Changing the way its seeker works would have the same impact.
It’d no longer be usable as a mass-fragging missile anymore, at least from my understanding of the documents so far.
If you change the seeker you basically just make it a Kh-38ML, which we already have.
1 Like
That’s my thinking as well, though having a mixed loadout would make it semi-effective. 1 or 2 MTs and the rest MLs.
It just won’t be OP in the sense of mass-frags anymore.
Only the F-15E and I would still be capable of that until new SPAA arrives.
And there is only people Guessing that the Kh-38mt don’t exist. While there info from butowsky or RU gov stating the contrary.
Kh-29D its pretty much confirmed to never exist. What he must be thinking its Kh-29TD. That its the suppose to be IR seeker of the Kh-29TE that its able to be used at night.
https://x.com/Russian_Defence/status/886702072955097088/photo/1
Then please provide this primary source information that a KH-38MT existed in its entirity and has been test fired
6 Likes
U again…
SRAAM is actually crap compared to 38mt
1 Like
F-15E has the Pantsir as equivalent to frag, KH38MT doesn’t have any.
You do actually, proving something exist is exactly what you can do of the two. it’s quite literally impossible to prove the non-existence of something. The entire thread is ment to try to find proof of the missiles functional existence, If you are just claiming things without said proof then what is the point of commenting?
15 Likes
I think the discussion is whether the MT’s seeker exists at all, not how to balance it.
I’m actually not that opposed to keeping the Kh-38MT in game for balance reasons as long as:
- Other nations get comparable munitions: e.g. Brimstones get FnF
- We drop the “muh historical accuracy” shtick for the R2Y2’s, Panther II, Tiger 10,5, and Coellian
2 Likes
I didn’t see any source regarding how the seeker works being wrong in the game
Care to share that source or a link to that post?
1 Like
Brochures are great documents.
Also the developer said that he changed FM Rafale based on video footage, there is nothing about other sources
Me when I lie
I don’t understand what you wanted to say in your message.
Brochures are NOT great sources. Idk where you heard that, but you usually need more than a brochure to add something. Second, someone already explained to you the situation with the “video”. You’re just trying to even the playing field (it’s not working)
1 Like
With modern weapons you are pretty much limited to brochures and similar sources
Many of Rafale’s bug reports were also made based on brochures and other marketing material …
Ok. Then why did the developers ask us to use official sources (not brochures) to change the flanker’s flight model?
Wow dude. Did you read the messages well?
He tried to explain, but he was wrong.
1 Like
That’s just marketing material
The whole premise of this thread is that “marketing material isn’t enough of a proof”
1 Like
Yes, i know.