500kRP for a Thermal? China's New Top-Tier SPAA HQ17 and Old TOR-M1

In the next major Update, we are so happy as the Chinese tech tree has welcomed a new top-tier SPAA, the HQ-17, to replace the TOR-M1, which was introduced two years ago and was referred to as an “outsider.”

Outsider?

However, according to the game statistics, the TOR-M1 is also considered one of the “efficiency outsiders” in terms of its performance, and it simply cannot resolve the issues with the late Soviet anti-aircraft lineup.
— from Dev team replies to community feedback on the Sky Guardians update.

Although just like the other two SPAA introduced this year to the Chinese tech tree: the scout and APDS lacker, ZSL92, with a half-minute reload time; and the head-on lock range of 3 km, cannot even counter the reserved helicopters in BR 10.3, the Antelope, is kindda underwhelming,

but hey, we still welcome, that finally a SPAA with thermal at top-tier for China. We appreciate the devs’ hard work in introducing more vehicles with Chinese characteristic, rather than simply copy-pasting from other nations. Of course, we also look forward to the future for more decent and viable Chinese air defense vehicles, such as the PGZ88, Yitian AA System, 625/630E with FB-10A, FK1000, HQ-7B, SPAA301, PGZ09 (D), etc. Esp. SPAA for BR 12.0.

SPAA 301

625E

625E

FK1000

FK1000

PGZ88

PGZ88

HQ-7B

红旗7B

Yitian SPAA System

倚天

The domestically-produced HQ-17, well, at least according to the test server data, its performance can largely be seen as a TOR-M1《M》, with only slight improvements to the radar, sights, and missile.

According to datamining: only 2kg lighter and 3-extra-km is because of 6s more life-span rather than using new motor

Just like the relation between the Tunguska 2S6 and 2S6M1, and the 9M311 and 9M311-1M, or the relationship between Stormer AD and HVM.

However, shockingly, on the test server, the HQ-17 should be placed behind the TOR-M1 and requires full 400,000 RP to unlock.

500,000 RP for a thermal

lineup

As a Tier IV modification, its Thermal capability, which is missing from the TOR-M1, requires an additional 100,000 RP.
In other words, getting a late-model Thermal modification for the TOR-M1 costs over 500,000 RP, which is highly UNREASONABLE!

This is because, unlike the relationship between the Shilka, Shilka-M2, and Shilka-M4, the two BR 11.7 vehicles do not have any significant performance differences. The HQ-17 could easily serve as an upgrade or modification of the TOR-M1 in the game, or be folded with TOR. We hope the devs please reconsider the structure of the Chinese tech tree in this regard.

Where should HQ-17 and TOR-M1 be put?

  • HQ-17 and TOR-M1 should be folded (Roland/Osa or Stormer AD/HVM).
  • HQ-17 directly replaces the TOR-M1 (Obj.211 replaces the Chinese PT-76).
  • HQ-17 serves as an upgrade or modification for the TOR-M1 (2S6 with 9M311 to 2S6M1 with 9M331-1M).
  • Keep the test server setup as it is.
0 voters
67 Likes

It is unreasonable to spend 400000 RP on the HQ-17, which has little difference. The upgraded part should become a modified part of TOR-M1

24 Likes

agree

9 Likes

The 2S6 Tunguska has an upgrade that improves its capabilities.
You should be able to do the same for TOR-M1, but so that it becomes HQ-17.
It is ridiculous to spend so much more RP on just an upgrade of pretty much the exact same vehicle.

16 Likes

We can clearly find that there have little difference between torm1 and hq17 ,it’s unacceptable and a waste of time for players to pay 400,000 to get hq17.

13 Likes

A small nitpick, title should be “500k RP” and not “50RP”, also the HQ17 is 410,000 RP and not 400,000.

Which makes it even worse, somehow.

5 Likes

I agree with his point.This is unfair for player who play China.It should be serves as a modification or folded.And it’s reasonable to let HQ-17 directly replaces the TOR-m1.Why Russia don’t have Tor-m1?

9 Likes

HQ17 should be one upgrade modification but not a new vihicle.As 2S6 BMP1 and T72B3 can be upgraded with one modification. It’s unfair that only Soviet Union/Russian vihicles can have such modification. HQ17 only has a little improvement over TorM1. It’s reasonable to fold HQ17 or even make HQ17 as a modification.

6 Likes

TOR-M1 is useless

3 Likes

The HQ-17 and HQ-17A missiles are compatible

2 Likes

1e156f79e0868afd


A60FE35969B70B0628BBACBAA8FD3E4F
A6216FBD4693BEBEEFFFF74EFB191531

4 Likes



E5F12F99245C3E10086BDB99E2E03A42
F20B5307AD7D11F98F23EB12B74AE57C

6 Likes

good

1 Like

good idea very nice

1 Like

thx :)

I can’t agree more.Differences between TOR-M1 and HQ-17 are too tiny for this game to put them into two vehicles with another 410kRP.HQ-17 should serve as an upgrade or modification for the TOR-M1 just like the 2s6 unless we get HQ-17A instead of HQ-17.There’s no need for players to get 410kPR for a vehicle they already owned.

5 Likes

What a minimum effort addition to the tech tree. Who is going to rush out to grind the same vehicle again with boring AA missile only gameplay.

5 Likes

Agree,We need it!

2 Likes

For a MBT, adding a similar variant means that players have more opportunities to participate in brutal ground battles. However, for auxiliary vehicles with single functions such as anti-aircraft missile carriers, adding an almost identical variant is meaningless. HQ17 has not eliminated the shooting blind spot of TOR, and it still cannot resist low altitude raiding aircraft. At the same time, 885m/s and 850m/s have not fundamentally changed, and it still cannot catch up with modern multi-purpose fighters at the maximum range. Therefore, we only have a thermal imaging device - an accessory commonly found in advanced air defense systems. So, what is the significance of not folding these two carriers or retaining one of them? This is not diverse at all and very boring.

10 Likes

As two not folded/separated vehicles on a tech tree, it need to prove its value to the tree it belongs to, if it just a slightly upgraded version of a already existing one, its meaningless. Tor-M1 has it’s pressing problems like slow speed, short range, unable to engage with close targets. HQ17 solves none of them. Lastly, if gaijin really wants to add a new, unfolded vehicle to Chinese tree, there are better options like 630E system or importing HQ17A missile to this vehicle which actually solves problems in Chinese tree, we don’t want to spend tens of hours just to experience the same vehicle with no remarkable rise in proformance.

5 Likes