You need to realize our Stinger slingers aren’t totally barebones like Strela. Other benefits are the reason they’re so high in BR currently.
@Caernarvon02
I’ve played almost all nations and can’t agree. Even the most complained about nation (UK) is really good until you hit 12.0 vehicles.
In this instance, yes, but in general, CAS mains
Drawing. Beside the proposed model was top bottom, not side by side.
They are already outranged by CAS; at least then they won’t miss the easiest targets flying in straight lines.
Type 81 also has nothing but its missiles. Now just one step below Pantsir and very very far away from the Strela-10M2.
It has a combination of R-73 and AIM-9M IRCCM, it’s possible to flare it if one knows how to do so. Place flares between the missile and your aircraft, continue flaring while turning until you exit the FoV of the missile. You defeat a Stinger seeker the same way as you defeat a TY-90 seeker.
The reason I was being “captain obvious” is because you seemed to be stating some strawman of “It’s either all realistic or Ace Combat with tanks”. These things are not mutually exclusive. You can still have realism within a game and still adhere to common game design and player quality-of-life.
If trees are missing lineups due to not having many vehicles, instead of making them unplayable by not adding any tanks/planes/ships, you can make some allowances. If anything, Gaijin made those ‘allowences’ a long time ago when their standards were different. The reason the Ho-Ris and such aren’t removed is because there isn’t anything to replace them with. Japan doesn’t have any WW2 tank destroyers. But, for the players’ sake, they can be allowed to exist. They aren’t broken, they aren’t dividing the community.
The KH38MTs, are complete fiction. When I said that they weren’t unique in purpose, I simply meant that Russia is not lacking in A2G munitions like Japan is lacking in WW2 TDs. There does not need to be any allowance made for the 38MTs, because the USSR has plenty of A2G missiles. (EDIT - I forgot to talk about the AGM65D thing - edit is in bold) The Maverick ‘problem’ is not a problem because Pantsirs can (and do) easily shoot them down. No other nations ingame have an SPAA even remotely comparable to the Pantsir. This isn’t a ‘cope’, it’s a straight fact. From a “realism” standpoint, the Pantsir’s addition makes sense. From a balance one… not so much. Russia isn’t even lacking in AA. Sure, if Gaijin added the F-22 it might be “realistic”, but does that mean it has a place in game?? No, because those things are not mutually exclusive.
The ships are differen’t because it’s a lot harder to make a ship. You’ve been told this and yet adamantly stand on your “all or nothing” hill.
Thats why you have such exceptional stats in the whopping 20 games you played with 4 or 5 soviet tanks.
this is a ship gun emplacement. not a panzer 4 turret ring sized basket.
Or they won’t even be able to lock them.
At their current BRs they’ll face a lot of planes with dumb bombs which you definitely can engage.
Apart from a substantially better missile it also comes with thermals. I don’t really agree with it going to 11.7 though.
As I said l have never seen it happening. When I get home in a few days we can try it out.
Lol. How do you define “realism,” “common game design,” and “player quality-of-life” within the context of a video game? You are setting a subjective standard. I am simply pointing out that it is a subjective standard and that all the puritans crying realism have no objective argument for why the Ho-Ri or Kronshtadt should be in the game and the KH-38MT, Tiger 105, Panther II, etc. shouldn’t be.
You are proving how your own definition of realism is arbitrary and subjective. Reasonable people disagree on what “allowances” should be made while still having “realism” in the game.
Here’s an idea: let trees not have analogues. The US for example has no analogues to the casemate lines found in the Russian and German trees. We don’t need to invent a line of fictional casemates for the US just so that it can have a direct analogue. Japan does not need the Ho-Ri to remain interesting.
No they are not. The KH-38MT is a modification of the KH-38M with a different (and feasible) seeker. At best, the seeker is complete fiction. The game has plenty of small things like this that are complete fiction.
Sure, and you can prevent KH-38MTs by spawning fighters and launching AMRAAMs. There are plenty of preventative options available to both sides. I for one think that NATO nations should be given better SPAAs, but you still haven’t shown that Russia has FnF capabilities like the US and other nations. If we are going by your “allowance” mindset for gaps in capabilities in trees, the KH-38MT fits perfectly.
No, those are getting down your teammate’s throats faster than AMRAAM would kill a carrier.
Oh wait. I went through the whole thing you wrote, nevermind.
It’s abysmally pointless.
This thread is talking about everything that got nothing to do with KH38MT, i guess Russian mains has succeeded.
I haven’t seen a mod on this thread for days now, I don’t blame them though.
Nah, they are too weak. Spreading delusions doesn’t necessarily mean achieving something.
If everyone sees right through them as well.
They’re just advertisement for this thread. So anyone could come in and laugh.
It takes just as long to fire off 6 agm-65ds as it does to fire 6 kh-38mts. Idk what you’re talking about.
Yea, good luck getting at least one kill from those 6x AGMs. It’s been talked about over and over again. First and foremost - AGM-65 doesn’t come with 3rd gen thermals. Second - it has abysmal zoom, so realistically you’re only able to launch IR one from like 10km or lower. They’re slow and there’s a pantsir on the other team. + weaker warhead etc. etc.
Where you came from? Read 5k posts please or at least try sticking to meaningful interactions.
“Muh F16AJ is in the game so the KH38MT should stay” Crazy how they compare a jet that got added because Japan had no equivalent with a gamebreaking missile that got no counter at all, now i see why they get called delusional.
It’s very easy to get kills with AGM-65Ds. Once upon a time I would have agreed with you because you would donk somebody and they would usually shrug it off. Now they are usually 1-hit kills.
The targeting pods provide great resolution and thermals. They have come a long way from being stuck with gen-1s. I have not noticed a significant difference between the KH-38MT and the AGM-65D in terms of targeting or usability. Most Su-30s will fire closer to 10km anyway because you increase the chances of seeing targets and hitting them and the obly threat to you is the Ito.
I doubt you have tried either the Agm-65d or the Kh-38MT.
