And again - it’s not necessary for the game. Let me remind you that none of the Yak-141s were “service ready”. As far as I know, none of the 292s were ready. It didn’t even have an autoloader IRL. We have too much in the game that wasn’t “service ready”. So, why shouldn’t SEPv2 come with Trophу?
We literally have CV9040 BILL which was such a unfinished project that the ATGM operator sat in the troop compartment and controlled from there.
Goodness gracious man
Operational? That is a picture of a working vehicle. Gaijin doesn’t need anymore. They usually need less. Half the vehicles at top tier are some weird mishmash of upgrades and other vehicles.
Just please stop yapping my man, it’s never that serious 😭😭
Have you ever seen a pilot of these planes in a Helmet-mounted display? I spent a long time looking for a video of someone flying in these helmets, but they all wear regular helmets from the 1970s. Even Gaijin didn’t make a model of this helmet for pilots.
It’s not necessary for the game to have a vehicle that’s functional and operational? If the Cheonma 2 was found to have no armor today and Gaijin added it tomorrow with 700mm of frontal KE protection, in what way would it be a tangible thing to balance?
It’s more than necessary for a game that derives all information about its combat vehicles from the vehicles themselves.
If a combat vehicle isn’t fit for combat, what does it make it? It’s about as far-out as calling for the IPM1 to receive Trophy because the M1A2 did.
Once again with people deflecting from the conversation… I couldn’t care less about the Yak-141, for the 6th time now in this thread, I would be more than happy if those vehicles were removed and replaced with more in-depth variants of existing vehicles. I would rather have a MiG-29 9-12 ISRP directly under a 9-13 with functional EW, maybe a 9-18 with 27ER capability, the current 9-19 with the current systems it has now, and many more over the Yak-141.
I hate it as much as the idea of a Convair 200 being introduced. Don’t bring it up again as an attempt to redirect the topic.
It passed field trials and was discontinued in development due to diminishing returns in cost to effectiveness. There were plenty of other 152mm premises that were on the shelf for later development, and with the breakup of the Soviet Union and the loss of Kazakhstan and Ukraine, Russia no longer had monetary support for 1-off modifications to proprietary MBTs.
IT (the one and only) was a functional tank. It drove, it fired, it fielded functional armor arrays that had been battle proven on other platforms, and it even had supplemental ammunition developed specifically for it.
Much like the 2S38 (that somebody tried arguing not even an hour ago), it’s a functional weapon. Using the SEPv2 to argue for the SEPv3 receiving Trophy is as erroneous as using the Object 292 to argue for 152mm version of the T-64.
You hurt your what?
Who loaded it, the Driver? I bet he also had a hydraulic impact that he would use to unbolt the firewall and hand-load the charges himself.
Add SEPv2 with trophy, I’m all for it. Give its ARAT-II armor package modularity and the ability to be taken off, add M829A3 while you’re at it and start work on legitimate peer vehicles like the T-72B2 and 2A6M-A2.
I’m not arguing for the SEPv2 to not get trophy, I’m arguing the efficacy of the SEPv3 receiving trophy.
If it shot, drove, and was able to effectively target its weaponry, I’m all for it. I would rather have the CV90 Mk.4 with dynamic target selection and in-flight correction via fiber-optic line, but both is better than one or the other.
It’s a picture of a working SEPv2, not a working SEPv3. Maybe remind yourself of the topic and come back when you know where you are.
Gaijin would need a picture of a SEPv3. What was provided is as far as can be from such.
At least get the correct vehicle before trying to make an argument on its basis.
Another pristine attempt to misdirect.
I don’t care about the dozens of other frankenstein’s vehicles. I’ve given an in-depth list of T-80 variants and differences and what their specific selling points may be about a year and a half ago, though apparently everybody seems to erroneously claim on my behalf that I support these disgusting amalgamations of subtractive mixing.
It was developed. But it was not installed.
bvv_d said that such weapons will not be introduced. But, considering that many things changed later…
:I
As far as I know it was both designed and installed, being one of the few requirements to pass trials.
Do you have anything saying it wasn’t on there? Would be pretty disappointing if it wasn’t.
bvv_d typically says short and direct answers that pertain to the current situation of the game. I’d imagine sometime later when the dev team works on their weaponry mechanics it may become usable, somewhat like the tank/drone interchangeability and recent PiP introduced. I had personally never thought of something like that being usable in game when even back in 2020-2021 the performance of missiles was going downhill fast.
One person seemed to be communicating with the museum workers or something like that. I might find it later.
Yes, but this is not a Russian pilot or even a USSR pilot, and I found this photo on Facebook, it says that this is a rare shot of a pilot in a helmet-mounted system during testing.
You’re right, Indian. Pretty obvious by the green helmet, but you didn’t ask for the HMCS to be shown on a native Russian-borne individual serving explicitly in the RUAF or even a WP nation.
You asked for “a pilot of these planes in a Helmet-mounted display”. That’s exactly what the picture shows.
It’s an Indian page referring to an Indian pilot. You can even find them in Vietnamese service.
That would be perfect man, thanks.