Thank you for all those who voted, this feedback will hopefully be passed to the devs soon.
Also, I’m noticing quite a number of accounts who joined within the last 10 minutes suddenly voting No. I will not attribute this to anything malicious but please don’t try to bot the polls.
well actually the guidance mode of this missile is same as the TY-90. You should change it to a combination of seeker shutoff + gate width if you want to restore it original design purpose
considering it has a ty-90 seekerhead in real life it should get the irccm it gets
It’s very simple: someone posted this poll on Tieba. No one is trying to manipulate the vote, it’s just that they don’t have the habit of reading the forums, and they will jump in when someone posts a message on their own forum saying “need support in XXX vote”.
The general view of the Chinese community is that in most cases, gate width > seeker shutdown. Although shutdown is better for long-range sneak attacks to a certain extent, it is generally believed that it is far inferior to gate width in combat.
BTW I chose to turn off the seeker because my R-27ET was often hit by random flares.
Many Chinese palyers prefer to Gatewidth missile, like me, i just know this vote and ask my friends to vote, we not bot
Ah, this is the information I needed. The influx of new accounts is not what I expected.
the r-27et suffers with gate width with because the fov is still twice as big as things like the r-73 or magic-2
Those who choose gatewidth,tell me how much 6000tan0.75° is？39m!Which can contain 6 f15 in it.You think it’s good for a long-range missile?
The reality is pretty simple they choose that irccm because thats what the Russians use and they like to match Equipment between the two nations, same reason aam3 got tracking suspension irccm.
Currently in the game, the fov of the gatewidth missile will return to its original FoV after the seeker shutdown, which happen on TY-90. Does it also work like this in real life?
Honestly, it’s supposed to have a TY-90-style dual-mode seeker. Forcing us to pick between ‘Gatewidth’ or ‘Shutoff’ just sucks
In fact, I think that an IRCCM type similar to the 9M would be a better choice for the PL-8B.
When is the deadline for voting?
Gatewidth irccm is basically useless when target range is over 2km given the 0.75fov in game, random cm will easily fool the seeker during long-range shots.
Then implement both for the pl-8b, irl it has the ty-90 seeker head.
as long as you know someone is shooting you a AIM-9M countermeasure+change your moving line will always counter the missile
In reality, countermeasures against interference are not achieved through mechanics like ‘Gatewidth’ or Seeker Shutoff.’ The true IRCCM methods are highly classified. This anti-jamming mechanic is merely a gameplay feature created by Gaijin because they cannot authentically replicate real-world IRCCM in the game. It has no connection to reality.
gatewidth suits magic2 and pl5e2 only. R73 and pl8b need shutoff instead.
I kinda prefer the gatewidth IRCCM since the python 3 like kinematics work somewhat for dogfighting.
But it should have what most aligns with what it has IRL since almost if not all of the IRCCM missiles are misrepresented. I have no clue what it should be for the PL-8B though.
make pl8b like the strela-10 missiles