not range per se, it’s more so acceleration and as such the byproduct is having better energy retention/range against maneuvering targets cause rn it burns for 1 second too long while having slightly better thrust to weight than actual r-77 (though, 80 vs 79 is well within margin of error)
So if thrust is reduced by one second and thrust to weight is the same as it currently, it would have worse acceleration and less thrust overall
not really reportable though cause all i got is video evidence for burn time being wrong
for the energy capacity/thrust to weight (r-77 in game already meets this)
And to be fair, burn time is variable so it might be right, might be wrong.
for example, here is german r60 manual that states 3-5 second burn time for r60
The R-77 is underperforming in energy retention though? Because of the grid fin design it should have less drag at supersonic speeds, and more drag when subsonic compared to a traditional fin design. Gajiin said screw it I’m not modeling all of that and gave it a drag number somewhere between the two.
Ain’t no way this thing is over performing. Same BR as much more versatile heavies, doesn’t get a great lineup around it, reload means you can’t push alone…
IS2 is the only heavy I get in China and it is utter dogshit. Oversized gun that takes ages to reload, terrible armor (+obvious weakspots) that gets penetrated by german everything, and low mobility to make it extra painful to use.
Functionally it’s a TD but the actual TDs lower than it are so much better
Nah, you are a breakthrough vehicle. You just require team mates around you to make the breakthrough work. It suffers a little at 6.7 and it’s definitely not overperforming, but I see it also do very well in capable hands.
