I don’t think HARM belongs in GRB yet… although I would welcome a SEAD game mode which we’ll probably have by 2025
I think anti radiation missiles would be ok if only added on high tier vehicles
SPAA gameplay is pretty braindead at the moment, people literally never reposition or use cover
it depends on the counter play.
If they dont model things like ALARMs loiter mode. Then just switching radar off renders them essentially unusable. The only imbalance comes from radars that cant operate without radar being on (I think there is a few).
But overall I just want them for Sim.
t that point, take a heli lol. Its alot harder to fly a tornado low to the ground while trying to find a target, turn to them, launch, notch while keeping track… All this while an f15e is 14km away launching 20 gps bombs and 6 mavericks and then moving onto you as he still has 4 aams. Seems fair and balanced to me.
Honestly. Yeah. Also now the Gripen can take 8x GPS guided bombs accross 2 pylons. So that means it can run 2x Aim-9M, 2x R-Darter and 8x GPS guided bombs. its arguably the better stand-off platform just for that and they cant even track a moving target.
In GRB, I wont be using it (not only due to its limited performance but also due to the terrible state the CR2s are in, proper brimstones would have been enough for me to grit my teeth and solider through the pain of the CR2s but now…)
I’ll stick with using in ASB, FLIR and ePaveways will be nice to use.
Ill just be playing my tonka in sim, IF they get their heads out of their asses and move it down to 12.0. If they dont move it down ill just grind it out but keep using my gr 1 as whats the point in playing 12.3 grb when ill be facing arh missiles constantly? It wont be fun when i can just keep playing my gr 1. Wont even be that good in sim as at 12.3 youll be facing 13.3 basically every game, when the a10c is 11.7 this is bullshit in my eyes.
Kinda yeah, In Sim
50% of the time you’ll be facing Mig-29s and Yak-141s (thankfully the F-16s with the good radar are now 13.0 so should be easier than it was last year in the GR1)
50% of the time you’ll be facing Mig-29Gs, F-16 MLUs and F-4F ICE. Thankfully the Su-27 hasnt moved down yet so that is still 13.3 (but I can see that changing sooner rather than later) (Swedish Gripens as well if you pick that)
Its going to be a total pain to fly at even 12.7 as you’ll always be on the ultra defensive (erven with all the defensive aids, not a lot you can do if a Mig-29 spots you) but at least I have experience in the GR1 doing that from last year and redfor are bad at the game. So Im reasonably confident that i’ll slip through the cracks in the GR4 with its upgrades. But at 13.0. Forget it, thats a redfor bracket now.
Defiently should be 12.0
75% of the time, nothing changes, but 25% of the time, a single bracket, you are facing Mig-23s instead.
Im not going to bring the A-10C into this, but I will mention the Mirage F-1C200 at 11.7 with 2x Magic II, 2x SARH missiles, a decent radar and good CM count, all with enough bombs for 1x base kill. Only real issue it has is a bad RWR. 12.0 for the GR4 would not be in any shape or form, OP.
Yet again Gaijin copying and pasting from the Swedish Gripen instead of letting the nation who built it have their gripen have historically different ordnance (GBU 39 was not used on SAAF Gripen). Got to love it.
That aside, if they are doing that, then you’ll be glad to know that you’re likely to get another 8 GBU 39.
Yeah, I know it sucks for the Swedish mains to not get anything unqiue, but at the same time. Italy and Britain are both being carried by the Gripen at the moment and it maintaining reasonable performance is essential. Especially when Typhoon might be a long way off yet.
But perhaps they’ll keep the 16x GBU-39 a Swedish only thing
It’d be nice after darter -.-
But I am not hopeful. I play Britain, so yay keep Britain with at least something useful. But I started with Sweden, as it is my favourite kit. Just sucks they couldn’t come up with something else.
90% of the dev team does work on US and USSR stuff exlcusively, so only so much the last 10% can do for the other 8 nations :P
Just hoping we might see some sign of the A2G radar for the Gripen and Tornado within the next year or 2.
Frankly they need to come in by next major. Basically for any aircraft that ends a line at present that should have air to ground radar. Maybe it’d even make up for the ahistorical nerfs to Gripens fm when compared to something like an f16.
1 Like
No excuse for the Gripen not having:
- A2G radar
- Centre line A2G weapons
- MAWS
when directly compared to something like the F-15E, F-16C or Su-34.
1 Like
Or an accurate FM relative to competition.
I’d wager it is because still they’re upset that once minor nation players actually got useful kit, we kicked the teeth in of the yanks and russians.
1 Like
Yeah. Its funny watching Su-27s slam into the ground when they try to turn fight with a Sea Harrier.
2 Likes
Brimstone Implementation
To begin, I do not believe the Brimstone should have its LOAL capability, nor am I going to argue for or against the use of the Pantsir in regards to countering the Brimstone.
Personally I am of the opinion that the Brimstone shouldn’t be added at all in its current state. However the missile can be implemented in a completely balanced way without its LOAL capability while retaining its radar guidance.
For one, Gaijin claims there is no counter to an actually capable Brimstone. This is a complete falsehood. Radar-absorbing and or chaff filled smoke grenades exist and could be implemented, along with existing in-game factors such as buildings or trees. Even with its radar guidance, simply putting something between you and the missile will protect you.
They claim the Brimstone is too potent. Nine times out of ten, if you are locked by a Maverick or Spike you have no idea. If you happen to be aware you can break line of sight or pop smoke. The same would work with the Brimstone. The only advantage the Brimstone would have if implemented even semi-accurately, would be its delivery speed and range. Neither of which are present in-game. So where is this imbalance?
My final point deals with the radar guidance of the Brimstone. Gaijin is convinced too many friendly fire incidents would occur, even without the inclusion of the Brimstone’s LOAL mode. This is one of their major reasons for not granting it its radar guidance system. I would argue that the higher probability of a friendly fire incident occurring within a match acts as a built in balance check. On top of this Gaijin can simply require a weapon-lock before firing the missile, again just negating the LOAL capability, which everybody seems to be on the same page about.
So with all of this being said and with Gaijin intentionally adding the Brimstone in an ahistorical and neutered state, why not just have it function as a Maverick? This way all parties are happy, the British mains get a missile that’s actually usable and effective, ground players don’t have to learn anything when it comes to fighting a new weapon platform, and Gaijin can put in the least amount of effort possible by making a more or less copy-paste weapon.
1 Like
SAL is a historical mode of operation of the weapon. What you suggest is an entirely fabricated mode of operation. The only reason it’s able to be introduced to the game at all is because it has a historical mode that is balanced within the game. If it were not for this mode, the missile would not be added. Especially in an artificially made up mode.
1 Like
The way that the SAL is being implemented is inherently ahistorical. Even while using the SAL mode the Brimstone can be ripple-fired, this capability is not represented in game. And again SAL mode or not, the failure to include its other primary modes is ahistorical. A Brimstone that can only use SAL is entirely fabricated.
Beside that point, it could still be implemented with its mmW and be completely balanced as stated in my original reply. The Brimstone has a 50/50 mode, where it uses SAL to select and lock a target, then after being fired uses its mmW radar to guide itself in negating the need to maintain a laser lock. (ie; lock target, fire, and forget. Just like a Maverick) This would prevent its LOAL from being added, prevent increase in in-game friendly fire incidents, and negates the need for SAL only. So why not implement that mode instead of the completely uncompetitive SAL?
5 Likes
We already have existing weapons in game locked to a single mode of historical operation. This is always chosen over implementing a fictional mode.
The reasons for not implementing the other modes of operation has been detailed within the Dev blog already.
2 Likes
But those reasons are incorrect. Case and point being the above quote. Carbon fiber and chemical radar-diffusing/absorbing smoke grenades and generators exist and are in military use around the world. That would be Brimstone counter #1.
This is Brimstone counter #2.
Current SPAA and APS platforms in-game can lock and destroy air to ground munitions.
Brimstone counter #3.
And there is no reasoning presented as to why the Brimstones can’t use the 50/50 mode.
3 Likes