The canards move. The elevons don’t stay up as they should.
they nerfed it?
Different belt composition so unsure. I always found the BK-27 bi-polar to use IMO. It works and slaps people, or it just sparks often.
I just saw the ratio of golden(explosive) shells to red(AP shells) go down so I assumed it’s a nerf lol
At least something is being done for it.
Tragic the iteration it looks like though. No stand off shenanigans against land targets.
What do you mean?
Designation of the first iteration, so we aren’t getting the latest with land attack capacity, so we can’t conduct shenanigans. It’s neither here nor there in the grand scheme, and the 4 was unlikely, but would have been silly. At least Viggen will have something resembling a use now.
Oh, yeah. Looks like it, sort of understandable though. Mk.4 might be gray area on the edge of to OP. It might not be to OP to add depending on what functions and mechanics they have planned for anti ship missiles in general.
Eh, 4 would have been fine. Closure rate is glacial compared to most munitions, and would not provide much even when launched from the extremities of engagement ranges in game. I doubt we’re getting maneuvers in terminal phase that would have made it more effective than just lobbing glide bombs from a su 30.
Just too slow to pose much of a threat to balance, you can close the distance to threats faster by just dragging a bomb to the target yourself. Significantly faster. Only aspect I could see being problematic is cycle launching them from the airfield but even then, they’d not be hard for interception. Slower under most pvp settings than a 38ML launch.
Really? Aren’t most anti ship cruise missiles in-game ~ Mach 1?
I’m more concerned about LOAL and mmw radar seeker tbh (especially at those ranges), smoke doesn’t do anything against it and you can bring GBU-39/B on the belly as saturation against SPAA.
Regarding maritime strikes, it would be a bit ahead of the pack, but not by that much. Especially when it can be argued there’s a not insignificant number at mach 3.5.
For the land attack capacity, it would not be added with LOAL or MMW seeker, because gaijin refuses. It would be limited to “This is the target position, loose”, sadly. You might have a case if Gaijin would ever implement this functionality, but they’re inclined to kneecap air because ground players cry. In the current climate, it would bring only a reasonably long ranged stand off capability to Sweden with a pretty abysmal rate of closure for non maritime targets, and that’s it. Even were it implemented correctly, I doubt it would prove that much of a problem given the ease of interception, especially if GBUs were dropped in tight salvos. They tend to detonate a fair number per missile intercepting them.
Would have been silly, but not overly effective.
LOAL i get, but it has never had anything else than a radar seeker, there is no other option. As you said the only other option would be GNSS only but at that point it could easily have been added many major updates ago and doesn’t make sense to have waited this long to add in that case.
Almost like that’s the case I’m making. There’s no reason we couldn’t have seen it this update locked to a gnss target designation for nonmaritime strikes, given their vehement opposition to MMW seekers. Would have been present for when they inevitably pull their thumb out and resolve MMW seekers.
The stand off capacity would have been nice to see with the Mk4, and it would have provided us a munition ready for the MMW seekers getting modeled, instead of the fight we’re going to end up having to have to get mk4 when that inevitably occurs.
Is this the Mk.3?
Designation’s on the side.
We also are not receiving a sea bound nor ground bound launch platform, and mk3 is not air launched.
What makes RBS-15 mk4 so OP?
If this is the case, then there’s definitely a case to get mk4 at least implemented as far as the game’s conventions permit.
Gungnir has the latest seeker which allows it to also attack ground targets and naval, not just naval
Also 300km range


