I’m not sure I agree with you mate - but you’re welcome to your opinion.
With the crap about 'Spall Liners, the Economy and now this Gaijin is not standing on a pillar of integrity atm.
I also understand they still have devs etc in Russia but the Russian side of the business is managed separately.
My man, yes they are (zoomed in for mobile users):
Stinger
Mistral
Igla
Notice how all of these have PID constants and that the Igla is only using a P controller (setting the I and D constants to 0), otherwise known as Bang-Bang.
Btw before you come at me, all of these files were last updated only three weeks ago (2.31.1.63 for Stinger, 2.32.0.26 for Mistral, and 2.32.0.23 for Igla).
The only issue there. Is that those NATO tanks, like the challenger 2, that just got spall liners have been in the game for 2 years and have been struggling without them. Massive improvement to their performance.
But they are only added when the soviets got their first spall liner equipped tank. The timing is just… Concerning
thanks for the correction ;)
i was trying to focus on the 25G figure since it’s the one mentionned in the article and i wanted to avoid any confusion
but yeah the current brochure indeed states 30G for mistral 3
APHEBC to be exact
Now I wonder…
If someone edited Mistral and Stinger code to IRL spec, how would it perform in game?
I mean good stats show that you know what you are doing and what you are talking about, so it does say something about how seriously we should take someone’s opinion.
Now I will give you that 5 games isn’t enough to say that. Although I already had a 1+ K/D in my PSO within 10 games, and rhat thing is pretty close in capabilities to the M1A2 SEP.
The latter 3 are pretty much the same anyway so I guess it did happen like you said here.
What he means is that the tanks that has spall liners IRL have been in the game for many years without any plan to add spall liners during that time. They only added spall liners to all those tanks when the first Russian tank that has them was added.
This looks (to an onlooker) like they ignored the lack of spall liners for NATO tanks until it was an issue for a Russian tank, and only then added them to the game for all tanks that had them. Even though it might not be the case (we don’t factually know), this makes it very much look like they care more for the functions on Russian tanks than others and only adding things to the game when a Russian tank need it.
It is not about the addition of spall liners on different timelines, its about tanks that had them IRL being in the game for years without them and only getting them when a Russian tank was added that also has them IRL. It just seems odd to not implement it at the stage two years ago (i’m not sure about the timeframe) when the first tank that had them IRL was added to the game.
When Gaijin excusers say an outrageous claim to make Gaijin seem reasonable to only be shown that Gaijin has already done said thing they thought would show Russian Bias: oop
Those are correct calculations lol.
The same average overload is written for all missiles. Otherwise Igla would have 16g. What’s the difference?
The difference is that the peak overload of the igla is 10g’s, and they gave it the peak overload and not the average.
Mercedes has four wheels and so is Lada, hence they are the same car. Well played…
Are you blind, Igla’s docs say it’s available overload, not max
You’re wrong and here’s the technical document to prove it.
Располагаемые = available, not max
I’ve translated the data from the document for you. Actually all missiles have average overload in the maximum column.
But there is no bias. If the stinger has 20, the formula and igla has 16.
Thats not the point. The point is they’re are denying the documented g’s because then you translate the mistral and stringer data on the igla missile system, they cant reach the same numbers, which is stupid to say the least. They are different missiles, different technology, different guidance. The igla is a early early stinger ripoff, and had upgraded a lot compared to the igla when we compare the version we have in game
That might be true, but the way they COULD be implemented is not really that hard (in terms of programming). its MUCH harder to get accurate flight models for aircraft because there are so many factors affecting it (air density, speed, angle, thrust, lift of specific area of wings), all of them affecting each other and interacting (and they have managed that very well).
spall liners CAN be as easy as “if projectile hits this object (spall liner), decrease amount of fragments and change cone size to smaller, otherwise proceed as normal” (literally just an “if/else” statement in programming if you know what that is). They could have, without any big issues, added a rudimentary version years back. What they have now is obviously way more accurately modeled but it didn’t need to be back then, they could have updated the rudimentary version when the better simulation-model was completed this year.
The T-90M was put in service in 2016. it should not have come to the game earlier than this.
The Leopard 2A7 was put in service 2014. (Edit: V version 2019)
The Abrams SEPv2 was put in service 2007.
The 122B+ is a concept vehicle from 2011 that was never built.
The VT-4A1 pas put into service 2016 (but was unveiled and put up for export sale (i.e done) in 2012)
So the T-90M comes at the same time as other tanks from the same time period.
Previous top vehicles (before this major update) by year put in service:
M1A2 sep: 2007
Leopard 2 PSO: 2006 (demonstrator)
T-80BVM: 2017 (Newer than i thought)
T-72B3: 2010-2011
Challenger 2E: late 1990’s
Black knight: 2018 (also newer than i thought)
TKX: 2010
Type 10: 2010
WZ1001(E) LCT: prototype for ZTZ99A
ZTZ99A: 2011
Ariette/Ariette PSO: 1995/2003
Leclerc SXXI:2003
Strv 122B: 2003
Leopard 2A6: 2007
Merkava Mk.4M: 2011
So the Year of service has been consistent (mostly) with release in War Thunder. the only two outliers are the Black knight and the T-80BVM being much newer than every other tank in the game at that time.
That’s the thing, so many other tanks that IRL has spall liners has been in the game for years. but spall liners did not come when they were released. Had they released spall liners earlier (like 6 months ago or something) almost no one would complain, its just the timing of doing it at the same time as adding the T-90M that seems odd.
To add to that the T-90M was the first on the dev-server to have the feature, meaning that they prioritized it when doing implementation, it was literally their first vehicle to have it modeled (even if they then released all of them with finished spall liners on live server) which very much makes it seem like favouritism.
Edit:
this is also not true, world of tanks has had them for many many years.
Steel beasts has had them for decades! (yes decades, they are mentioned in their manual from 2001)
