HQ-11's battle rating and launch system

As things currently stand, at the battle rating of 12.7 in the test server, the HQ-11, as a non-separated, independent air defense vehicle, is clearly not up to standard. The following is a brief explanation:

Firstly, non-separated air defense systems at the same battle rating either possess the capability to launch both radar-guided and infrared-guided missiles simultaneously—for example, the SPYDER, which can launch both Derby and Python-5 missiles. This grants it at least some missile interception capability while also maintaining lethality against helicopters lacking advanced DIRCM countermeasures.

Moreover, at the same battle rating, there are even air defense systems that possess both infrared and radar launch capabilities while also being separated. For instance, the upcoming American NASAMS can launch both AMRAAM-ER and AIM-9X Block2 missiles and features a separated design.

Under these circumstances, an air defense system with only eight missiles, capable of launching only radar-guided missiles, and whose FM-3000 performance is not particularly outstanding, rightfully deserves some of the features it should have. I personally offer the following two recommendations:

First, keep the vehicle as it is but move its battle rating from 12.7 down to 12.3. This approach is simple and straightforward.

Second, maintain its current battle rating of 12.7 but equip it with one or two CIWS units (as shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3). This would mean that the missile launch vehicle, which already has radar, remains a single unit—if it is destroyed, the entire system would still be disabled. However, this would increase its ammunition capacity to a level appropriate for its battle rating, achieving true balance.

These are the suggestions I am putting forward, and I hope the development team will consider adopting them.



2 Likes

HQ-11 has better trajectory for its missile than SPYDER which launches its missiles vertically making it not good at shooting close targets (2km). this does effect both IR and radar missiles.

it is rare to see such good interception
PS: i watched the NASAM video, your chinese model has much better energy compared to NASAMs AMRAM_ER

Gaijin previously promised that each faction would have its own separate air defense units. Giving HQ11 the LD300 or TEL vehicles, rather than creating new separate air defense units, would be more beneficial for everyone

3 Likes

I mean it would still be the same but now a multi vehicle system.

Amraam er imhas amraam in the name which means gaining gimps it

It should get the ciws

This is exactly the arrogance of the Slavs. Multiple pieces of evidence have already shown that HQ11 has two systems operating simultaneously, yet it is still categorized as having insufficient information. They don’t believe there are any issues with what they’ve created; instead, they just ask you to provide suggestions rather than actually fixing the problems.

1 Like


Meanwhile, under the topic of HQ11, it is clearly stated that the ISSUE system is the fastest way to report production-related problems.

1 Like

Yes, it performs better than the AMRAAM-ER in terms of thrust characteristics, energy retention, and speed.
However, NASAMS consists of two launch platforms and one radar search platform. If any one launch platform is destroyed, the system can still operate. Additionally, NASAMS has a maximum loadout of 12 missiles, which can be a mix of AMRAAM-ER and AIM-9X Block2 missiles. It can carry missiles like the AIM-9X Block2 to deal with low-altitude, close-in threats.
In comparison, apart from having slightly better energy characteristics, the HQ-11 is incapable in almost every other aspect—especially against low-altitude, fast-moving threats. It carries fewer missiles, and if the launch vehicle is destroyed, you are completely out of the game with no second chance.

1 Like