That is the aforementioned radar pod.
So we will get a AH-60 for Israel with f&f, but still not the full armament for the DAP? :( That’s not cool…
1 Like
Jup, see it right now 😂 So yeah, I am happy. ^^
Was the MLWS finally modeled???
Same exact BR and both helos tested and used them.
There is no reason the DAP should not get SPIKE-ERs too.
1 Like
The MH-60 can indeed use AGM-114Ls so we have that option for FnF missiles on helicopters (as well as AH-64D and AH-1Z)
2 Likes
They just don’t want US to get radar guided hellfires, even though the khrizentema has missiles that can be launched with the help of radar to go through smoke, at the very least I’m happy to have the gun pods.
2 Likes
even 8 is alot more like limit them to 2 max
I just want to get rid of that horrible cockpit
1 Like
something I just realised is that at top tier, gunner crew skills are useless, giving helicopters that had door gunners ai would make it have a use again
1 Like
It would open up more use by adding more helicopters with gunners you can use like bomber turrets.
And change crew skills so that even if it’s abit unrealidtic, tracking at 2km and start firing at 1.2km would be useful. Atm for bomber turret ai on max crew skill it’s around 800m detection range and firing at 200-300m. Which means anybidy can shoot you out the sky from 1.5km+ away sometimes without your gunners reacting.
1 Like
Hell no.
because youre the one who is supposed to use your guns in this game.
The thing that Bombers and Naval have in common is that they’re areas where War Thunder’s standard game design completely falls apart and stops making sense.
A fighter plane is operated and controlled by one or two guys, very easy to abstract this into one player.
A tank is operated by 3-4 people, but ultimately the two main things you’re doing are shooting and moving. With only one primary turret, this isn’t that crazy.
A bomber, with guns with spherical coverage that in real life are operated by like six different people each being tactically aware stops working so well at least with regards to defensive armament. This would be best done either with AI or with multiple players if you want to have gameplay based upon bomber v interceptor combat. Gaijin compromised, and put in bad AI with the ability for the player to turn their attention away from flying and take control of the guns when needed.
It doesn’t work super great though!
A warship, and you have completely exited the realm of what makes sense with War Thunder’s 3rd person shooter gameplay style. Controlling a warship is not about controlling the guns yourself, it’s about deciding what do engage and where to maneuver. The game SeaPower or its predecessor Cold Waters are far better abstractions of vessel command. If you’re gonna do the control the guns yourself!!! thing, WoWS is better as an arcadey style. In my opinion, War Thunder Naval should’ve been individual-vessel SeaPower in a combined arms MMO setting. That would’ve been awesome. What we got is something altogether different with pacing and gameplay that simply doesn’t make any sense at all. Look at Naval’s maps, too. Insane weirdness every time, because it’s unplayable otherwise.
I firmly believe that true combined arms (Air, Land, and Sea) IS POSSIBLE in a game like War Thunder. But Naval never should have been set up like this. It’s completely the wrong direction.
To get back on topic, helicopters (and modern CAS capable fixed wing aircraft) sit in a middle space between fighters (very well integrated into war thunder), bombers (mediocre integration), and naval (terrible integration).
They would benefit from a splitting into two players, on vehicles that were crewed by more than one person. In an AH-1Z, one player flying the aircraft and another using the turret and air to ground weapons would be much more effective and have far greater situational awareness than the current Highly Task Saturated single player per aircraft can be.
Attack helicopters have two crew for a reason. F/A-18D VMFA(AW) squadrons existed for a reason. The mission can be done by one person (there are many single crew tactical jets capable of complex CAS), but the workload is higher. One of the main focuses of the F-22 and F-35 were reducing pilot workload as much as possible in all situations for this reason.
As a Naval player I disagree with naval ships being implemented wrong. The only issue is spawn distance. Ships currently on averagr spawn at 11.5km. Whilst irl and in enduring confrontation events (we in the naval community normally play those), lets you engage at realistic ranges where it’s not about whom can lob enough he to remove the crew of the other in 5km distances.
If they fixed the distance of engagement to be 25-30km it would fix most issues.
Your enjoyment of the super kludgy mode is essentially survivorship bias. I’m sure it can be enjoyed, especially when in suitably longer ranged engagements as you describe, and they’ve had to do a lot of work to make it into actual gameplay and have gotten there, however I’m curious how coastal fits into that. What place in this game does the Zippo have?
Absolute fun and hilarity capturing points from other torp boats and gaining sneaky kills against players not paying attention.
Coastal perfectly fits low tier naval to fill out the ranks until 4.7 which it does.
Plus in EC they are great for recci of enemy formations because of the speed.