oops translated already, understandable
Yeah… The old switcharoo.
At least the fact we got Centurion instead of King George V is a good sign though
@Smin1080p_WT can you remember when air rb games went from 1 hour to 25 mins i cant find it in any change logs i have narrowed it down to late 2020 but cant find it
if anyone else has evidence of when it happend it would be nice to know
Is there no perceived issue to turn around refute MMW guidance wholesale when IR/MMW band smoke formulations are known to be possible on the basis of documentation for the Brimstone when it should have a much easier time dealing with the Longbow seeker, as they use fundamentally different frequencies and methodologies.
~~
Shouldn’t the should be individually considered, instead of on the basis of a 2nd generation system if they were to be individually modeled.
Further, as to response provided
Why does a specific formulation need to exist for each nation, could it not be made a universal feature as a “gaming convention”, it wouldn’t be the first or last time such efforts are made in relation to missiles, and the effectiveness of their seekers.
US Designed Electro Optical seekers should not be able to lock onto the ground
“Seekers like these can track optically contrast objects. As it is not possible to implement true contrast edge tracking in the game we allow seekers to lock on any point on the ground. So any point on the ground is considered contrast object.”
Therefore, this issue is considered resolved
Its good enough that an RWR only reaches into a given band to it to be conferred “extra” bandwidth for detecting emissions wholesale at the moment. Which of course is mostly due to a lack of sufficiently detailed bandwidth information for the majority of relevant systems
As to concerns with the performance of LOAL as raised could simply be treated like MITL guidance and just not implemented as with other PGMs.
AJ 168 Martel - Guidance Method
“Close the report based on the developers answer:
Man-in-loop mode will not be added. Self-guidance within the game is a gaming convention, not an error.”
7 Likes
Guess y’all should’ve been more specific about which KGV y’all wanted XD
We were
I don’t get it.
Is that bad?
Neat, Buccaneer and Tonka getting Sea Eagles aswell.
-
Buccaneer S. Mk. 2B:
- new loadout(s): 4x Sea Eagle
-
Tornado G.R. Mk. 1:
- new loadout(s): 4x Sea Eagle
2 Likes
Yep, Thank god. Would have been frustrating as hell to lock it behind the Hawk for the sake of it.
SHars are due to get them Soon™
Just need them to add Sea Eagles now, not the wierd Penguins they are at the moment
1 Like
@Smin1080p_WT Hi I don’t understand why, since it’s a different tree, Italy can’t have the Kormoran on the Tornado. The German Navy’s Tornado isn’t in competition with an Italian IDS in terms of market, sales, or anything like that.
2 Likes
They can do this but Exocet and Harpoon get to rot away in the files still.
also this goes against their whole statement of “we are adding “x” asm to “x” because “x” doesn’t have many other options for air to ground” as Neither the Tonka or Bucc are really bad off for guided air to suface weapons so…
Again why cant they add Harpoon or Exocet to the airframes that carried them?
2 Likes
Yeah, gatekeeping AS-34 now is really really dumb.
Especially when its the same aircraft… So no meaningful work needed
2 Likes
Now that we are seeing ASM’s not being locked behind a single aircraft it would be neat if the Kormoran could be added to more than just the IDS MFG too.
It’s been in the game for almost 3 years now and we still don’t have it on other Tornado’s and the F-104G. Granted for like 2 full years they just didn’t work but still.
2 Likes
Add this to the list as well. Gatekeeping weapons on event and premium vehicles is incredibly annoying.
Skipper and KH-66 are two other examples of this.
2 Likes
What are anti-ship missiles even used for? ai targets on the few maps they exist have absurd damage control and they give you little rewards and have zero influence on the match. Gaijin just loves to add stuff without even putting in minimal effort into making them usable and fun…
Air Sim has had proper naval objectives for years and it would be tirival to add more naval targets to many ARB maps. Though their reward does need a boost
As for damage. Sea Eagle seems to do okay, sinking destroyers in 2 hits in test flight on the dev server (assuming that doesnt change) the issue is more where they hit, though they should disable flooding repairs for AI ships hit by ASMs
2 Likes
Air sim should be getting more attention
1 Like
Yeah… officially been 3 years since we got a new map
1 Like