Bigger question is will more 30mm bushmaster users get the programmable round
Luke the vbci or sinilar
Is there any possibility for a new us mbt this update?
One has a 105 cannon, the other has a crewless 30mm auto cannon. It’s not going to be higher.
Introduction date doesn’t define BRs, or you wouldn’t see the concept three at whatever low BR it is.
1 Like
The “PL-12A” that’s being added can you specify what it actually is? as the PL-12A is not a real designation used by the PLAAF or PLANAF.
Do you mean the PL-12AE? Or is gaijin adding a made up missile?
Better seeker should be here from the 120A in game tho…
If they finally give the 120D a better seeker, it’d kinda be a slap in the face if the C5 which had* one in dev when first added
1 Like
Don’t mind me dragging up a by now rather old comment please, but with the GBT 155 confirmed for this update I’m really dreading the fact that we might see new SPH in at least 3 of the 5 updates this year.
I really, really wonder why Gaijin is so adamant about adding more HE slingers when HE is so unbearably unbalanced in both ways. Like, I’m not missing some overtely big and/or vocal group within the community asking for these things to be added, right?
Those new torpedo trails in the content disclosure makes me think we’re going to be seeing smarter torpedoes this year.
1 Like
Is anyone able to confirm if the Dragoon we are getting is the DHVA1 variant or is it the base Dragoon?
And if the two way data link the 120D “Should have” is modeled macking it harder to notch…it would be like a long rang MICA with out the 50G! and seeing how the PL12A is introducing GNSS to its guidance would it be a big stretch for the two dl to be add for it?
The description of two way data link on just a quick search gives this
“A two-way data link in an air-to-air missile enables continuous, real-time communication between the missile and its launch platform”
^^^ if that description is what the the 120D is implementing…the META will shift from EFT/RAF/SM2…to F15EX spam! 😎
All fox 3s already have this in game.
What 2 way really means is that is that other stations can exchange data with the missile
Yeah!
Even if 30mms are on the weaker side compared to 40+s, sometimes you just want to have an autocanon to flank and spank en masse from the sides!
And, with APFSDS and some thought, even the 30mm can be sufficient in that regard.
I may find a place for this vehicle on my Top Tier lineup! Just like I use Jaguar, ICV, Namer, etc.
Besides, I like that it’s such a modern vehicle; timeframe-wise, I like having these in my Top Toer lineups, even if the BRs are lower.
I am glad the devs went with this vehicle, instead of LAV-25! The 25mm would have been way too weak for me to look forward to it.
First of all, I would never use the Bradley as an ATGM carrier because it requires you to expose your turret crew just to squeeze off a missile. Secondly, the folding mechanics on the M901 make it extremely difficult to use effectively. Something like the TOW HMMWV, would allow you to maneuver rapidly to a position, and surprise the enemy. The M1167 is almost as short as the Wiesel 1A2 (it’s like a couple inches taller), and uses TOW 2 on a wheeled platform. Not to mention the TOW jeep, which is shorter than even the Wiesel. I never specified a BR range either, but I do firmly believe WW2 shouldn’t see things like TOW.
1 Like
The C5 has One data link IRL! My bet is that this is going to be modeled in some sort of way that make the 120D much more accurate and harder to defend
hello guys my name is
Damn that model looks absolutely sick.
1 Like
It has a slightly larger motor than the C-5, It has the motor from aim120 c-7 which is 5" longer than c-5. It’s never been modeled in game that way but there are multiple sources that state that.
The AIM-120C-5 has the 5in motor in game and IRL.
It does not get changed until the AIM-120D-3.
1 Like
The aim120c5 shouldn’t have it is my point.