Should the Grom-1 be added back in the march update? yes or no

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
41

Yeah, Im all for more complex ground attack missions which could include SEAD in ASB

1 Like
42

so an F-15E with 5 JASSM might be able to down a base in one pass?

1 Like
43

maybe.

I do want to see more complex base damage modeling. make guided weapons more valuable in arb/asb. especially for those like the f-117

2 Likes
44

yeah, that should really happen. before then, more napalm is needed on top jets

1 Like
45

or Napalm equivalents. Ive always reckoned CBUs should have a similar damage mulitplier. And most of the aircraft that cant use Napalm did use CBUs

2 Likes
46

If they add groms back then I see literally zero reason not to add the Israeli Rampage, it’s essentially an MLRS rocket with a bigger warhead, rocket motor and GPS/INS seeker, would have a similar range and capabilities to grom 1 but limited by amount, F-16 can only carry 4 underwing

image

1 Like
47

Taurus/Storm Shadow are stealth cruise missiles with a range of 500km +

Grom-1 has rocket motor that burns for a few seconds with much less range.

Taurus and Storm Shadow have turbo engines that propel them throughout flight hence they “cruise”.

I don’t know how you can compare Grom-1 to them

2 Likes
48

shit why not i could care less how people play the game more stuff equals more fun to do / deal with and means more stuff we will get

1 Like
49

ok lets add it seems like a good thing to add and almost every country has the f-16 so we can let them have it and Russia can have the grom1 simple fix to the problem

50

i don’t care how they want to compare more the marry to play/ use as long as they stop bitching about the grom1 and they add these who cares at this point i just want to have fun when i play

51

Because even on the largest EC maps, both can be launched within a minute of takeoff and reach the entire map, while having enough explosive mass to wipe a bombing point.

They both trivialize bombing to a degree where there is effectively 0 risk to the user. Only 1 side gaining access to such a capability is not balanced, especially when one side is missing it for ‘"some reason’" despite being decades older and having significantly more airframes already in-game missing them.

If you don’t understand how they compare essentially identically in-game then you are hopeless.