this could be too powerful, super bvr plane with super bvr missile.
no problem with fa-18, it’s compensation for poor flight performance
1 Like
Germany have the F/A-18C and Japan have the F-2 ADTW
Oh really? I didn’t see that at all, do you have a link for that?
The AIM-120 C5 has to be a joke right? Over double the range and 40s more guidance time?
Gaijin doesn’t seem to understand that any armor can be penetrated with enough speed — whether it’s a ballistic vest or ship armor. I thought that was common knowledge. For example, in the USN empirical formula, velocity is raised to the power of 1.1, while mass is only raised to 0.55.
Compare Okun’s calculations to what Gaijin uses — just look at the penetration ratios of the shells they’ve modeled. It’s clear as day.
Figures at 0 meters and 14,600 meters (almost 15,000), all versus British Cemented Armor, for example — and effective pen (shell not broken):
- Yamato: 31.7 and 19.3
- Iowa: 32.8 and 21
- Bismarck: 31.1 and 18.5
- Richelieu: 32.9 and 18.8
- Roma: 31.9 and 20.4
Gaijin’s values (first one for 1000 m):
- Yamato: 870 and 630
- Iowa: 857 and 583
- Bismarck: 708 and 439
- Richelieu: 738 and 491
- Roma: 771 and 513
You get it, right?
I’m not even going to talk about Stalin’s dream ship — there’s no reliable data on its gun, since there was only one and it broke after 80 shots. Overall, it was deliberately overperforming to showcase supposedly incredible results. Just like the rest of the ship, which the Soviets couldn’t have built even without the war, not before 1945. There are published sources on this, but as usual, Gaijin doesn’t care — not when it comes to the Red Nation.
In the end, it’s clear the Germans are nerfed — as usual — in this ‘game’.
Iowa and Yamato obviously have overestimated penetration values. Or, more likely, the 380 mm guns are heavily underrated.
Iowa’s penetration matches what’s in Battleships: United States Battleships 1935–1992, calculated using the USN empirical formula. But using the same formula, Bismarck’s penetration is actually significantly higher.
Double standards, perhaps?
That formula gives more weight to velocity than to shell mass.
Yet in Gaijin’s model, Richelieu — with the same caliber, 10% more shell mass, and 2.5% less velocity — has higher penetration.
According to Okun, close-range penetrations are nearly identical across these calibers, but heavier shells lose velocity more slowly — which makes sense.
So either the penetration values for the 406–460 mm guns are inflated (except for Rodney’s 406 mm for some reason — although SS also show inflated values in the same pattern), or the 380 mm guns are massively underrated — most notably Bismarck’s.
And all these ships will be matched against each other anyway — as we all know, BR 8.7 vs. 8.3 makes no real difference.
Could go well with fixed PL-12 or PL-12A equipped J-11BG
That’s the closest thing to it right?
Thx
Has the F-2 ADTW been shown yet?
not sure, fixed Pl-12 is good but with J-11BG, can also be same problem
i mean, it’s good but maybe not now
just fix J-11B radar and PL-12 should be enough
Oh, okay cool
Is there any other AGM65 changes that is rumored to be coming?
that’s an absolute joke…
Ah, thanks.
13.0 could be a banger
Well this is a better buy than the Germany Premium for sure. The germany one is getting 9Ls which is horrible at 12.7
If its not currently in the update notes, then im afraid I don’t have any news on it for now :(
I don’t think it would be a huge issue, it’s a fair tradeoff on the pure FM and close range performance of Rafales and EFT for better long range performance and detection.
Or they could just bump up to 14.3, benefits game as a whole
1 Like
The Hornet is fine without AIM-9Ms, the Sparrows carry it
1 Like
yeah, together with current UFO Rafale
1 Like