tell that gajin directly jumping to the 2a7v, or skipping multiple typhoons and rafales
Heck, Gaijin went ahead with an AESA-equipped Rafale and skipped the RBE2 PESA.
I still cannot comprehend why they didn’t add T1 typhoons and PESA rafales, they jumped to the late models and then refused to model them well, like what are they smoking??
2 Likes
Sometimes the snail power creeps too much
They didnt even give the Gripen C’s their starting radar as they all use the A’s radar instead of the actual radar they used when they were first made. A lot of radars that are older need fixing.
1 Like
Any news would come via an official announcement. Right now we don’t have anything to speak of on that.
3 Likes
Canada isnt a real country you are all just snow Mexicans fr fr
From the Aim-120 AMRAAM SAR. Came out in 2014.
I’m really interested to see how this one somehow isn’t proof.
Ngl most radars ingame for 4th gen aircraft seem to perform horribly.
3 Likes
The SU-30MKK would be pretty good for Chinese top tier CAS, if it gets added
I don’t understand why I keep seeing this claim everywhere.
I have Al-Khalid-I and I absolutely adore it, even whel I play it at 12.0. And, as far as I know, VT-4A1 is basically Al-Khalid, but with significantly better armor… so how can it be that bad?
Granted, it’s missing its spall liners like all Chinese MBTs (Gaijin, it’s been a year, are you going to fix this or what?), but, if it’s an Al-Khalid on steroids as it seems to be, I can’t imagine why it would be so bad that I’ve seen people claiming it to be “one of the worst Top Tier MBTs”…
honestly i am hugely dissapointed how gajin is handling spall liners, they implement vehicles like they want no matter in which state and if you report spall liners directly from dev server etc or reported them when spall liners where added they just dont add or fix them either way
Pzh2k, boxer variants, leo 2 pso all reports with spall liners acknowledged but not touched and added
they made it a feature which they add when they feel like it
1 Like
I’ve brought the Al-Khalid-I to go with the T-80 and A-5 hopefully ready if Pakistan is coming to China
1 Like
2014 means nearly a decade since the F-14 was retired, and I hate to burst your bubble but they don’t test missiles on aircraft retired 10 years prior, sure it could launch and carry them but that isn’t a concrete reason to bother modelling it in the first place
I just can’t understand.
They have numerous bug reports with sources, statements, documents, photos, videos, everything, EVERYTHING they could possibly need to add all the missing spall liners in one evening.
Yet they leave the reports “accepted” for months, and months, and months, and even well over a year now… and do nothing about it.
1 Like
Idk if thats better than gaijin telling you they just don’t want to add it. Not that its wrong but that they don’t have plans to fix the vehicle because they like its current state.
2 Likes
And this is what I hate.
They claim that "they do balance only via BRs and SOFT factors like ammo choices and reloads (if possible), and that they would “never” artificially alter the technical capabilities of vehicles, since “carefully crafting vehicles to be accurate depictions of their historical and real life counterparts is their priority”…
Yet here we are. Actions speak louder than words.
1 Like
Well ive only had staff tell me they dont plan on changing one vehicle despite being broken since release but i know there are others.
Not really…
It’s not an Al-Khalid on steroids, in fact, it is actually worse in some ways.
The VT-4A1 has worse mobility because it has only -17 km/h in reverse, the weakspots on the VT-4A1 are actually larger since everyone has access to sabot rounds with higher penetration, the entire UFP can be penetrated by APFSDS projectiles as there is a bug that doesn’t allow rounds to ricochet even though the VT-4A1’s UFP is angled at 84 degrees compared to 82 degrees on the Abrams, and those ricochet rounds no problem.
The only tangible upgrade that the VT-4A1 gets is an active-protection system, but you’re really getting a comparable at best, worse Al-Khalid at 12.0.
7.1 second reload with 577mm of penetration is pretty much bottom of the barrel in terms of firepower, even worse than T-90M. My problem with this is that T-90M actually has protection when the VT-4A1 doesn’t. The Al-Khalid gets the same firepower at 11.0.
