Gave it a little look. Its still quite subsonic (and therefore, easy to intercept). It may be similar to the X-38 on range, but the speed will still be its biggest drawback, it really shouldn’t change anything if compared to Mavericks.
The balance between AGMs went off the window the moment their speed became a factor on reaction time to them.
let me see if i can find something balanced that isn’t an american stick propelled by a Saturn V engine.
what about AGM-88G AARGM-ER? supersonic (Mach 2), 361kg, Anti-Radiation, 44in wingspan, 10in diameter, 13.8ft long.
used by F/A-18E Super Hornets, autonomous guidance.
the article says it will be compatible with future platforms like the Eurofighter, which means Germany, Great Britain and Italy could use it, Finland requested 150 of them for their air force (Sweden and it’s finnish F/A-18C MLU 2).
in that case there would be just a few nations lacking good CAS weaponry.
The issue is that unlike kh38s those missiles only target radars. And you can only use 4 of them, not 6.
usually the main targets of CAS planes when spawning are SPAAs, so it would be a good missile afterall.
however im pretty sure Gaijin will do it’s silly magic and make it somehow capable of targeting MBTs too like they did with Kh-38MT (which technically shouldn’t be able of locking targets over 7km).
still enough, or beg Gaijin to give them 6/8 instead of 4 like they “accidently” made with the LMURs of the Mi-28NM.
Not 7km but 1.5 actually.
Irl seeker’s thermal imaging is so bad it can’t even identify ground units until it gets in 1.5-2km while in game it has better zoom than most TGP’s and 3rd gen thermal imaging.
38MT is completely made on fantasy, nothing more.
doesn’t the SNIPER targeting pod have the best zoom ingame?
LMAO… No, I advise Russian players to learn how to play and stop complaining about being bad at the game.
Make Gaijin to fix its radar to make use of 50% of its kit reliably and I’ll jump to that train even with its limitations.
Knowing that Gaijin won’t do that anytime soon, I rest my case.
None of the planes you quoted rely on their radar strength as much as the F-15A/J/Baz with their 7Ms without IOG+DL (and only having a goofy, unreliable mechanic to try and lock again on a target). MiG-29s have R-27ERs with IOG+DL which are stupidly easy to keep out of notch if you know what to do and how to illuminate targets while they’re performing a notch, and Harriers only need a solid lock for launch as most of slings you’re doing with an AV-8 w/120s will be under 15km due to kinematic limitations. Therefore, DL is not necessary at all.
If the radar isn’t reliable enough to make use of its entire SARH kit, you end up with a fast plane with a decent FM, without HMS and 4 IR IRCCM missiles. Sounds a lot like a sidegrade F-16 OCU on that circumstance, isn’t it.
The OCU should be 13.0, it’s certainly more than 0.3 better than the base F-16A.
You still need a hard lock for them to reliably hit (assuming the target isn’t multipathing), which is difficult to do when the target notches your radar, which isn’t very difficult to do.
Sounds a lot like a Mig-29, if you ignore the fact it has a terrible FM, and useless IR missiles.
Again, I rest my case.
The only real downside the MiG-29 FM truly has is their energy bleed. Other than that, they shouldn’t be played as a turnfighter basically ever, they have more than enough tools to defend themselves both at long, medium and short ranges if positioned correctly— OH, I forgot that was the scapegoat for saying the F-15A is allegedly OP.
Ironic, considering all of the complaining surrounding Russian tanks is because they can’t aim.
February stats are out, BMPT K/D’s and WR have declined significantly.
What I think would balance it out is moving the TT one to 11.7, and possibly reworking what hitting the belts does. Prem one looks to be balanced from stats.
If you hit the belts, it should have a 100% chance to destroy both cannons, the vertical and horizontal drive, the missiles, the autoloader, the FCS/electronic equipment, etc. Basically everything related to the weapons should be nuked.
Spaa mostly sit on spawn so by killing them you can only help your team air which almost never spawns. Tanks, on other hand, can kill your team ground units and cap points. They have much bigger impact on battle result. So having 6 munitions capable of erasing all ground units > having 4 munitions capable of destroying spaa only.
Not really. It takes 1 pantsir with switch radar target bind to delete entire salvo.
Similar situation with HAMMER. Do you have source for this 1.5-2km tho? I like to save these.
Seems like 10.7 is also recovering a little bit.
I suspect that within 1-2 months the FOTM effect will die down completely and everything will be back to normal.
Cause specific nation mains will shoot a god damned T90M in the UFP then cry it doesn’t go through.
The tanks aren’t great tbh, i thoroughly enjoy 11.7 right enough.
Realistically most mains have some critical misunderstanding of other nations.
The issue is if you buff the tanks it leads to easier facilitation of acquiring the good cas.
Same as when T58 dropped.
Or when the german prem heavy cruiser man.
They cycle prems like mad , T80UD was another example of a braindead tank which ruined a bracket.
It was a 10.7 vehicle before tbe reload buff…
And before that the gripens pretty much dominated before a series of nerfs.
The worst days it seen were at 13.0 when all the Arh missile holding planes were dropped.
As most if all planes without access to ARH are ar a massive disadvantage for the most part.
Serious for what ? At 12.7 the F15 is under BRd leading to what we need being more decompressing not more.
Yet the F15A has a better Flight model, characteristics, 4 x irccm missiles , more counter measures, better radar, * the literal only way the mig29 is better is the r27er*
That doesn’t mean move the mig29 but jesus decompressioj is need to at least 15.3
That argument also avours the F15A if you positiom the eagle correctly it’s untouchable.
I like tbe fulcrum but the F15 A generally did me better when i used it.