Yeah ive been waiting for 4 months for something new, at least give us the 9K330 Tor-M1 from Cyprus
I fully agree, or they should just start by giving us the I-DERBY ER now that russia is getting a missle that can almost go Mach 5 and can pull 75G’S
2 Likes
Day 1097 of waiting for Polish tech tree
1 Like
they can add each one and they will still butcher them
1 Like
yea it’s insanne they still are getting a new SPAA (at top tier) , when other’s are more i need …
like those are all the gap’s that exist that in my opinion need to be fixed , and yet no new stuff there.
USA
need ta new spaa
maybe yes maybe no
maybe yes maybe no
germany
maybe yes maybe no
russia (low tier, no need at high)
maybe yes maybe no
UK
need a new AA
maybe yes maybe no
japan
maybe yes maybe no
maybe yes maybe no
need a new one
china
need a new one
maybe yes maybe no
italy
need a new one
France
need a new one
need a new one
Swedeen
need a new one
need a new one
Israel
need a new one
11 Likes
Hey @Smin1080p_WT
Back in July 2024 when modern Fox-3s were added to the game, we had a major rebalance occur where all missiles received updated autopilots and drag coefficients. Here is the changelog for it.
In this old round of changes, the AIM-120A/B lost a large amount of its ability to pull Gs quickly, making it less effective at close range in order to make it better at long range. This eventually bled over to the AIM-120C-5 and now potentially the AIM-120D.
In light of this, I am lead to ask a few questions:
-
Do the devs feel the AIM-120 is performing how it should be?
-
If they feel the AIM-120 platform is performing how it should be, what is the justification? Do they have any historical sources, or is this purely based on balance?
-
If it is based on balance, and not historical sources, would the devs be willing to reconsider the current implementation of the AIM-120 family?
-
If it is based on historical sources, and assuming they can be discussed openly, what are the dev’s findings for the AIM-120’s performance? We have various bug reports (Report #1, Report #2) that display the AIM-120B’s ability to hit maneuvering targets in a variety of conditions, so I’m wondering if those have been factored in at all.
Please note I’m not coming in to argue, I’d just like some clarification if at all possible. Thanks in advance.
25 Likes
Oxy confirmed it will be a low tier vehicle, so I suspect something Rank IV or lower
Feels actively deliberate at this point. Some nations they just refuse to give decent SPAA options at particular BRs, e.g. Not moving the Falcon down to give a 7.0-8.0 SPAA, instead giving it a radar and leaving it at the same BR as another radar SPAAG.
UK 10.3 -> 11.3 SAMs
They mostly just need to give the Stormer it’s LMMs already, it’s main issue is no proxy, so uh give it the service used proxy missile?!?!
Type 93 -> Type 81 (C) gap
Just add the Indonesian RapidRanger at 10.0 already aaaaa
AMX-10P -> AMX-30 DCA gap
It’s not like there isn’t options too (AMX 13 DCA prototype without radar, VAB/TA-20, and more)
1 Like
Nah not copy paste, gaijin does not have the money to pay for 3rd party model. Coz you know gaijin is indie developer
true.
and its not like they dont have ideas to any spaas they can add, they have a whole suggestion page for each with all of the relevant info for every nation.
im waiting for a vehicle like the japanese type 93 to come in 9.3-9.7 for us tech tree. we have humvee assets already and other nations get stingers but … ah well…
1 Like
I only wish for its digital HMD and wide HUD…they could even keep the same PL12…gaijin having problems modeling those Chinese top tier…
I’ll be focusing on the Hungarian stuff mainly especially the domestic stuff
4 Likes
Honestly sort of depends if it has 48cm or not.
Hello
All missile performance in game is based on source material. Nothing is “buffed” or “nerfed” on the whims of balance. Its a case of source material showing clearly something can do X or Y.
Regarding open reports, so long as the matter is still open, that means it has not yet been rejected by the devs. Usually this is down to 2 main reasons: 1) The source material is trying to be confirmed (assuming it conflicts with what is already known and understood) or 2) it is scheduled for a wider rework of the missile(s) in terms of physics, performance or a general updating of missiles across the board (such as the above mentioned drag rework for context).
9 Likes
Cough Brimstone Cough
21 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT while you are here could you forward this?
Seeing as we get now another Tank with this gun
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/mTcQL9rjtGow
2 Likes
probably going to see this in a MatAWG video
3 Likes
Is there any way the devs can share information on this? What source material do they have that shows that AIM-120s perform the way they do in game?
At least from an outsider perspective it would seem that AIM-120s have a similar form factor to say the AAM-4 and PL-12, both of which are capable of pulling a fair amount of Gs in HOBS situations. Yes, they have smaller fins, so it would still be worse. But I question why the difference is THIS dramatic.
1 Like
How do you explain the Kh-38? What sources indicate that the R-77-1 twin pylon can be used on aircraft other than the Su-35?
Addendum: kh38MT, not ML
1 Like