Stingers with an anti ground mode would be interesting.
Worthless against tanks, but might be decent against non armored vehicles
Where do you get info about resistance to L-DIRCM from that page?
Electro optic frequencies still sounds a bit thin, I think. “Electro-optic frequencies” in all likelihood means something in the NIR spectrum, but it’s not that precise. Doesn’t really mention what sources they used either. Quick search does indicate LDIRCM resistance tests at EOVAF, but something specific to the Stinger would probably be necessary.
The absurd effectiveness of LDIRCM in general seems to be a (somewhat questionable) balancing decision, though, so it probably doesn’t make a difference for now.
1 Like
The Stinger RMP (and Chaparral) as referenced uses the POST seeker, so utilizes IR/UV dual color Rosette imaging methods.
Would the prior excerpt not work?
The important part is to get them to admit to it.
1 Like
It seems unlikely it’d have an impact on the UV channel, that should be well filtered. But they’d probably require a source for a claim like that anyways.
Well, it doesn’t really specify against what CMs they tested the new EOCCM logic.
Fair, but they didn’t respond to the bug reports that some IIR seekers, like on the IRIS-T, shouldn’t be vulnerable to LDIRCM, so they probably won’t to this either. There might be a chance once helicopters get MitL weaponry. Before then any nerf to LDIRCM would render helicopters largely useless, so I can somewhat understand where they’re coming from with this, to be fair.
Ah yes the Western MANPADS incident, a true proof of Gaijin’s way to keep Western tech gimped.
1 Like
All they should need to do is implement the existing Optical Contrast mode for the FIM-92B and later Stingers and MIM-72G, this is detailed in this report;
(Photo)Contrast range extension for POST seeker
Doesn’t matter, CM techniques are generic in game. And besides with reprogrammable software (FIM-92C and later) detection and response to countermeasures can be adjusted as needed once a system is characterized, and be deployed in short order to frontline units as needed.
They should be very much high risk, high reward.
4 Likes
Good luck with that, they really only introduced that to model the Strela’s optical contrast tracking, but so far none of the UV contrast missiles get that functionality modeled. The only others that got it are Type 81C and Type 93, that only get it because Gaijin didn’t want to give them the optical imaging seekers they actually use.
2 Likes
The PPI makes it easy to shoot down moving targets from far distance than using your scope. I’m pretty sure it autoleads.
The 2S6 is versatile and if you are unable to hit a target at 8-10km, you knock out their munitions and force them to play closer.
it comes at the cost of being mounted on a terrible platform. poor gun traverse, and a poor launch method leads it to having one of the worst reaction time. So unless you’re omniscient it’s worse than the 2S6 in almost all aspects except for the niche use case of the target being 10km.
You’re missing the point. If the lavad can be between the Strella and 2S6, I’d be okay with that however it’s not possible with the current BRs we have in game.
By your logic, the british and american ADATS should be a different BR because one is objectively better than the other. What you’re refusing to see is that BR compression exists…
What you don’t seem to understand is that the strella won’t become outclassed by a lavad when it comes to it’s spaa duties. Both would perform similar to each other.
If at 10.7, the 2S6 will outclass in most use cases except for short range which in this BR, should be the last thing you need to worry about.
No, better Stingers will increase it’s overall performance, which is something that matters for BR placement.
Again, very simple concept.
That’s all cool but it doesn’t change the fact it’s missile turns into a slug very quickly and just refuses to turn.
At 8-10km range you’re only hitting targets that are headbutting a missile. At any medium-long range Osa is simply better and by a lot. If they play it close then,yet again, Strela is mogging you.
It’s niche is just sitting in radar screen while clicking on munition contacts. If you’re actually interested in shooting down planes, just take something else.
More like if target is further than 5km away.
And those two shouldn’t be at the same BR, even in the current state of the game.
AA duties are far from the only thing AAs can/will do.
Most of it’s sluggishness comes from human error at distance. with having the auto lead using PPI, you get more efficient use of it’s energy.
Again, you’re only focusing on the missile itself which is just half the picture. Situational awareness and reaction time is extremely crucial, both of which the Strella and OSA are terrible in.
Shooting down munitions is required especially in 10.3+, so I"m not sure why you are downplaying it’s importance. Shooting down planes especially in long distance is pointless considering how easy it is to dodge them.
The OSA can maintain speed and pull, but it can’t pull hard enough which is why it’s easier to dodge. The smoke trail is what allows players to easily outpull it.
You got planes at that BR, and I think there’s quite a few OSA in different TT so I recommend you see how easy it is to dodge them. I do it all the the time in my Su39.
Not really, it’s quite easy to hit targets around 5-8km. the only issue is if the targets gets into cover or block LOS which all spaa struggle with.
Those advantages the US adats has is pointless when it comes to it’s anti air duties hence why they are in the same BR. It doesn’t make sense for an spaa of the same anti air capabilities to be separated because one can kill tanks much “better”. Again it’s a consequence of BR compression.
1 Like
Most of it’s sluggishness comes from it’s incredibly short burn time, making your energy reserves extremely low over any decent distance.
Situational awareness goes both ways when you use your radar to achieve it.
Osa isn’t really a short range AA and Strela definitely has more than enough traverse speed to reach good reaction times.
I’m just saying that not everyone is keen at being a bot that shoots at dumb objects in the sky.
It’s basically your playstyle when you choose to spawn 2S6.
Meanwhile 2S6 can’t maintain neither.
Agree to disagree.
Once again, vehicles are balanced by their overall performance.
So is this why ZSU-57-2 is at 7.0 while it’s equals when it comes to AA capabilities are found at like 3.0 ?
I’m glad that the average forumer isn’t in charge of balancing with all those 1d balancing “ideas” running around.
I’m saying how it’s sluggishness is compounded by human error. Hence why in the PPI, it guides the missile perferctly (no wasted movements), which makes it easy to take out drones at max distance, and planes around the 5-8km.
RWRs are no where near as good as figuring where in the map you are. Radars however, can.
The osa isn’t really a good medium range either because of it’s very poor reaction time. If a plane comes from somewhere you didn’t expect, you’re dead. the Strella’s reaction time is entirely dependent on your mk1 eyeballs and ears, which isn’t particular useful in medium to long range distance.
That’s how top tier is. It’s been like this for years. the majority saclos spaa will have trouble hitting targets from those distances. The only ones that are reliable at those distanceis the pantsir, hq17 and maybe the TOR.
Because it’s role in game isn’t meant for killing aircraft.
Put the lav-ad with the accurate stinger at 10.3, what happens? Nothing It doesn’t suddenly break the game or gets rid of the Stella’s role as spaa. Nor does it suddenly become a good tank killer. Put it at 10.7, you’ll be going against tanks and planes that will most likely kill you before you can do anything.
But I guess it was the case for the ADATS, and Apache?
1 Like
Would be nice if the Mi-8AMTSH-VN could take the verbas on the middle pylons like how the Mi-8AMTSh can take iglas. So you can take 8 ATAKA and 8 VERBA at same time
Just let it fly straight for 5km without any input and then make a single turn, it’ll be sluggish as hell even in that best case scenario.
You knowing that 2S6 is present is more than enough to not die from it, aka not headbutting a slug.
You don’t even need that fast of a turret traverse for engaging things at mid range.
Strela isn’t even used for long ranges.
Good thing this isn’t top tier.
Yes it is, no one using it as an AA at 7.0 because it sucks big time at that job is an entirely different thing.
It’s an AA that’s at it’s BR simply because of it’s AT performance.
Simply put, it can kill tanks much better than other SPAAs of similar AA performance, which is the whole reason behind it being at 7.0.
The thing that happens is that it gets much better overall performance which is the thing that matters for BR. It can basically perform same AA duties as Strela while actually being able to engage ground units at the same time.
Which is why Gaijin is doing a massive favor to everyone by not buffing Stingers as all affected vehicles would have to go up by a significant amount.
ADATS situation isn’t cool, but people running around demanding same shit happening to half a dozen other vehicles is some hardcore shit.
not really, it would be a massive help to them while they still retain the same issues. It would be a MASSIVE help for Helis, BR wise nothing would change they would just be on equal footing with other nations who haven’t been artificially nerfed.
as for the SPAAs nothing much would change either the MANPADS will still suffer from suboptimal lock ranges and abysmal damage if they hit (which due to their limited range they most likely still won’t) they’ll just be way more consistent and not randomly stop pulling and miss by a few meters. I could see a one to maybe 2 BR bracket jump for most vehicles affected as fair trade off, LAV 10.3-7, Gepard 1A2 10.0-3, Ozelot 10.3.
Maybe balance the Japanese/Russian IR SAMs alongside it while we are at it, so either the Type81C to 10.7 or the Strela to 11.3, since that is still a massive injustice (2 IR SAMs with the virtually same capabilities being 4 BR steps apart)
Launch the missile using PPI, and you’d be surprised how less sluggish it is and how capable it is of hitting targets at 6-8km.
You do when enemies are coming from the left, to the right and from behind, which is what a competent CAS player would do.
which is the point I’m making. Why would you bring 2 spaa to focus on two different types of scenarios that both have very easy to exploit flaws?
It is. You’re facing guided munitions that can either out range you or require a fast reaction time to intercept. It’s going to be even more so prevalent with MITL. The notable examples I can think of is the upcoming J22 and A7E.
You’re proving my point. It would be better than a Strella only because of it’s ability to kill tanks but it would perform so much worse than a 2S6 because it can neither do it’s anti-air nor anti-tank well. But due to BR compression, there isn’t a BR that can reflect that.
So the question is that should we do? Does the stingers really need a upgrade?
Yes, because the alternative is being stuck with easy to counter and easy to kill spaa in a BR where guided munition is common place.
And the best way to fix it is by upgrading it and putting it at 10.3. It doesn’t suddenly make the lavad overpowered, it doesn’t ruin the game’s balance, and it doesn’t put the Strella out of it’s job.
Id’ be 100% okay with it moving to 10.7 once br decompression happens so it can be between the Strella and the 2S6.
It’s incredibly easy to keep up with planes that are further away for obvious reasons.
Because they’re actually better at their respective jobs ?
That simply isn’t happening nor it would be fair.