It seems to me that, in that case, the in-game data about the range of this type of ammunition is heavily exaggerated, if we assume that this is only Gaijin’s projectile flight simulation.
- The game displays kinematic range, not tactical engagement range
In War Thunder, the displayed “range” value represents how far the weapon can theoretically fly under ideal ballistic and aerodynamic conditions. It does not represent the real effective guidance or employment range of the weapon.
In reality, for systems like Paveway II and AGM-123, effective engagement range was primarily limited by laser geometry, seeker field of view, and designator performance — not just by flight kinematics.
- Gaijin separates flight physics from seeker logic
WT simulates missile/bomb flight and laser seeker behavior as two separate systems:
one models boost/glide and aerodynamics,
the other applies an artificial laser acquisition scaling model.
As a result, a weapon may be able to physically reach long distances, while being unable to acquire or maintain laser tracking — even though the stat card still shows a large “range” value.
This creates a mismatch between hangar statistics and actual in-game combat performance.
- Real military documentation does not define a single fixed “range number”
For Paveway II-class weapons, there is no single official “seeker lock range” value. Instead, real documentation describes employment envelopes that depend on:
release altitude, attack geometry, designator type and power, atmospheric conditions.
WT reduces all of this into a single static number, which is inherently an oversimplification.
If we accept the current WT model as a simplified simulation, then the “range” values shown for laser-guided weapons are primarily kinematic marketing numbers, not realistic combat-effective engagement ranges.
This is not necessarily a bug, but it is a UI/stat presentation problem, because it implies a level of real-world accuracy that the underlying guidance model does not actually support.
