Oh to have that implemented
Yes, CW and PD are just named categories, not performances.
2 Likes
I appreciate yours and everyone else’s efforts to dig into these details 👍 Thank you guys, keep up the good work 🍻
2 Likes
Im gonna be honest, who the HELL has the time or patience to bot war thunder polls out of anything, they could use their bots on anything else but nope warthunder forum polls. There are definitely bots voting but probably not to the extent you are alleging, I could always be wrong tho
6 Likes
The poll is set to public votes too. He has 0 proof, just 100% cope.
I personally did not vote on the poll, because I am ambivalent to a TT version of the F-14D. I will support the majority opinion, and the majority obviously wants a TT version.
I already posted a few times that I preordered the F-14D, but I will not argue or vote against those who want a TT version.
3 Likes
If it had distance as well, it would be PD and not CW. CW is a correct reflection of its current state.
8 Likes
I love this literally, those who support TT F-14 say there are people using bots, and those who don’t support it say they’re using bots, but I think that at the end of the day, the problem is that these 1,000 people think they represent the ‘Community’ or the majority, without even knowing the opinion of 95% of the community.
2 Likes
Bro… a lot of people have already told you about your “objective” survey, well, really, it’s not good to produce clones in the tech tree, just because for movie lovers top gan f14d is something special
Don’t worry, I’m just noticing.
Bots are just a part of the problem.
Let me quote myself.
I had a genuine laugh when I found this.
Usernames are wt_jk, wt_fk and wt_lm.
All voted at the same time, all created on the same day…
Some people are certainly invested in this thread, which is why it got more than 1k votes with only 50ish unique users posting. So many voters are either literal bots or accounts that just happen to hop on the forum for the first time in months (with ridiculously low read times), cast their vote there and then disappear into thin air again, probably until a similar poll arises in the future. Definitely not compelled voters being used.
Not to mention the biased nature of said poll and inherent problems with polls on this forum in general.
6 Likes
That is exactly the issue. The current implementation may be CW-like because it lacks visible distance / distGate, but that does not mean CW-only behavior is historically correct. The AIM-54C documentation specifically states range discrimination and improved beam-aspect capability. Doppler discrimination and range discrimination are not the same thing, so adding a range-gate mechanic would be correcting the missing documented behavior. I believe stating PD as a ‘distance’ modifier might be seen as a fallacy considering the state of bug reports.
8 Likes
I did not buy it, but I think the AIM-54C+(?) should at least receive those seeker and other buffs that were mentioned by other players previously. Just stating that they have different cooling and are a functionally identic copy paste is not cool.
7 Likes
As well as the 54C+ receiving a much newer Transmitter adapted from the Aim-120, It should be able to take full advantage of newer LFM techniques to Range Discriminate, which is what this distance / distGate is trying to mimic but obviously having a much weaker distance / distGate function than modern ARHs
9 Likes
It is on the work as a report.
1 Like
Exactly but we won’t use that as a primary argument as it is ambiguous. We have direct proof of range discrimination instead.
Edit: Because devs might just close the report instantly saying it doesn’t prove anything :(
1 Like
They did the exact same thing to a multipage report for the abrams m1a3s armor.
1 Like
It’s impossible to say, but I’d bet it won’t be included for the purposes of balance and maintenance in BR
Yeah, the problem is that if a SINGLE source is not perfectly on point, the whole report can get dismissed, which is a bit silly. The M1A3 report was rejected for lacking exact information, but exact information is basically impossible to obtain for most modern vehicles.
So what is the expected standard here? Should we use educated guesses and conservative approximations based on available evidence, or should we just do nothing and watch the Leclerc get nerfed again?
5 Likes
The problem is that the reports don’t want ‘conversational changes’ I’ve seen things like LFP with 2000mm .)
Most of these fixes would only be minor buffs. From what I saw, there are three possible improvements to the missile, or four if you count the motor, though that one would be more indirect. It would not really increase max range directly, but it could improve lofting behavior so maybe indirectly improve the range indirectly.
Individually, these changes are small, but together they could make the missile noticeably better. Still, I don’t think that would justify a BR increase, because the F-14D is definitely not on the same level as the premium Su-30s.
4 Likes