Hmmmm an M48 in the British tree perhaps? :o
merhaps
1 Like
Would require BR increases for those vehicles that get them.
I would take that for the Cromwell mk1, would give a very nice ~4.7 medium to bring. As for the Churchill it would let give it anything too powerful so I don’t think it would.
There was no 75mm APDS but there was the American prototype APCR that never made it to Britain.
There is no reason however for us to not have M61 with HE filler because usually they also replaced the Shellite(?) filler with concrete for American vehicles.
I mean the Americans did make an apds round for the 75mm lol. We never did but we really should have it considering it’s basically our apcr round at this point. Both act the same shattering on the most minute angles. Would just help when facing tanks like the kv1b and shit.
Source?
Verified SRAAM moment:
Dont get me wrong. Id love for the range increase and the all-aspect capabilties…
But this is what they need to fix above everything else and I just dont get why it does crazy stuff like this so often
Edit: Added some better views (Kinda loving this new replay system)
Even after that first SRAAM, the second shot nearly missed as well which you can see at the end
(Also let me know if a bug report is needed for that, though I forgot to hit my screenshot button)
Edit 2: Threw a bug report together just because I could: Community Bug Reporting System
3 Likes
So, did some testing. It appears SRAAM will do this consistantly if fired within around 400m
So the question is… Is this correct behaviour?
A min range of around 500m and a max range of around 800m.
I can understand them missing with extreme off-boresight shots, but these shots, where it simply needs to fly in a straight line to hit the target feel… very wrong
If it isnt correct then I have ammended my earlier bug report with this new information
2 Likes
6 pounder has had APDS in the files for several years, gaijin just originally said “too strong at low level” then we got Swedish APDS, now its “not needed” i believe as the argument.
Historically correct ammo for the Churchill Mk 3 too iirc as churchills were quickly rearmed with 6 pounders and APDS for Totalize. (1 in 3/4 churchills were armed with 6 pounders due to heavy tank fears and a lack of 17 pounder gun tanks so the tank brigades could defend themselves)
Would be nice for the Churchills imo given they are relatively just, meh?
The chieftain did a video on it and I am the last person to be able to find that kind of a source. Especially when it was a surprise to him let alone me. They made apds rounds for the 75mm, 76mm and 90mm. However they found it had a 30-40% increase to penetration over the apcr while also having a 65% decrease in accuracy and so decided to stick with apcr. The accuracy problems were from a range above like 800m or something I can’t really remember, but it does make sense why they went for apcr.
I would just like a 57mm sabot for the Cromwell 1, would make a very good 4.7 to even maybe 5.0 medium that’s faced and has quick reloading apds slinger.
The sraams have always been buggy like that, the only thing is they managed to fix this kind of behaviour on the r73s without even trying to fix it on the sraams. It causes the missile to miss rather easy shots, and reduces its max g load. Hopefully they get around to fixing our sraams and red tops so we can actually have some decent jets at and around 9.0 to 10.0. Because if the red tops are fixed the sea vixen should probably go up to 9.0 while the lighting could maybe stick where it is or become 9.7.
Would also make it easier to add the TSR2 as now it would be stuck at 10.3 or 10.0 with red tops.
1 Like
Would love a hawk with SRAAM too
Or a jag, giving the jag gr1 sraams would probably make it worth even grinding as at the moment we have far to many strike aircraft for our own good. Makes bringing jets into ground rather annoying as they all share the same spawn cost…. We really need a 10.3 fighter, or 10.0 as at the moment the best we got is a hunter with no flares and sraams. And shitty sraams at that.
Sea Harrier isnt half bad but yeah, 9.0-11.3 we are kinda weak.
But yeah, SRAAM would be the perfect buff instead of 9Ls for the Jags
Sea harrier feels soooooo much faster than the gr3. I have no idea why it feels that fat. It falls out the sky after half a turn or more like a quarter. If I’m struggling against a10s in the sea harrier but can easily handle them in my gr3 I don’t think 9ls are worth me suffering through the grind. I don’t have the engine mod yet so that may be it but I doubt it.
Sea harrier is heavier but it has a better engine. Also the entire front section is different so that would also affect aerodynamics.
I’m not sure about irl or anything else. All I know is that in game the sea harrier feels like it wants to plummet as soon as you try and turn, using vffing as well or whatever it’s called. Where as on my gr 3 even with bombs it likes to stay fast and manoeuvres just fine, not fast but it doesn’t struggle trying to go verticals after on turn where as on the sea harrier you basically stall before even getting past the half way point. All of this at a br where you see f5’s every game and it just makes me not want to play it. No point either as in ground it still shares the same spawn pool as my buccaneer and jaguar. We are in dire need of a fighter at 10.0 to 10.7 to fill these gaps. Not just for ground rb but because it would be fun for air. I hate playing anything above 11.0 purely because of the massive gap in performance between 11.2 and 12.0, let alone 12.3.
@Smin1080p some weeks ago a employee of Gaijin reported he had made a report internally regarding inaccuracies around the BOL Rail countermeasures. Are there any plans to action this report? This nerf has hurt the Tornado F.3 substantially for no good reason.
2 Likes
Hello
These reports are suggestions, so its down to the developers discretion to decide on that.
1 Like