Feedback on PL-12 series missile balance changes in update

I’m writing to provide detailed feedback on the recent balance adjustments to the PL-12 and PL-12A missiles in the update, and to propose a potential solution that could improve both gameplay balance and the unique identity of the Chinese tech tree.

Before the update, the PL-12 was a well-balanced missile with distinct characteristics: it offered reliable mid-range performance while also being capable of pulling high-G turns at close range, giving jets like the J-10A and J-11B a viable close-quarters combat option. This made the Chinese tech tree feel unique and engaging, rather than just another “AIM-120 clone” experience.

However, the changes to the center-of-gravity to stabilizer distance (reduced from 0.3 to 0.12) have severely impacted the missiles’ maneuverability. For the base PL-12/SD-10A, this came with no corresponding improvements, effectively cutting their agility by over 50% and bringing them nearly in line with the early AIM-120A. This has been a devastating blow to the viability of aircraft that rely solely on these missiles, especially the J-10A, which already struggles with high drag and poor energy retention. Losing its close-combat capability has made the aircraft significantly less enjoyable to play.

Additionally, players have observed a critical flaw: the PL-12 exhibits extremely poor control authority when fired at high speeds. Highly maneuverable jets like the Rafale or Typhoon can evade it in close-range head-on encounters with nothing more than a barrel roll, which feels unrealistic for an active radar-guided BVR missile. I hope the team can investigate whether this is an unintended side effect of the new flight model parameters.

While I appreciate the performance boost given to the PL-12A (increased fuel mass, thrust, and burn time), the accompanying CG-to-stabilizer change undermines these improvements. My proposal is to adjust the CG-to-stabilizer distance to 0.22 for both variants, while retaining the PL-12A’s engine upgrades. This would preserve the PL-12A’s improved mid-range performance, prevent the close-combat capability from becoming unviable, and maintain the unique identity of the PL-12 series. This change would benefit both player experience and the long-term diversity of War Thunder’s gameplay.

Thank you for taking the time to read this feedback. I hope the team will consider this adjustment, as I believe it would lead to a more balanced and enjoyable experience for all players who use the Chinese tech tree.

27 Likes

this is true.

2 Likes

how about you do what you all have said to to when someone brings up the amraam nerf (that was actually more severe than this)

just deal with it

2 Likes

Ooooor, we let them know how dogwater this change is and get it reverted/adjusted? This is obnoxious, this is the main ARH missile China gets up to the top tier, this is not the performance I or anyone expect it to have, how is it that Gaijin magically finds all the different ways to hinder chinese vehicles into mediocricy, one way or another

2 Likes

i dont think giving gaijin a free hand at ANY uncalled for nerf is good.
just cuz chinese are choosing to make more noise but the americans didnt choose to do the same is no reason for why you should tell people to

just like how nobody in their right mind would tell anyone to deal with it if something bad happens to them

2 Likes

ok?

amraam is the main ARH missile for like half the nations in game

hmm, I wonder if that is similar to amraam

lmao, people did, and still do, but they get shut down by people like you saying “deal with it” or claiming that amraam is somehow good

1 Like

funny how i dont recall ever saying that and the only one saying something remotely similar is someone called Alpharius but idk if you are acquainted with him

2 Likes

dont know what to tell you

if you havent seen people saying stuff like that you clearly werent very active on the forums around the time of that nerf or any time since

1 Like

regardless, dont join that club broski
#justiceForAll

2 Likes

im just saying

you all saw them do this over a year ago to a missile used by even more aircraft and nations, and only hurt any attempts to get it fixed

but now its a problem when its done to a missile only used by one tree

its not that its a problem now, its just that its a problem.

its important not to fall victim to any false equivalences.

I was and still am against the AMRAAM nerfs and am in favour of specified seeker buffs for each missile

1 Like

Done in the first post of this thread xD

This is a chance to bring more player behind the amraam buff too. No infighting we should get both missiles fixed now that we have even more people suffering from this.

1 Like

not that many more

in the last month there were ~1 million games played with chinese air from 14.0 and up

vs over 4 million games with planes that use amraams

I have pretty much every single relevant top tier jet and I’m honestly quite tired of the one-sidedness of balance and the sheer disconnect developers have. Both the PL-12 and AIM-120 should be able to turn. Developers have genuinely convinced themselves that the ONLY metric that matters in this game is range when range never comes into play and they’d know if they actually played top tier air RB.

3 Likes

More severe than this?

I dont think so

8 Likes

yes, in terms of amount of performance lost

and in number of people impacted

The AMRAAM does not pull a lot but it’s at least not realistically rollable and the major complaint we have is that it’s terrible at HOBS. You can literally fly into this thing and win.

2 Likes

it kinda is though

ive accidentally rolled amraams thinking it was a sparrow

Guys, we shouldn’t argue here. Instead, we should make a joint appeal to buff every missile, so that there won’t be too big a gap between them.

1 Like