There are loads of values in the datamines, but not all of them are actually used
I’ll just look for some videos and to see if that is implemented
Either way, thanks for pointing it out, I wasn’t aware of that and was only going off of my own experience and what I’ve heard from others while looking for ways to use the Comanche before buying it
We pray for aerial warfare mode
Lmao
Praying it is what could possibly make air rb slightly more interesting and more difficult than spamraam meta we have going on rn
We really do
I’ve got no hopes for it tho, infantry killed all the hope I had left for WTs future
yeah you gonna be suffocating before we get the mode otherwise
Are you by chanve a bug moderator in disguise?
/j
Maybe 🤔. Hopefully enlisted devs came over for wt infantry lol. But community managers have said the development of the game wont be affected
I still dont get this complaint, its like all of the people that complained about naval, naval hasnt really effected how many tanks and planes we get each patch so eh? and if you dont like infantry dont play their mode its just that simple lol
Nah, but I’ve legitimately had people thinking I was some kind of moderator in the past lol
I’ve gone over this in the past
Gaijin is spending resources on a new branch of military, rather than using those resources on improving modes we already have
The amount of vehicles per update isn’t what I’m worried about, it’s the lack of quality we’ve seen in a lot of the updates
F-22 (and J-20, Su-57 which probably took some “inspiration”) are able to launch missiles without LOAL, the IR bays have it so they pop out before firing
All the Abrams M1A1HC and up are based on the Swedish export package, for which we know for a fact that it was stated to be worse than the US domestic armor package at the time. The unfortunate thing is the swedish test trial is literally the only bit of info out there in terms of armor values for the Abrams everything else is classified. Still frustrating that gaijin models modern tanks based off a 30 year old export package lol and refuse to make an educated guess on what it would be.
Can’t be carried internally no, but iirc the Aim-9X Block II and the rails the F-35 uses for them are stated to be of low observability, so apparently it wouldn’t diminish the stealth capabilities all too much
If this goes through then does it mean all IIR missiles with datalink in the future will ignore flares so long as radar itself is also not defeated?
What will lack datalink (so far): Python 5, ASRAAM, R-74, IRIS-T, AIM-9X Block 1, AAM-5, AAM-5B
What will have datalink: AIM-9X Block 2, MICA IR, R-74M2
iirc AAM-5 also lacks DL? not sure
I’m not sure if either AAM-5/5B has or lacks datalink. @Xeno_quaza @WreckingAres283 maybe they can clarify
The AAM-5 and 5B lack datalink, as per its exclusion in the technical document CPS-U138002-3. The idea of it having datalink was something that basically just materialized on wikipedia with no proper sources, then was spread around.
While not confirmed with anything official afaik, there are reports of P5 getting DL.
In game it lacks it, so unless someone bug reports it with some source.
odd I thought it did, CAMM has DL which is just a surfaced launched ASRAAM
The brochure for CAMM and other MBDA missiles with datalink states datalink in the brochure but the ASRAAM brochure lacks the term datalink in there.
