peak CBT
3 Likes
It’s true, they are extremely inconsistent, especially in frontal aspect. I don’t know why but in rear aspect they seem much more consistent.
In frontal aspect I think I had one successful kill. Two times I tried it on a F-104 during an head-on and I clearly saw it exploding behind the enemy aircraft without doing any damage.
2 Likes
No one uses them because they are bad = no one reports the problem = the missile stays bad/gets worse = no one uses them because they are bad. Welcome to the war thunder death spiral.
6 Likes
The very sad truth.
2 Likes
Its from a couple months back and is in the primary bug report, but this is my crown jewel for this bug.
Proceeded to detonate behind them and blow off a single flap (or elevator, can’t remember which)
5 Likes
It’s the same thing with the Rato pods on the kikka it took literal years for them to actually spawn in the first time
1 Like
I realize these aren’t the best shots possible, but I mean… come on, 3 hits and he’s still able to out-run me and maneuver?
2 Likes
I’m mostly amazed #1 was a crit and #2 wasn’t
it would be interesting to see how much damage each one actually did to him
I could drag up the replays later. AA20s are so wildly inconsistent that I stopped even looking at the damage because it’s usually next to nothing. Flap here, some fuselage damage there, if you’re lucky maybe skme wing or elevator damage. Almost never does it daamge the engine, and I think I’ve set a single fire since March.
First Shot:
The Damage:
Second Shot:
The Damage:
Third Shot:
The Damage:
I’ve had 9Bs detonate very close to their 9 meter proxy distance and they at least set fires, damage engines or destroy whatever control surface they were close to, ie, wing or elevators.
This is THREE AA20s with nearly THREE times the warhead size of a 9B, I get that their proxy distance is 15m instead of 9, but it doesn’t take a genius to realize something is wrong and needs to be fixed. It’s nearly been a year since this bug has been introduced and there is absolutely zero indication of them receiving attention. It’s tragic and insanely frustrating for the devs to completely disregard something that is actually game-breaking. It isn’t some niche minor correction of some statistic like a few kg off an aircraft’s mass or a few mm on a tank’s belly pan, no… these just blatantly don’t work and they are a primary way of downing enemies for some aircraft and the secondary for even more.
5 Likes
Unchanged in recent update.
3 Likes
but we got a new american and russian prem!
3 Likes
used them yesterday on the g91 in a couple matches, out of like a dozen head on proxy detonations only 1 actually did any damage, one of them blew up right above a mig15s cockpit and did nothing…
2 Likes
Please for the love of god, fix these missiles. It’s unfair that others get missiles that do damage without having to divert attention. This is infuriating.
2 Likes
No, this isn’t gamebreaking, why would you think that?
1 Like
Did you send bug report
1 Like
What i fknd ultra sad here is, you’re absolutely fantastic with these things aiming and landing them, just for a “hit” or “critical hit” and then actually.no damage.
It was proved years ago when they initially nerfed the nords that the proxy was now wrong.
They nerfed the damn explosive mass but not reduced the proxy so now it proxys to far away from the target.
Both this missile and fireflash are absolutely dead now adays. Maybe if it was 3 or 4 years ago theyd act on it. Now adays theres just too many modern planes and systems for them to care about older ones at all
2 Likes
Yeah, it’s linked in the main post.
1 Like
Thanks, I appreciate that.
As for the explosive mass nerf, from what I understand the explosive mass is actually more than it should be, for AA.20s at least. I could only find secondary sources which is a pain in the but but the general consensus is that while the warhead itself is ~23KG (51lbs), the actual explosives used (2 different explosives that I do not remember the name of) actually roughly add up to ~8KG of TNT equiv. The thing is, the explosive mass doesn’t mean much for a warhead, it’s the fragmentation which accounts for most of the warhead; a warhead that is roughly 3x larger than the 9B. The proxy range of 15m shouldn’t be the issue, again only through secondsry sources which makes it a pain, reports stste that aircrsft within a 50ft (15m) radius of the blast would be destroyed.
That’s what bothers me so much. This clearly isn’t the case in game, as missing by just a few inches can, and has, caused non damage because of the way the fuse detonates late and / or, the fragmentation isn’t modeled in game and it relies solely on explosive mass (I have heard this is the case but have no clue if that’s the case or not). I would really love some transparency on gaijin’s end to try and help in understanding what is going on. Not to mention the fact that the rocket motors are supposed to be reduced smoke:
Which they did fix, and then inexcplicably re-added back to the game, making them insanely hard to aim should the target cross through the smoke trail.
I’ve reached out to smin twice, and in their credit, they have forwarded it to the devs both times and unfortunately that’s all the community managers can do. It’s completely up to the devs, and there seems to be no way to communicate with them directly about how gamebreaking this is.
2 Likes
It really does need cleared up doesnt it, Look at fireflash as well, they nerfed the rocket mobility and such by making it unable to respond for the first second ^(which was proved incorrect) but by that time you have either missed as it cant move, OR the missile runs out of boost.
As well as this, both nords and fireflash dont seem to fire off the aircraft properly, the fly off at an angle as if theyre mounted badly Which on these planes they are pointed straight.
At this stage unfortunately I think the missiles will be left to the last minute, or just left completely as they have bug reports years old on it and haven’t fixed anything of it.
1 Like