From primary or secondary sources stating that its max 50Gs
The primary source here is from RUSSIAN DEFENCE EXPORT you mean they are giving fake values?
strange, state own export military company’s data has a less reliability than the other sources
1 Like
its actually supposed to be 40G max, theres no proof at all that its 50G
Im not here to argue about the R-77. Theres another forum thread dedicated to russian missiles. So I dunno why this is relevent to ths Pl-12.
40G would be 3.3x of Engaged targets g-load, which is still rational
But still, a medium range missile should not perform well at short range(as the bug report manager said)
1 Like
Because here:
They dont think pl12’s performance is a bug
“medium range missile not supposed to work well at short range”
Currently we have source to prove the 38G max overload (ingame profile admit 38G), we have the ingame evidence that shown the missile never reach even close to that value (actually pretty much halved now with maximum about 20G)
But their reaction is the figure above
Is that clear enough?
5 Likes
They are aware of the issue and are working on it so 🤷
But if you have sources that state that the R-77-1 doesnt have a max G overload of 50Gs, then by all means, submit a bug report.
yeah, with a NAB directly
they never listening and just let all player submit to the MIGHTY bug report system
So they can give you a reject directly
Also, the whole opinion is NOT about the 50G.
It is about the PL12 is a medium range missile and not suppose to work well at close range, so should as well as R77 “MEDIUM” range missile. They are making double standard
3 Likes
Ive reported stuff in the past and have gotten stuff fixed/changed. But then again, I used primary and secondary sources,so that probably why they got changed.
its funny how the micas and R-77’s literally do the same yet the dont care about it, yes a medium range missile can do this, their literally made for dogfighting and medium range, the trade off is its energy, which was exactly what the PL-12 did, R-77’s doing the same but better is more realistic since the grid fins give it more lift and overall increases its turning, but making PL-12s perform like sparrows does not make this point that the dev made stand at all
7 Likes
Exactly, things come to CN equipment whether it has primary and secondary sources or not they just gain you a Not a Bug or Not Enough Info directly
You can try to post CN stuff and see
Thats why Chinese player are mad about it
BECAUSE IT JUST ISNT FAIR
9 Likes
the R-77 is something that we shouldn’t be discussing here, its only evidence that devs are being too biased about chinese fox-3’s and NATO and russian ones
Ive just quote the MIGHTY bug report manager’s opinion that either make every medium range missile perform as R77 at close range, or nerf it
Dont specialized RU stuff make the game fair
3 Likes
I don’t know who works in the issue reporting department, but they shouldn’t be there. They just wishful thinking and don’t even try to understand the root of the problem; they just paste a boilerplate response and close the case. Gaijin should conduct a quality control review of the “services” provided by these people.
Without players, there is no game, and the bug reporting department is doing everything it can to alienate players. It’s very sad :(
2 Likes
With that logic r-27er should only pull 24 g as it has a target g load value of only 8 gs.
1 Like
That deserver a new topic but I am sure GAIJIN will lock it soon
1 Like
Any original source which it can pull 30G?
If I know why should I telling you these online?
1 Like
yep, I mean the original source for R77, a PDF mark with reliable title, official document (thats GAIJIN asks)
They do not accept we have A and we can speculate B for Chinese
Also not accept something like image above in Chinese
I memorized that evidence proof the DTC10 APFSDS (IK this off topic, but thats how bug report platform did) has a greater pen than ingame now. The source exactly like the image you’ve send, a maintenace handbook, which is at least seems reliable to me, like yours. But GAIJIN said no the source is not clear
Thats how they treat Chinese equipments, according to that extreme strict they did, you cant make double standard on RU stuff, can you?
1 Like
I am sure that if you find a document/paper/patent by avic themselves about the pl-12 or something they will accept it as that’s what they’ve done for r-77.
The first doc is a patent for the r-77 from vympel
Second doc is the manufacturer of the GCS on R-27 saying it can handle a maximum of 35G for 6 seconds
1 Like