Far less, of course, but the arguments/complaints people bring up mostly center around the KH-38MT/Su-30SM/Su-34 being unbalanced/OP/the strongest, not that it’s the CAS truck that’s spammed the most. And with that line of argumentation it’s at the very least no reasonable for the Rafale to catch less flak.
Tankers are very much impacted by good CAP being up. It’s an incredibly strong tool to both keep your ground team protected from enemy CAS and run the enemy team out of spawnpoints. But not dying to something is not very noticeable. That effect is called preparedness paradox, I think.
It’s likely simply due to the fact that they see the Russian Kh-38MT Platforms most often (in the kill feed, and with the occurrence of multi-kills doesn’t help), I’m sure that if they were asked to rank the performance of all A2G ordnance in Ground modes at top tier it would fairly evenly reflect their usage stats.
And so if they were to pick one as an exemplar it should be self-evident as to why the Kh-38MT is so frequently mentioned.
But as you said earlier, they won’t feel it, because the only thing they can see is that they don’t get killed
Rafale is catching some flak for being busted in Air RB mainly, and rightfully so, for a lot of reasons
But in the CAS department, the ones complaining about it will usually be tankers, that more often get killed by a KH38 than a AASM. It doesn’t mean AASM IR isn’t busted, it’s just less frequent to get killed by it, and so people complain less about it.
Also, if KH38 MT is removed, i’m not against AASM IR removal as well. Playing those is boring anyway.
I will say though, AASM can at least be intercepted reliably by a few SPAAs, unlike KH38, which gives low reaction time, and makes the fuze not trigger at times for some reasons. That’s my main issue with it
It’s second because it’s on the best plane of the game at this moment and there is no one to compete if there were more missile with speed and 100+ kg high explosives warhead AASM250 won’t be able to compete.
By it self AASM250 is a bomb with IR seeker sure it can lock tank from 20km distanse (at this moment) but it won’t be able to make it there like Kh-38 without sufficient speed and altitude given by carrier.
It’s sad that that type of mindset is so prevalent even in threads about balancing.
Yeah, but then you have people here discounting the usefulness of CAP, which is mind boggling. It’s one thing to not really notice it in a match, but when putting some actual thought into it and exchanging opinions with others about the strongpoints of various planes that part should really click.
i’m aware, but this won’t matter for as long as we don’t have AAs able to reach this range.
When said AAs are added, and assuming Gaijin doesn’t make them weak, KH38 will also need to be fired from afar, making it far more prone to mid air interception.
CAS in its current form will therefore probably disappear, replaced by SEAD first and foremost.
KH38 is a problem because long range AAs don’t exist (and also because the planes spawn 15ish km from the battlefield)
Dare i say, considering AASMs ability to loft and LOAL, it will probably be far more efficient than kh38 against semi-fixed SAM sites
Point is, depending on how gaijin add those, the gameplay will shift so much that is difficult to predict what weaponry will fare well and which one won’t
Is it somehow not surprising that most complaints are going to be relating to something sitting at the top of the meta for each Battle rating?
Well you also have others claiming the A-10 is a serviceable choice for CAP flights when it has nothing actually going for it, outside it’s A2A missile selection.
So it’s not like there is much of an audience for it.
Depends on how soon they add Anti-Radiation Missiles, as many of them do loft to a significant degree and should be coming down at 70~85 degrees or so due to trajectory shaping. and will likely cost far less SP points
Although i’d argue Rafale lacks endurance in CAP, considering the hord of Su now appearing.
Su30 SM isn’t exactly bad either. Sure the FM isn’t ideal, a bit mirage 2000 like i’d say (which is far from a bad FM) and it gets access to one of the best fox 3 in game (R-77-1)
Su30 struggles less in GRB than in ARB because the maps are smaller, everyone is flying lower, and you therefore don’t need to give your missile insane acceleration. That means Su30 mid acceleration isn’t as bad in GRB compared to ARB.
It’s not a god of CAP, but it’s not as defenseless as many people make it out to be
I don’t know what kind of SAM sites gaijin si planning to add, but the 75-80° shaping probably won’t do anything though. Most SAMs radars now have full coverage. Those things are quite insane and would be very dangerous if added in game, almost like a no fly zone over the entire map, depending on terrain
Considering gaijin track record with AA modelling however, i don’t expect this to be an issue (Hello radar wobbling, manpads overload & lock range, lack of premium AA, SACLOS guidance, lack of sights for WW2 ones, and the list goes on and on…)
I’d rate the Rafale significantly over the Su-30SM. Even those that don’t will at the very least agree that they’re almost tied. It’s not surprising that there are more complaints about something that gets spammed more often (I brought up the example of the G.91 R/3 with unnerfed Nords at some point in this thread), but it really shouldn’t be that prevalent in discussions about actual vehicle balancing.
That’s not remotely as prevalent though.
In what way? Six missiles isn’t all that much, but I’ve rarely ran out.
I find the FM of the Su-30SM extremely limiting for GRB CAP. It can not fly continous turns without bleeding all its speed, and the acceleration is terrible. Those things (combined with solid missiles) however are what make the Typhoon, Gripen and especially Rafale so dominant at CAP. You can put constant pressure in any direction and get in and out of engagements pretty much at will with those, with the Su-30SM you simply can’t.
The missile count on Rafale is fine, but there’s just too many targets X)
I carry 8 btw, since i usually don’t take the rafale out for CAS, but pure CAP. You can see it as an extension of my ITO if you will (ITO first spawn, rafale second spawn if possible)
Sometimes, even 8 missiles aren’t enough. Some get chaffed, others multipathed, and sometimes there’s just too many Su to kill, and there’s little chance to get back to base if they are aware of your presence.
Also, note that by the time my MICA reach them, they already got a couple of KH out anyway
It should significantly reduce the time that the site has to respond to a detection, before the radar is struck in the terminal phase, and that the missile may well be dropped as a contact during the midcourse.
Considering Gaijin’s use of +/- 40 degrees for AESA systems complete hemispheric coverage can’t be achieved with a conventional 3 or 4 element array as there is no way for the emitters to be arranged for the detection zones to overlap.
Relative to their contemporaries they certainly are obvious outliers vs their contemporaries, but the difference between a 4 & 6 K/D (ground based kill, death) ratio is pretty significant, when the rest sit between about 2.2~1.1 or so.
The issue was more that the Nord’s were fast enough, and the warhead large enough that the average player could reliably dumb fire them at AA at the time and score kills consistently. Where with the Bullpups the -12C was far slower and fewer players could reliably make use of their extended range though these days they are very much overlooked in terms of SPAA counters and effectiveness for whatever reason (still waiting for the US to get an event G91/R1 though).
That was the point there are far better options for CAP at 12.0 than the A-10
The Rafale however does that while going up against the Pantsir.
The FJ-4B VMF 232 was just outright better at that job, even for people that didn’t figure out MCLOS guidance (and I’ll maintain that considering performance by people that haven’t figured out how to effectively use their weaponry is stupid). It was just rare, while the T.91 R/3 very much wasn’t.
A G.91 for the US would be funny. Shame the F-4D lost CCIP for the rockets, that filled the fighter with groundpounding capability role quite well.
My point was more that there’s relatively few people arguing about the CAP/overall performance of the A-10C in the first place. The plane is pretty much a sidenote and gets attention according to that.
As long as you can provide enough source they should accept it. However it wont be a simple task, as i had the pleasure of dealing with BN APS, where the devs said it provided ±45, and after reading the sources saying it is hemispheric, they said it cant be. Now im sitting with 5 different primary sources saying it is hemispheric, but devs are yet to look at it, and im afraid they are going to pull out ±45 again.
Well, what I have does indicate that it at minimum provides +/- 45 degrees in both azimuth and elevation (in actuality it’s -10 / +70), just that each of the four elements in the composite array are installed inclined at about 45 ~ 60 degrees or so, and so it’s not wrong, if measuring orthogonal to the array.
This reminds me of the whole “BVM being incredibly OP” situation, all the while 122s existed for even longer.
Or the fear mongering that tried to portray 27ER and it’s carriers, in the day and age of 100m MP, as some sort of a doom combination you couldn’t escape.
While all of this was happening, Gripen was flying under the radar, but at least some people like DEFYN caught that and called it something along the lines of “one of the most handheld planes ever added”.
As far as I can tell it depends on the installation inclination of the individual panels, with Vertical panels being limited to -10 / +70 , and inclined installations being fully hemispheric.
