I know I’m not, and that wasn’t the point. I just know that SadRIPer will try to act like they are a good player again. He is just a broken record like that.
So why beat around the bush and just get it over with.
2 Likes
Pay up then
Sure, as soon as you let your claim become reality.
3 Likes
Please lets not forget that Gaijin left one of their vehicles with this damage model for YEARS and they fixed it (idk if they fixed it tho, i guess they did) once ppl noticed and started doing videos about it.
This was when Ka50 - 52 spam Destroyed lobbies and everyone complained about it, and its been like that for VERY LONG, till new helis were added and etc.
The average op russian vehicle of the moment
6 Likes
I’d bet that this guy will barely be able to go positive in the 12.7 Russian vehicles lol.
4 Likes
No missile ignores multipathing.
And when notching, no missile ignores chaff. Once chaff disappears the missile can re-acquire a non-maneuvering target, but that’s about it.
All* helicopters.
The way they fixed it was updating the general helicopter flight model, which fixed all helicopters, and obviously impacted Kamovs a bit more.
2 Likes
If Russian bias exists, then by the same standards US bias and German bias exist too. These nations are treated much better by Gaijin, consistently have the most powerful and undertiered vehicles, and have bug reports addressed and actioned upon faster and more often.
It’s a self-reinforcing loop, originating from the extreme gap between the popularity of Big 3 nations and every other tech tree. The player population of the latter category spend more, perform worse in battles (leading to favourable balance adjustments), and have a much bigger control over community sentiment/pressure.
When you look at top tier, these nations almost always have the best vehicles. This is extremely obvious in the technology advancement update cycle: major nations get the newest and most advanced vehicles, whereas the equivalent vehicles of minor nations come months or years later. The opposite situation rarely occurs, and is the exception rather than the rule.
1 Like
oooh it does. namely R77-1 not completely but is much much less susceptible to it. It have no problem tracking and hitting even nothing plane at 10m RA while AIM 120 loose track on planes flying straight at altitude.
You know we have data sheets with seeker stats straight from the files right?
(credit to the authors of the sheet of course)
The AIM-120 and R-77-1 have identical seekers in game. The only ARHs with better seekers are the AIM-54s, Fakours and MICA-EM iirc.
3 Likes
you know that this means absolutely nothing right? BMPT have FCS and electronics modules modeled but they were disabled in code for that specific vehicle, just likey every ATGM vehicle have handpicked missile launcher damage model, despite general rule… but yea keep coping
1 Like
If you have any actual evidence that the R-77-1 has a better seeker feel free to share it.
However “just trust me bro” or “it came to me in a dream” level statements like yours aren’t very trustworthy.
5 Likes
you can search for multiple vidoes of people complaining and showing in sensor view how R77 tracks planes at 5 meters above ground without any problem while AIM 120 missing plane going HEAD on at 1km alt. And if i have to choose if i ahve to believe those vidoes and my VAST experience in sim vs gaijin word i will pick the 1st. We all know how gaijin copy paste vehicles but the one vehicle they “forget” to model something here and there. Just like BMPT somehow missing damageable modules, T tanks having reduced spalling and so on… Not my problem you guys need to lie to yourself in order to pretend this game doesn’t have selective modeling for certain vehicles or nation…
I can also cherry pick videos that show the opposite happening.
You forget a very important thing. Nobody mentioned Gaijin’s word. The data sheet I linked has stats datamined directly from the game files/code, which was datamined/put together by a group of very credible people (including Gszabi). None of these people work for Gaijin.
So yeah I believe a document made by credible dataminers over a random guy on the forum.
Talk about coping lol.
8 Likes
lmao lol
1 Like
Quite a skill problem, isn’t it? Looks like you’re are multipath user, rsrsrssr. The only thing happening is that the R77’s loft is much higher than the AIM-120’s, meaning it will hit you from above, and this mechanic, which should be nerfed, won’t save you from an R77 coming from above your head.
1 Like
Dude, I’ve tracked rear-aspect low altitude targets with AIM-120 and MICA-EM alike.
Knowing HOW to launch weapons in non-ideal situations is a skill.
T-series tanks have never had reduced spalling. HHA has reduced spalling, but that’s not a tank, that’s an armor type.
Enjoy lying to yourself I guess.
3 Likes
when in 1 of 10 examples AIM 120 hits plane near ground while 9 of 10 R77-1 do opposite it just proves my point anyway…
All you said that it have same seeker, which means it is tracking or should track the same, which it doesn’t, because R771 just tracks near ground better. If its by hidden code or by other missile trait which is handpicked by gaijin i dont know. Fact is R77-1 reliably tracks planes at ground level or even on RWY when taking of and even when platform which fires is is ground hugging to… AIM 120 wont hit anything below 50 or so meters no matter what.
That’s just verified information from sources you praised above…And ehm autoloader…
coming from rusaboo troll who just in second sentence admit that R77-1 having different properties making them stronger… gj
“low” altitude is broad definition. ground level? pure nonsense for Aim 120. Getting lecture from one of trio forum trolls pretending everything is ok with russia while making claims like PUMA is better than BMPT and other quite funny statements is very laughable at best :) You, Renzo and Morvan are quite notorious for your forum patrolling and rushing to defense on definitely not Russian bias. By the way your claim that AGM 65 is better than KH 38mt or is its equivalent is also quite funny.
@Hans_von_Grobel
Ah yes, accusing everyone you come across of being malicious.
Keep defending [shilling for?] your precious Russian vehicles.
“Kh-38MT is superior to AGM-65D.” - Me, countless times.
“BMPT is superior to Puma.” - Me.
So you either miswrote, or are attempting to provoke others.
Oh, and low altitude means multipathing in the context of my post.
1 Like