Bait used to be believable.
1 Like
Best comment of the night XD
1 Like
Yet you fail to mention that the stealth bomber in question is the Nighthawk, which is notoriously lacking in all areas other than it’s stealth (which is a gimmick at best)
You can still see the thing visually and you’ll be able to guide your missiles with SACLOS or optical contrast. Meanwhile said stealth bomber has a lackluster payload, no countermeasures, no air-to-air weapons, is subsonic and even lacks tracking camera mode for it’s laser guided weapons
A legendary aircraft for IRL strategic bombing conditions, a very flawed one for WT gameplay.
2 Likes
don’t know if people told you already but the backlash from an AMRAAM viggen being Premium lead to a statement by Smin saying that there’ll be an AMRAAM carrying JA-37Di in the tech tree too, foldered with the current castrated JA-37D
1 Like
not for mentioning no, they’ll ban you for sharing the proof
1 Like
Thx, i missed that.
And nowadays you’re supposed to say “BR optimised”. Otherwise the castrated jets feel offended.
only reason the Dutch F-16 and NF-5A aren’t in game is that their scalpels weren’t sharp enough
1 Like
You can ask for Yamato before Bismarck, but think asking for a more resonable ASEAN placement that most of the community agree with is too much?
Gaijin even cancelled the SG Leopard for China this update, chances are they have started to reason.
Is this just bait? Sure sounds like it…
I wouldn’t go that far. Pure top tier, air is great, but then you look at the emptyness that is anything from rank 5 onwards and the near complete lack of CAS. For gound its a similar story, fast reloads suit the meta, but the tree has a lot of holes and lacking capabilities.
There’s just a lot of gaps that can’t be filled with any domestic options and just generally not as many options for the future as most other nations.
Gameplay wise it’s probably somewhat fine right now, about average when considering other minor nations at least. The real issue is the future of the tree, when in many regards they either need to wait a really long time for the next thing, can’t follow at all or Gaijin is forced to do more F-16AJ like situations…
Still, the fix for that is an ASEAN subtree, not ruining naval balance even more than it already is.
The ARH missile has 14km range. While it is the same missile, that only means the current one underperforms.
Though with the optical seeker that doesn’t matter as much, since lock range is still limited anyways.
Unrelated to that guys questionable takes, Thailand did. But it’s a stationary, self contained ADATS box. It also has no mounted radar, so even if you put it on some truck it wouldn’t be better than what Japan already has.
Yamato won’t fix Japan ground either. The only way to get a wave of additions to fix multiple gaps and futureproof the tree is a subtree, the one thing you conveniently disregard in favor of absolutely insane ideas like this…
9 Likes
Both have some of the worst survivability in game
Comparing the survivability between the Challenger 3 (TD) and Arietes is genuinely ridiculous, even without the spall liners the TD tanks things significantly more than the Arietes.
The ammunition layout of the Arietes mean if you get shot from the front left side guarantees a crew knockout and right a ammunition detonation almost guaranteeing a kill no matter where you shoot.
The slightly better mobility
You say this as if the mobility can actually put you in a positive position in the Arietes, you are NOT flanking anyone and most of the time you arrive to a location the same time and if not slower than your opponents.
I’m not sure why British mains have this dilemma that they have one of the worst nations in-game which is entirely untrue - the Black Night which is my main British high tier MBT is a genuine monster and especially at long ranges being nearly immune to darts.
turret cheeks
You continue to ignore the fact that the entire armour profile of the Arietes is a weakspot within itself, you don’t have the option to brawl in it, you can’t snipe and you can’t flank as 90% of tanks in-game just do it better all whilst being more mobile (besides the 122s and 2A7s).
The upper front plate on the Challengers have absorbed many shots from Russian vehicles in the past from my experience due to the poor pen of the shell but for the Arietes on the other hand you got trusty spaced armour.
2 Likes
just changes in self destruct range in game, and triggers rwr. No change in rockets I think, and it’s rockets can’t provide enough effective mobilable range. The IR version in game can be avoided in 8km easily by just pulling.
So it will be even harder for it to shoot something down if it triggers rwr, but ARH could be a effective way to shoot down Helis
Yes, there is no change to the missile body.
But the effective range of the missile is 14km, the in game missiles underperform since they are modelled around the seeker range of the lightwave seeker instead of the range of the ARH missile they are based on.
3 Likes
Sees 450 notifications, confused as dev is down and update is pretty much fully known. Some troll has been arguing for 5+ hours, why was I expecting more…
Can people learn to just ignore this…
Also were the mods asleep, because there is no way adding Yamato and Japan’s state in the game is related to R&R
still too far, it’s only for helis. effective range for it is only about 7km, even Pantsir can’t hit a pulling Tornado 12km away if it’s aware of the missile.
though the anti-heli ability provided by ARH is a needed buff
*an incompetent pantsir
granted most pantsir players still use 3 point guidance, which is probably why. until gaijin fixes the fact it tempts to hit behind the target that way this will keep happening
I said I dont think asean is going to japan not that is unreasonable.
Yes very aware that the arh has that range it still has the problem the type 81 c has to eyeball it and you really cant expect to hit things so far because you simply cant see them with type 81 c which has a radar trailer has been crippled in game. And with more faster jets and now stealth the type 81 c is being to show it flaws alot more
And america only had two test beds of the adats and i think a few more ore less of the NON-native roland anti air the xm975 so again this isnt a reasonable argument against giving the adats to japan. Neither is the type 81 c pefroms better NO it doesnt it performs at best situational and just dumb luck or reliant on air players flying stupidtly
My argumentr for the yamato wasnt that it would fix ground for japan. But sort of do for japan what gaijin has done for air for america and ground russia and germany. Make it incredible domainte and break the meta. There is a reason so few japanese mains player consitent at top tier
You say that being one yourself it seems
No japans state in the game is precisely because devs have ignored japan and reasonable things to be added that japan does have.
You keep saying this, but do we actually know if it was actually their plan for this exact update? Our Baidu friend was confused about the whole Singapore deal.
Japan, to be fair, is not much more reasonable than China is. It is not like Japan needs entire ASEAN region or that it would help the tree, either. It just gives them more toys to play with, and predominantly at top tier. It is understandable that y’all (generally) want to have Leopards, T-84’s, Su-30’s, Rafales, Gripens, and Singapore’s F-16/F-15’s in one tree, who wouldn’t, but stop pretending that plastering stuff from entire SEA region into Japanese TT is necessary to fix problems/fill ‘gaps’ you claim exists. As only standing problem I see is the lack of CAS. Which a single nation, Thailand, can solve.
2 Likes
id argue china doesnt lack anything to add, japan does. tech tree wise it would make more sense to add them to japan but im not gonna mix myself into this discussion
1 Like