Why US top-tier CAS still fights with 1970s weapons while Russia uses 2020s missiles in the same?

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
1

Howdy, as soon as I started playing on the US, I constantly encountered a balance issue with the kh-29/38 missiles, wondering why my F15e (AGM-65D/G) has slow missiles, while Russia’s aircraft has missiles that are 3 times faster and deal more damage

For those who don’t know:
AGM-65 Maverick (USA) – 0.9 Mach Subsonic, slow to target
Kh-29 (Russia) – 2.0-2.5 Mach Supersonic
Kh-38 (Russia) – 2.2-2.5 Mach Supersonic, modern

I understand the reason for the problem, probably because the Americans have long since switched to 5th generation aircraft, and all new weapons are based on the F22/35, while Russia uses 4th-4.5 generation aircraft (such as the Su-30, Su-34, and MiG-29, which are present in the game, unlike the American F22/35)
This is the problem: the Americans are fighting with 1970s and 1990s aircraft, while Russia is using modern aircraft. This is why the Americans have 1970s missiles, while Russia has modern ones, creating a significant imbalance

My question:
-Why does the US not have access to more modern equivalents (e.g., JAGM, AGM-114L) or improved Maverick variants (e.g., AGM-65G with better performance) to match the Kh-38 era?

-I understand that in reality, the US has moved to 5th-gen fighters and newer weapons. But in War Thunder, this creates a serious imbalance where Russian CAS dominates the top tier.

-I’m not asking for a nerf. I’m asking for a review of whether US CAS is missing modern weapons that would be historically appropriate for this BR.

To balance this gap, I would suggest considering the addition of more modern US air-to-ground missiles that already exist and would fit the timeframe of the current top-tier aircraft:
· AGM-179 JAGM – a modern replacement for the Maverick. It has been in service since 2022, offers better range, improved guidance, and, most importantly, higher speed.
· AGM-65G – an improved Maverick variant with a heavier warhead and better performance (not 0.9M speed)

Adding these weapons would make US top-tier CAS more competitive without breaking historical accuracy or requiring a nerf to Russian aircraft.

4 Likes
2

For the same reason the Typhoon has SAL Brimstone 1s and not Full Brimstone 2s

The F-15E did just get 20x GBU-53s. So technically they have weapons from 2020

3

It replaces the hellfire, but its meant to go to all aircraft which is why its called “Joint, Air to ground missile” With that being said the A10 should be able to carry it granted it would make the A10C hard to kill thx to the range on the JAGMS.

For most aircraft at top tier we have the AGM 154, which is GPS guided but there is a variant that had ir tracking with an added addition of it being stealth.

image
image2000×1333 55.7 KB

4

the fact the brim wasn’t even allowed IR homing in game sucks so bad

2 Likes
5

The issue is not era. The issue is that what America has underperforms massively, e.g AGM-179 and AGM-114 won’t loft, and Mavericks have too much drag and deal too little damage. Meanwhile, Russian weapons overperform massively, e.g being able to lock munitions with radar and Kh-38 having an AGM-65D seeker when it should realistically be AGM-56A grade).

It keeps happening over and over again.

3 Likes
6

Just to further prove your point
image

3 Likes
7

Or just SAL versions of the 2 or 3

1 Like
8

I understand that JAGM is not an easy solution. But I’m not so much concerned about the presence of one missile or another, but rather about the difference in speed (0.9 Mach vs. 2.5 Mach). Perhaps it would be worth reconsidering the BR of American vehicles or providing them with more modern variants of Maverick (AGM-65G with improved dynamics) if adding JAGM is challenging

9

Only if you ignore the modern american munitions, the agm 84h is from the 2000s and the agm 53 is from 2020

it is already in the game… we also have the agm 65F

shot 2026.07.07 20.13.21
shot 2026.07.07 20.13.212560×1440 832 KB

10

when we are talking about Close Air Support, mavericks are ‘the’ CAS weapon of the US tech tree. kh-29 and kh-38 are ‘the’ CAS weapon of the russian tech tree. nato allies typically use mavericks. the only other “unique” one is china… which is just copies of russian weapons.

GBU-53s work for cas, but aren’t the same in the speed at which they reach the target, as well as the explosive amount (although right now the GBU-53 has 1100mm of heat pen, which I am assuming is a placeholder stat)

11

Okay, then when is the Typhoon getting an AGM-65 equivalent?

12

They don’t like USA, sooner or later you will realize that

2 Likes
13

SPICE 250’s are as good as Mavericks

14

are you stuck in the past or something?

15

TBF theres this,

image
image1186×893 161 KB

mach 7 ATGM

allegedly its planned for the F15E and B1B.

Also this
image - HACM
a prototype entering production in 2027 for the F35, F15 and F18

Theres tons of these missiles now that i look at it, but good luck balancing them.

16

there is also other upcoming options like SiWA and Mako that can be carried by more platforms

17

Is it anti RAD or GPS?

image
image1920×931 193 KB

Because its devolped from the AARGM

1 Like
18

AGM (air-to-ground missile) ≠ ATGM (anti-tank guided missile). AGM-183A is a hypersonic precision strike weapon for high value targets, its Russian counterpart would be Kh-47M2 and at best would be easily better used in air simulator battles to target buildings or vessels like a carrier.

I don’t think there any weapons like the Kh-29 and Kh-38 which has speed, destructive power and size in service for the United States Air Force. AGM-114 has the speed but not the explosive mass, AGM-130 has the explosive mass but still subsonic. Other options would be underwhelming or too much for ground vehicles itself.

19

If 20x GBU-53s dont count, then 8x Spice-250s dont count.

20

That is nothing alike the kh29/kh38, it’s equivalent is this…
image