The sea skimming is intentional, I think, as it’s an anti ship missiles. However yes it’s kind of redundant when they refuse to give us the man in the loop system, which is understandable. However the missile can’t lock tanks from 6 or 7 km out making them worse mavericks due to how fat and slow they are. They really need to be buffed to at least 10k otherwise we’re competing with jets like the a 10 with 6 mavericks with 2 extra wall eys or gbus along with 2 to 4 9ls depending on the model AND a 30mm gau…. The buc shouldn’t be moved down (all 9ls and r60ms should be moved up to minimum 10.3) but we should get a needed buff for our Martels. Either that or make it so we don’t have to use the data link pod so maybe we could either bring the lightning pod instead or a 9l at the very least.
LITENING on the Bucc?! No, it was only ever fielded with Pavespike and tested with TIALD.
Nothing yet
climb to 3k and fire them as point targets at the spawn.
Sorry, couldn’t remember the name of the pod it used lol….
Also I will give them that, they are very good at acquiring targets on the way to the battle. So I can let lose from around 10km at the spawn and it’ll pick up an spaa for me.
Well yes and no - I had a read of Flame2512’s (love your work man) bug report on the Martel’s guidance system. I trust his research into the matter and it matches what I know. Here is an excerpt though
“Once fired the launching aircraft would turn away from the target, while the missile climbed approximately 2,000 ft to it’s cruising altitude… The operator had limited control over the missile during the mid-course phase, being able to steer the missile left or right, as well as adjust its cruising altitude in increments of 350 ft.”
So really the missile could be set to low or high altitude depending on the mission requirements. This makes the sea skimming flight pathing really just another nerf to the already miserable Martel when there is no reason for it.
I do agree though, it shouldn’t go down in br - just buff it, or even better give us the actual guidance system and give the British something actually unique and cool to play with!
Cheers,
Sebdspy
There was nothing wrong with the source materials @Flame2512 provided. Just the Devs decided not to implement the man in the loop guidance right now.
Yeah I agree with that, the latency issues would not be fun to deal with as well. But I was more on about changing how the missile flys, as he mentioned that the operator had control over the height of the missile so maybe a more gradual decent instead of the flight path we have now.
I was also disappointed with Martel TV. I believe the best tactic is climbing and launching the missiles well above the targets. Something similar to this video:
So same as a maverick or any other guided missile.
This was my first air-to-ground guided missile, apart from Nords and Bullpups, so I don’t know if the Martel is on par with the others. From the opinions of several people and from my own experience, it seems to be much worse. Maybe it makes sense, since it’s an anti-ship missile anyway, but it doesn’t work well even against ships.
I seem to have a harder time hitting targets when I do this. Climbing to around 3 to 4km and firing from 6km out seems to work decently well for me.
Does anyone remember when the Bullpups were first introduced and you could use them with the missile tracking cam to basically have a TV missile? Surely Gaijin could introduce something similar for the Martel?
Gaijin could totally do that, but I think they are worried that players will find ways to use that and be completely unkillable for any AA system
Meanwhile the KH-38:
It’s from Jane’s International Defense Review 1988: Volume 21, Issue 9, page 1210.
From a quick read it says that with romor a the chieftain can withstand attacks from a 127mm charge from the front and sides. And with romor B passive armour it provides protection equivalent to the stillbrew armour for both ke and ce. And composite c being a light weight alternative for light vehicles.
Also that Varma would stop Russian 125mm apfsds from 1500m (it cuts off between apfsds and 1500m so I’m assuming from). They say it doubles the ke and ce protection of the m60 and m48 with Varma add in armour applied. This is referencing both era and passive Varma tiles.
Also what Russian 125mm apfsds round would they be referring to from 1988?
I believe Mango was first seen in 1986.
So that’d be funny if there were maps that weren’t Maginot and weren’t a CQBfest
I’m more thinking along the lines of the side blocks on the challengers, as they’ve been said to be many things including varma. As well as on the avre which I think are romor b plates perhaps.
Cr1 mk 3 VARMA. Cr2 DL 2E 2Fe 2Fl 2G VARMA, 2H 2I turret side VARMA hull side ASPRO-HMT
It’s kinda hard to read the lower right excerpt but it says the passive VARMA will block the soviet 125mm apfsds round from 1500m. Also a chieftain with passive ROMOR B and active ROMOR A on the top right which I think is cool. With it also saying it can defend against 127mm heat warheads from the front and sides of the turret and hull. Meaning RMOR A should defend against whatever the 127mm heat warhead is flat on.
Also while I was mucking about checking armour values I worked out the nera elements inside the cheeks of the challenger 1 only have a ke equivalent of 0.45 and ce of 0.87 when being shot at flat on. Is this just a quirk of how gaijin model nato composite?