The Kh-38MT may not actually exist

[Sean74218]

When will Gaijin respond

[Alpharius11348]

never if they can get away with it

[Demokrat4]

Probably never, they just realized that this is Russian bias.

[Smugspite]

@luque13

Make aircraft take off? Spawn further away

that just makes it worse realistically because then they are 20km away and can use that time to find targets before they are able to launch

[MotorolaCRO]

@tripod2008

It’s that the performance delta gained by the addition of the Kh-83MT, over say the Kh-29T(E) / or -29D breaks balance

You’re still looking at only one part of an aircraft.

@tripod2008

The fact that it is also present on high performance airframes causes yet more issues. Considering it is so much better than literally everything else.

Neither SM3 nor SU-34 are high performance airframes.
30SM shouldn’t have it though.

@tripod2008

That is the point, none of the airframes equipt with the Kh-38MT, would decrease in BR if they did not have access to it

This doesn’t make any sense for SM3 and SU-34.

[GHOST_KING5710]

@quartas121

Zeroster

I highly recommend reading before giving an opinion

Flakpanzer IV (3 cm Flakvierling) ‘Zerstörer 45’

poll In the later stages of the Second World War, the Germans lost control over the skies and their ground forces had to endure extensive enemy air attacks. The use of self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (SPAAGs) based on half-track chassis offered some way to fight back, but these were themselves highly vulnerable, as they lacked proper armor protection. A SPAAG based on a tank chassis was more desirable. Starting from 1944, the German focus was on producing such vehicles based on the Panzer IV …

Plus the Zerstörer 45 we have in game is only a test bed on Mobelwage ( it should be renamed), we didn’t get the real Zerstörer 45 (wirbelwind configuration)

[Chubbmaster]

And discussing balance instead of actually proving it exists

[ItsOnyy]

That’s fair, considering there is nothing else to talk about. I think Gaijin did us all dirty here, the thread is slowly but surely dying, they didn’t even have the courtesy to say “We are looking into it”.

[Morvran]

Its not entirely irrelevant though.

If everyone had a KH-38MT performance weapon then the argument could be made that hte soviets needed a paper weapon for balance, but given the opposite is true, then it does raise entirely different questions.

[Chubbmaster]

I’m guessing its one of those situations where they can’t prove that it exists and we can’t prove that it definitively doesen’t, so its not very conclusive. Idk tho I’m kinda stupid

[Chubbmaster]

True

[PercussionCap]

@ItsOnyy

the thread is slowly but surely dying, they didn’t even have the courtesy to say “We are looking into it”.

I mean there’s only so many times you can come back to a thread when the answer doesn’t change from “it’s fake”

[Sternlos]

Ya idk what they are doing.

They were obviously cautious to not give brimstones FnF capability, knowing it would be a disaster for the current state of maps in high tier ground. So 18 is too much, but 6 is fine? People complained for years about su25 with them, then su34, and now with su30 its boiled over. Surely they were aware of this. They had to know people were upset about pantsir situation with non parity, same case for f14, and other scenarios, but nothing happens. These situations where 1 country gets a capability no other country has seems to crop up a lot and lasts for multiple updates if not years.

[MrBombastic8]

They are playing the waiting game

[Morvran]

Thats why Im so mad. Because in the same update they wrote a 3 paragraph long explanation as to why the Tornado GR4 couldnt get a half decent AGM, they add the Su-34 and pretty everything said could be applied to the Su-34 and the KH-38MT word for word and now it turns out the KH-38MT is a work fiction.

Im pissed

(Also, on a side note, just had a Pantsir intercept 6x Brimstones I fired at it… So…)

[AlvisWisla]

The Kh-38MT is not radar guided and has an extremely low% chance of teamkilling without player input.

So no, that’s whataboutism known as a false equivalence fallacy.

[Morvran]

I dont really see what your point is.

They made a huge song and dance about how Brimstone 1s would be too OP because htey outrange SPAA and would be unfair in the same update they add a paper weapon to the Su-34.

The bare minimum is that the Tornado GR4 should have gotten SAL-Brimstone 2s or 3s to compensate, but it didnt even get that

[tripod2008]

@AlvisWisla

The Kh-38MT is not radar guided

Not at all an issue, as it can be completely mitigated by adding chaff functionality to the genericized smoke formulation that all tanks use.

The advanced development program for the M81 grenade was conducted from 1987 to 1992. in the transition to full scale development, the Operational Requirements Document (ORD) required the grenade to provide IR and MM instead of just MM protection The Grenade, Launcher, Smoke: Millimeter/Infrared (MM/IR) Screening, M81 (Figure 17) was type classified in 1995 and is scheduled to begin production in 1998

@AlvisWisla

has an extremely low% chance of teamkilling without player input.

That depends specifically on how they model the seeker & sensor, and their integration, so it’s no different to any other store.

[ItsOnyy]

It’s hard to know for sure, but my 2 cents are that Gaijin devs added this weapon knowing there wasn’t enough open source data. They are obviously aware of this thread.

We won’t really know for sure what happened until they speak on the situation. Maybe, just maybe, they are working on a blog, assuming they have the community’s best interests at heart.

[MythicPi]

@tripod2008

Not at all an issue, as it can be completely mitigated by adding chaff functionality to the genericized smoke formulation that all tanks use.

@Gunjob has a source that somehow the brimstones MMW seeker cant be decoyed iirc. I think it said something like there are no CM’s that work in its spectrum or something? Could be misremembwring though, you’d have to get details from him in an appropriate thread.

That being said, they could just lwt it be decoyed anyways and call it a day. I dont think anyone would think thats unfair.

Ive also made the suggestion post for SAAB Barracuda to be added to vehicles its available for, which should reduce the seeker lock range of IIR and radar seekers, and thats been passed to devs for consideration, which could help a lot with all the F&F CAS problems we have going on atm.