T72B3 gets the UBH mod which replaces the powerpack and ERA if i’m not mistaken. 400k rp still seems stupid for what seems like a small performance change.
10 Likes
Yeah. At least folder it so it’s about 200k research
6 Likes
Because in my opinion, it is more appropriate to delete tor m1 and replace it with hq17, but considering that gaijin may not be willing to give up tor m1 directly, modification may be a compromise choice
1 Like
asking the same for the gripen a and c in the swedish tree
TBH if HQ17 receives a brand new CN domestic missile (HQ17AE I would prefer, although there is no information of HQ17 being able to use it irl), then it indeed should be considered as a separate vehicle, for it would dramatically improve HQ17’s efficiency, and players should spend more effort for it.
However, in test server HQ17 uses a slightly improved 9m331:
a bit lighter (2kg, which makes the top speed 35m/s faster)
better battery capacity (which provide a longer self-destruct time, making the missile able to reach 15km)
The rest of the missile remains the same: the thruster still runs out at 8km range like 9m331 does, and missile performs bad when hitting targets at 10km or further.
Therefore, IMO the relationship between HQ17 and Thor is similar to the relationship between 2S6M1 and 2S6 : they are both a slightly improved version (radar, thermal, missile). So extra modification/folded should be a good idea.
9 Likes
Yeah, though the result of the vote varies, no one is satisfied you can see.
1 Like
I remember seeing a old photo of HQ-17 with display board, and says it has 15km range, combining that with the HQ-17AE’s display board, I think we can get its missile’s top speed is 1020m/s. but I can’t find the old picture of HQ-17 with display board.
4 Likes
1020m/s
3 Likes
this is same as mine, I’m looking for the HQ-17’s board, should be an old photo, also saying 15km, no speed information. It’s needed to prove it’s the same missile as the 15km version of HQ-17AE.
1 Like
It should really just be a researchable modification for the Tor M1. Being an entirely new vehicle makes no sense
3 Likes
asking the same for the f104 s and s asa in the italian tree
asking the same for the tornado ids and ids 1995 in the italian tree
asking the same for the m60a3 tts and cm11 in the Chinese tree
asking the same for the j11 and j11a in the Chinese tree
asking the same for the mirage2k dr1 and drmv in the French tree
we players should unite not argue with each other
3 Likes
i did not want to split, i just wanted to add something
1 Like
M60A3 TTS and CM11 is different things which the CM11 is also called as M48H
2 Likes
Gaijin:tor m1and hq17 most powerful!
1 Like
HQ17 in the current form is just like how 2S6 and the 2S6M1 modification is, slight upgrade to radar and missile + thermal. Why 2S6 can just get a mod but HQ17 need the full RP, it should have been just a mod, or at least make it foldered
4 Likes
I would rather have 2 SAMs than 1, but they should DEFINITELY be foldered.
1 Like
Because then China ground won’t get anything for this patch, and Gaijin doesn’t want people to realize that
2 Likes
Agree to make it into a modificantion for TOR.
In fact, we need a whole new BR12.0 AA for CN tech tree( Also for others, for example GER, clearly VT1 is not as powerful as Panstir S1), not simple copies that only have slight improvements :(
We want NEW things that can bring NEW changes.
3 Likes
If it were a SPAA with an IR missile in addition to the hq-17, I would accept having two SAMs at the same time. However, currently, the hq-17 is just a slightly better Tor M1, so I don’t think it’s necessary for both of them to exist at the same time. Tor M1 should be removed, and folded can only be chosen as a compromise option
CCTV7 “Ordnance Science and Technology” 20220906, which mentioned that the improvement of HQ17 for HQ17 is the motorized chassis and electronic system, and the weapon system has not changed. The HQ17A and HQ17 are the same weapon system, and both missiles are common.