Sufficient evidence, time for you to pull out the measuring tape a
GNSS Kh-38 on a Ka-52 would be fun
And the unclassified manual of Falkland Island Mk.1… (jk) = )
imo the Hermes-A would be more fun, may not be fire and forget but that’s 20km of range, 1000 m/s with IOG, DL and it carried 28kg of explosives
1 Like
That would be fun as well, someone should create a suggestion for it.
We dont plan this on the current version for the time being. Its suited to its BR currently and this would be a big performance boost.
1 Like
lmao thats so funny
I noticed that some of the Cromwells seem to have had their speed governers removed, do you know if this would potentially mean the devs are open to also doing the same for the Comet/Charioteer etc… ?
thanks :)
That is about as good as I can get at this time:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/sEnxzbGLwAdE
That’s fair enough ngl.
Can we get the datalinked Stingers though?
Um… no. It’s modeled as AIM-120C-5.
Not sure what you’re expecting from C-5 other than a range increase and higher gimble limits for its seeker in the context of War Thunder. Dual-plane maneuverability? Though I’ve only seen the claims, not the evidence. Especially when dual-plane isn’t possible in War Thunder currently…
Your statements on Harriers are appreciated though.
Even if SHar is an amazing 13.0 despite being mixed in with OP 13.0s like Su-27, F-15A/C/J, Su-33… due to compression at 13.0.
That would sadly nerf the map. Cause the game is limited to 130x130, so you’d end up just reducing available water area for the map.
1 Like
Yes like how can you not know it’s smaller than irl lmao, you don’t need evidence it just is.
As I said to Morvron, it being scaled-down in-game is a buff for the map itself.
Scaling it up would reduce water area as a whole, and you’d only get to see 1/3rd of the islands at best.
Though if and when the game is updated to support a larger area, then it’d be cool for Falklands to be among the first 250x250 maps.
so, the Sniper is reserved for the F-2 for now? I hope just for now. Btw the AMRAAM should be smokeless too. Also, why does the “C-7” have the max speed of the AIM-9X. One is rated for Mach 4+ and the other for Mach 2.5
4 Likes
As far as I am aware. Aim-120C5s also had 40G pull and 0 guidance delay. Whilst yes, I havent seen primary sources for this, there are plenty of secondary sources i’ve seen posted about the forums to suggest this.
This alone would be quite a major buff over the Aim-120B.
Also the range buff doesnt seem enough. An extra 5 seconds of motor time, should be quite a sunstantial short range buff in terms of speed and increase range by 30-40% based upon some things i’ve seen.
If the 40G is from dual-plane then we could at least get the 0 guidance delay.
Eh… Fix BOL and I might agree. But at the moment, its pretty sad. Hard to justify it being higher than the F-14A imo.
Arguably we should ahve maps larger than 130km squared anyway.
But whilst it would reduce the amount of water, it would increase the landmass and that would open it up to be a viable ASB map. Something we’ve not gotten in over 2.5 years.
3 Likes
and from lack of answers from gaijin about asb, im gonna assume the number is just gonna get bigger
Sadly yes
Stupid decision though, even if not adding for all aircraft some should still get it like the Harrier GR7 or the A-10C, maybe even the Tornado GR4 too.
5 Likes
The game can’t really handle dynamic gun limits, so they pick the lesser of two evils when modelling stuff that enters that territory, either not making cosmetic things move, or letting the player shoot through non-cosmetic things. For example with the CTWV RCV the player can shoot through the CITV mast. With the T86 the snorkel/exhaust is purely cosmetic, so the “best” solution in this case is just not extending it.
They also broke aim9x high off bore shots. they did something with the PID guidance which cooked it.
1 Like