ADATS, what Gaijin got wrong

Funny then that gaijin has accepted reports to nerf NATO thermal arrays because their output resolution was lower than their stated generation.

Its why the 120S went from Gen 2 to Gen 1 thermals on dev when it was being added and I had to produce a pamphlet that gave a statement that the sight system is “Gen 2” and prove it had enough of a output resolution and the right sensor to match to get it returned to it’s actual generation 2 performance, since, for some reason, the marketing material saying the sight is “Gen 2” for the 120S was not enough to get it passed back then, I had to produce both the Generation and resolution.

5 Likes

depends on what country the vehicle is for I guess

1 Like

Yeah I was looking at the 80BVM and am looking for some decent technical data. It’s supposed to use the same Sosna-U as the 90M from my knowledge yet in game it is gen3 not gen 2.

iirc the t90m has a gen 2 in game.

My point exactly.

I misundertood you, iirc the t80bvm in game uses a different photodetector than the t90m.

I’ve been looking and I haven’t found anything that puts the ФЭМ18М into the 3rd gen classification. So even if we give David the benefit that the BVM is a 2018 model I don’t see where they pulled 3rd gen from.
The only purpose of them moving to that thermal was to remove foreign reliance. I can’t find anything making it a 3rd gen other than the statement 3rd gen technology of mid wave. Which if that is the case we have a lot of 2nd gen thermals that are supposed to be 3rd.

1 Like

BVM was gen 2 prior to the major changes to thermal generation in general.
Leopard 2PL went up, and so forth.

I hope ADATS doesn’t get narked again.

Depends on what the historical documents say.
Time will tell.

too bad, there will be a bug report citing a “russian test” with diagrams drawn in MS paint that will be accepted and “fixed” before anything else that says the missile range is 10m and the radar elevation of -10 degrees to -5 degrees

5 Likes

its been 10 years

4 Likes

I think they are looking for any clue to nerf American equipment. After all, they have already turned half of the US equipment into God knows what. God, what did they do with the Bradley, I really loved this IFV. RIP Bradley and soon RIP ADATS.

@Demokrat4
If that was the case then HSTVL wouldn’t be the best light tank in WT, and Abrams wouldn’t be arguably the most powerful.

The Bradley has never been nerfed. The last time it was changed was when it was given the ability to fire on the move.

So its tow2b going from 500mm of pen to 100 isn’t a nerf?? swedish ifv’s still have the original 500mm pen for tow2 b’s

1 Like

TOW-2B would disagree with that statement.

2 Likes

This nerf is actually justified. While the BILL 2 has a HEAT warhead (still without the tandem effect), the TOW-2B has a tantalum EFP. But idk about damage or armor Multipliers. I just don’t want touch Bradley…

1 Like

you clearly havent played since 2a7 was added

@Alpharius11348
You think the 2A7 hasn’t been added?
I got a nuke with the 2A5, stock 2A6, and 2A4M the other week.

I am fairly confident that the RBS-56B uses EFPs just like the 2B.

But this is extremely off topic.