so a Porsche GT3 has the same HP as a Ford Focus becasue they both use pump octane petrol
it can after 0.6 seconds. Its just that other arh missiles have 0.31 seconds delay, or in the case of the mica, 0.16 seconds.
OEM files/data from manufacturers for a missile that is still in production and most of it’s parameters are secret to public. From where did the Gaijin took the stats / performance parameters for this missile when RTX is not sharing anything (or almost nothing) about it’s real performance at all.
Same sh** for BMPT, you say that we need to proof stuff with OEM files, nothing based on guessing, but somehow you’ve added “external ammo belts” to Terminators even though the BMPTs brochure states that they are using only 2 belts (1 per cannon). SELECTIVE REALISM
In reports about Abrams and the DU in the hull armor, you / Bug Reporting Manager said that it was only used in ~5 tanks that were used in schools/training (we have files for that). Yeah, now find a picture of a Russian SU-30SM with mounted KH38MT (NOT ML, not a brochure, but a picture of them actually using them). We still didn’t get StormBreakers for the US F-15E even though almost every country already has some kind of IR bomb.
Half of your game doesn’t work. Targeting pods are broken. Tanks physics is terrible. Russian fuel tanks work better as a spall liners than the actual spall liners. Russian tanks can still reload a shell even though their autoloader is destroyed (destroying autoloader and gunner/commander when you have ~<3s left)
1 Like
Though still annoying when multiple primary sources state one thing and Gaijin think it says something entirely different.
Like say:
Typhoon Supercruise speed. (Docs: 1.5, Gaijin: 1.3)
Stinger G (Docs: 20-22G, Gaijin: 13G)
ECRS Scan speed (Docs 560+, Gaijin: 190)
etc etc
1 Like
I understand that, but you can partially avoid it by maneuvering aggressively in one direction (left, right, up, or down). The AIM-120 can no longer do this, whereas missiles like the AAM-4 or MICA-EM can do so without any issues. I watched multiple replays and closely observed the AIM-120, and it only pulls around 20 G initially. Its maximum G is only available about 5–6 seconds after launch.
You can also see this very clearly when you fire the AIM-120 at an opponent from behind and they start turning. The AIM-120 simply can’t follow the turn at first; only after a few seconds does it begin pulling its maximum G.
That’s the core of the problem. I hope I’ve explained it clearly
The information regarding the seconds is more of an estimate
Or DICM from the Mi-28NM
Yeah, but that is at least every DIRCM as far as I am aware and terrible implementation of that system rahter than a specific figure that they get right in some places but wrong in others .
Like if AH-64E could only block 1 missile at a time but MI-28NM was infinite
still waiting on aim 54C buffs
reduced smoke
improved accelration
25G pull
dogfight mode
1 Like
The implementation is simply catastrophic. The DIRCM on the Mi-28NM is far stronger than it should be. It is physically impossible for it to have 360° coverage. At best, it’s roughly around 170°, and even then only toward the rear, with the coverage provided by a single laser. That is the point that really bothers a lot of people
Not sure how this thread has arrived to ldircm helis and their ability to throw off IIR missiles.
But Mi-28Nm regardless of the coverage people see it has as an issue, still can die to those missiles on an average of more times than people in ah-64E or Z-10Me. As far I have spoken and seen videos, you still need to show your belly in the Mi-28Nm.
The entire AIM-54 family was buffed some time ago. If they were buffed even further, it would most likely result in all F-14 variants moving up by one BR. In that case, the F-14B would no longer remain at 13.0, at least that’s what I assume if the buffs were as significant as you suggest
Fundamentally, you are right, but the DIRCM is a good current example of Gaijin’s inability to implement things properly. And then saying that it has to be proven that it isn’t like that is just plain stupid
I don’t think anyone knows the direct answer to that one, but there are some sources posted in this thread:
Sadly several of the images have been corrupted due to the way the user added them (via discord somehow?), but you can still find links to several sources and papers about the AIM-120 in the thread.
Limited coverage of LDIRCM is modelled in game already, whats not modelled is that a singke turret should target only 1 missile, instead of currently infinite.
Oh, so that’s why the IRIS-T SLM can’t hit the Mi-28NM from above? Because the LDIRCM coverage has supposedly been modeled correctly?
Probably a old footage, because mi28nm nowdays do get killed from above front aspect afaik
aim54s are garbage right now i dont know what buffs youre referring too but theyre not enough, these missiles are literally a larp, they’re utterly useless
which is a problem, we’re not making a wikipedia page, or making an informative article, we’re talking videogame balance
They used to be 15G, now they’re 17G.
But a bigger buff would have a rather negative effect on the F-14’s Br
also has the second worst aircraft at top tier with the worst being f15l which is just another us aircraft in a different nations, besides why are we not considering the fact that the issue is not the max overload for aim120s, but how long they take to be able to achieve said max overload? gaijin didnt reason this change, as it was a kneejerk balancision done back when people sucked massive balls at dodging missiles and just ate aim120s in the face(august 2024) they nerfed the maneuverability and slightly buffed the range, why was the maneuverability nerf? how are we even supposed to bug report a change that wasnt sourced in the first place? if we cant find any sources on the matter(i doubt gaijin can much the same) the only way we could get it changed is to understand what the reasoning for the nerf was in the first place.