Hopefully they add the heavy armour as a modification as they did with the Warrior.
I’d like to have the option for a lighter, faster playstyle
British IFVs are against the ToS
2 Likes
and it wouldnt hurt to go the route of the PUMA anyway, and have one without at 10.3 and another with at whatever BR they decide the Javelin needs to be at, though why I cant think of any reason why it needs to be higher than 11.0
I think the debate then becomes,
1- how powerful will the javelin be? equal to, worse than or better than Spike? and
2- how many javelins can it store as reloads? Is it one and done? 2? 3?
Its unlikely we will see a javelin version IMO without that information ((which sucks.))
Yeah, but even one at 10.3 without would put us in far better standing than we are currently. Especially if coupled with a Warrior VERDI II
1 Like
we just all in all, need more warrior variants honestly, and the warrior needs a rework to fix some of the modelling issues and missing things with it. The rear door for example, should be opened by a large hydraulic ram under the right side passenger seats. Pretty sure that could stop something with the size of it. It doesnt have its turret basket or spawl liner. Half the stuff in the turret is missing. As said before, the towing eye and right side FPE cover is missing, and a bolt is sticking up by the driver hatch… It just needs some heavy going over, so maybe it’ll be usable in like 6 years.
1 Like
Well, also in my opinion, missiles like the Spike, as modeled in the game, are quite disappointing. I can’t say whether normal missiles like the TOW, HOT, or 9M123 work better.
1 Like
yeah exactly, so the javelin being F&F, and the experience we have seen with other F&F missiles, theres hopes it would be better.
TOW only works half the time in my experience
the average TOW missile coming out of its launcher be like
I have less issues with TOW2A’s than other missiles though tbh. But my fave missile to use, control wise, is weirdly the Milan, or the funky south african one.
3 Likes
Phew, knowing the developers, they’ll just copy and paste the spike and that’s it. And of course, they won’t correct the elevation and dive the missile makes to hit the roof of the vehicles.
1 Like
Agggg god, I had a bad time with the Milan. It has a huge delay from the moment you move the sight and the missile moves, making it difficult to hit anything that moves even a little. Now I’m using the British Striker, and even if a tree leaf passes in front of the sight, the missile falls to the ground instead of going where you aimed.
One question I have: is it possible that laser-guided ATGMs are affected by normal IR lights? I know that the IR lights on the T-90 or AMX30 Brenus are used to deflect missiles, but it has happened to me many times: I fire a missile at a T-55 or M48 and, as it almost reaches the target, the missile suddenly deviates to the side and falls to the ground.
2 Likes
I do hope when they add the Ajax that the Heavy/PSO armour is a modification like the Warrior at 8.3 be nice to either have better side protection or be slightly faster tbh…
1 Like
I also hope they dont just add the old apfsds but also add the new longer apfsds for the CTA40
Also hopefully this goes through
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/P5jcqhUa4c29
2 Likes
It won’t, it would require a remodel, which requires money. Only hope we have is submitting loads of model inaccuracies and hoping there are enough to warrant gaijin buying a new model
AFAIK there should be 3 configurations for the Ajax armour wise. Basic, MCO and PSO.
Going by the description of the MCO variant as stated by General Dynamics, it has additional armour on it against “medium calibre cannon and ATGM threats”, then on top of that theres the PSO which adds cage armour on top of that, but the version of the Ajax we have seen has none of this additional armour, which leads me to believe that there are 3 variants.
As seen here, the MCO is described as having armour to protect against medium calibre cannon rounds meaning it cant be the variant with no side protection.
This being the basic config for Ajax (those side panels are not protective are are in-fact stowage and access for maintenance afaik. theres a video of them open with equipment and wires etc behind them.)
This being the MCO variant
Then a final configuration we haven’t seen yet, being the PSO which would add cage armour on-top of the MCO
Either way, it would be nice to see all 3 variants of the armour added into the game.
5 Likes
No, there are 2 configurations, PSO at the bottom, and MCO top, MCO standing for mobile combat operations.
It’s hard to believe that. (also the document says MCO stands for Major Combat Operations)
There’s is no way that this, is going to stop any form of Cannon round or ATGM; so it cant be MCO, going by that official document. Which means that this is a different configuration that isn’t MCO. Meaning that its a 3rd configuration. so there’s is whatever this is, MCO and then PSO.