Understood, appreciate the response.
How aware are the devs regarding the current state of 9Ms?
My report for front aspect IRCCM got accepted and of course all of Flame’s reports (still dont know why they havent been actioned) but this report still needs forwarding:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/bT0XeTXyaQ3X
but the IRCCM appears to have stopped working in rear-aspect too now since the last major update. Is a report needed or is this a known issue? (and would it require docs to report?)
Exmaples:
5 Likes
Game is definitely ready for next gen missiles
You see there’s 2 types of IRCCM in this game.
One type does it’s best to counter flares by shutting off its seeker or narrowing its FOV so it doesn’t see the flare.
And the other type specifically takes out flares like an SPAA countering aircraft or A-G weapons.
Would be nice, especially since it’s featuring Italian domestic recoilless rifle Folgore.
R3 with Folgore would be also cool)
And AIM-120s even though it was an ahistorical nerf to air launched 120s…
And its funny that pilots were told to fire 120s in close range over 9Ms but here we are
Would make a pretty decent 9.3 like the VBCI, although would be 200 RPM. IIRC the VBCI is more?
Yep, but 120 buffs im doubting will ever happen
1 Like
I honestly wouldnt care for the AOA nerf atp if they fix the seeker, its chaff rejection or lack thereof is egregious
1 Like
Yep, its rather dumb how trivial they are too defeat
2 Likes
Then theres the R-77-1 thats practically impossible to get away from
Eh… ive not had too much of an issue, at least at anything beyond WVR, but the asymmetry in that regard is annyoing, given they have ARH and IR missiels that work in WVR and we barely have either
1 Like
The solution is quite shrimple really, Be French. Or that one Chinese transfer student…then your really well optimized for WVR
Why does the J-10C, a light aircraft, have greater drag than the Su-30SM2?
Plus HMD and better engines
Well they recently asked for the whole document on the AIM-120s so maybe they’ll finally do something.
https://community.gaijin.net/p/warthunder/i/FTINp3ILB1Ls?comment=ndKbZ6LLZUYmEU1FQR2uJujv
Although it is a little weird why they’d ask for the whole document rather than just implementing the report.
They tend to do that if they belive your source.
1 Like
HMD is certainly something, but slightly better engines means nearly nothing for it, the whole Jaguar airframe is rather poor
I’m still waiting for the Japanese Il-2, the Ki-51, or its improved version, the Ki-71. Is it really that difficult? You could even turn the Ki-102 Otsu into a ground attack aircraft (adding historical armament) and then add the Ki-102 Ko as an interceptor. Yes, I know the Japanese used the Ki-102 Otsu as an interceptor against B-29s, but that doesn’t mean it was designed for that purpose. Is it too much to ask for an attack aircraft for Japan with a rating lower than 7.7 that will not be a rank I aircraft?
2 Likes
Remember Alvis made some for MOWAG, specifically a 25mm and 25mm/TOW versions.