverick on the commies.
2A4 can use DM33 but it doesn’t.
M1 Abrams can use M900 but it doesn’t.
Just a few examples of Gaijin reducing vehicle’s capabilities for balance.
Even with that, Rafale has almost the same amount of games as certain 122s despite latter ones being years older. Ground is also played more than Air on average.
Even with those, the rafale will have MICA IR
Yes, it’s impossible to power creep the Rafale without creating more double standards and favoritism, this time going against the plane in question.
I mean they do the same with planes where they dont introduce certain missiles to balance it out which is a better way to nerf a vehicle for balance than unhistorically changing aspects about the vehicle itself.
True but the Christian II was only introduced in 2024 and the speed difference between premium grinding air and ground is still massive.
adding IIR will literally widen the gap. rafale will be much more op compared to the rest. what other jet gets 8x mica ir equivalents that outrange every other IIR missile ?
The Main issue Is that they kept buffing It while every statistic showed it was curbstomping the entire competition, and It Just kept getting stronger every update.
All while every one else kept being ignored
The russians most likely, via R27ET with improved range and seeker
The problem is, DM33 and the likes are already present at 10.7 but 2A4 still doesn’t have it.
On the other hand, things like IIR missiles still aren’t in the game because the game isn’t ready for those and gameplay would suffer greatly, even if all nations receive their version.
Yes it is but Rafale is still played disproportionally too much.
No wonder as that thing is a mix of favoritism and fictional stats.
And the 2A4 frankly doesnt need it. Im not talking about IIR necessarily stuff like missing R73s on the Mig 29 is more in the same realm as missing rounds.
Compared to other minor tree planes absolutely and itll only get worse over time.
Favoritism yes not so sure about the second part.
That’s your own opinion.
I’m just telling you how things are often withheld for different reasons.
IR seeker found on Hammer should only be able to get TRACK lock at like ~1.5km away from the target.
And KH38 IR seeker shouldnt exist ingame
2 Likes
What’s that got to do with anything regarding Rafale’s fictional performance ?
Yeah rafale’s, I dont see a source stating that Hammer should only be able to lock at 1.5km away from target
That’s because you aren’t looking for it, as it doesn’t concern you for some reason. NATO’s overperforming stuff is hidden in plain sight, but people choose to ignore it and concentrate on bashing RU for the same exact thing.
This paragraph below is copied from Gunjob’s comment on another thread.
So moving targets.
Lets get a few things out of the way, AASM can clearly target a tank sized target, there is enough secondary information that calls out vehicle sized targets.
What does this targeting looks like?
Well. Lets play out an engagement;
Rafale with Hammer.
- Uses TGP to upload target data for a tank at a specific location.
- Comes into LOAL range.
- Fire.
- Hammer is now on its own.
- Hammer arrives at target basket 1.5km over the pre-planned target area
- Hammer begins terminal approach
- First IR image is taken shortly after entering the basket, ~1.0-1.2km to impact.
- Course correction now happens for the new target location over the next 500m of distance traveled.
- Correction complete for 1st Acquisition
- Second IR image is taken, ~600m to impact.
- Course correction now happens for the new image.
- Correction complete for 2nd Acquisition
- Impact
There are only two chances for a course correction, along with the distance needed for those course corrections. Each time its a static image, with no target vector or speed measurement, so each update will be to a new static location. A target moving with enough speed would outpace the ability for Hammer to provide updated locations with any hope of accuracy.
If it was a static tank that had moved to a new parking spot or a TEL thats been relocated to a new location this tracking method would ensure impact. But if those targets are actively moving, there is no chance.
1 Like
withholding something is entirely different to wrongly modeling a weapon due to balance concerns tho.
I sincerely doubt that the overperforming seeker on the Hammers is responsible for Rafales rising popularity in air rb
/thread
1 Like
9.3 and 9.7 always go to 10.3 and 10.7.
The premiums always push it up :(
It’s not saying that the first IR image is taken at 1.0-1.2km, it is saying that the first IR image is taken at 1.5km and then completed around 1.3km where a target is acquired. Note that the paper says the seeker takes two sets of images. Not two images.