Even the 305 is mid. 8.7 for an SPAA without radar.
At 6.0? mid
OK ish at 5.7,
Ok-ish but generally just a fast tank destroyer with no armour.
They are almost all in the realm of ‘ok-ish’ but not ‘best’/‘one of the best’ at any given BR.
Just saying we are getting far off topic and this doesn’t have to go into personal offenses.
that basically a PT76 without HEAT but better APs
Im not, just state a fact they are racism, but dont want to admit. They dont believe Chinese can manufacture better equipments than themselves
What you mean ? Both of them super good at their br speedy things to flank German mains 211 has T-34-85 gun and shells which is superior at that br.
Well I mean not all maps are ‘flank friendly’ plus they do suck when they face tanks they can not penetrate at all up front.
In any case, the current HQ-11 is HQ-5.5
8 missile is just not enough
hah, this guy dont think so
the other half seems like a disadvantage of separate AA
having a problem with something that you dont agree its okay but bringing other nation in it, that quite stupid.
i understand trying to get the devs to change the current hq11 to the one with a radar and 2 launchers, but asking for the gun platform is just useless. can you imagine having only 1 8* launcher with 1 gun truck. dont ask for the gun platform you will waste everyone time.
dev wont allow you to have a 4 platform air defense ( 1 radar, 2 launcher, 1 gun)
having the gun platform at top tier is just useless, maybe to shoot down missile but it doesnt have the time to lock and start shooting a fast moving plane.
nope, not the CIWS for my opinion, just raise the HQ11 to majority is enough
add laucher would be fair
I mean it is a disadvantage to have large sizes but it’s not like the Buk can’t just do with the TEL alone anyway.
That’s true.
U could slightly automate it, in the same way we’ve done with the SPAAs we can simply select the target and fire. I mean afterall there is a reason for IRL ships to all use CIWS.
yeah but we are talking about plane in maps that can give them covers. ships and anti ships weapons dont have covers, its just flat and 100% detection for 200km in sea
exemple, you spawn and get ready, detect and fire missile, multipath or chaff it and hide behinde cover, gun ready, you detect it 90 degree to your sideat 3km, gun gonna take around 1-2 sec to turn and start shoot it, the plane has already shot ot landed some bomb next to you.
HQ-11 only requires an additional 1-2 launch units is enough
so have to grind yet another new sam system to even be slightly on par? you realize how stupid that is right? why should china have to get 3 NEW SYSTEMS before we finally get something even close to on par with what everyone (other than israel) else has
radars are built into the launchers and gun themselves. so it would still be 2 launcher, 1 gun
Imo. the CS/SA5 is a good example that even at top tier, a gun based AAA can have its use cases, especially when defending against hostile missile barrages. Hence why I’m very open to the idea of having a CIWS system to engage drones and missiles with at close range, whilst gaining the ability to not spend a precious missile for every menial target.
So throw in the CIWS and a second launcher and China would end up with a solid yet still balanced SAM system, since the HQ5.5 at its current BR is very underwhelming (if not even outright bad compared to its counterparts).
Man, they’re not worth arguing with because it’s a system they don’t care about. The real hq11 has a separate launch vehicle, and then the authorities don’t seem to be ready to send out the hq11 air defense system, including the hd2000.
I just got this thing and I am confident in saying that it much worse than the CS/SA5
Radar missile means that the enemy knows a missile is coming so they can easily notch or multipath it
Lacking a gun (especially with AHEAD) means that I also can’t shoot down incoming munitions and no smoke means that I can’t make them lose lock either