Performance is a result of players and in the BUK’s case, gaijin’s dogshit modelling of the radar.
The missile itself is ridiculous
1 Like
Never was, the KH-29T and TE were maverick equivalents before, but no Russia needed the best IR in the game (by a signifigant margin)
So you getting scared by something that isn’t happening ?
1 Like
I own the BUK, and yet I opposed it’s addition (9M317MA) since the beginning
So what ? it’s horrible radar makeing it almost useless your wish is it can better when it will be worse than now ?
1 Like
I want the radar buffed and missile nerfed, simple as
Oh yeah good idea SAHR missile instead of ARH missile good luck shooting something down in area when everything have FnF munition
1 Like
Kh38Mt sources are sufficient enough for the games addition. And the era in which the vehicles are designed don’t matter in this conversation.
Ok. Then we should also add realistic protection values for Russian vehicles, advanced Russian shells, and corrections and buffs to autoloader reload times. Automatic tracking of targets should be added too. All vehicles, especially modern ones, lack some capabilities. And NATO tanks are already better than Russian ones in game
1 Like
The missile is realistic and accurate to it’s value. What do you want
What sources, they don’t exist, even the RU Military export site removed acknowledgement of it’s existence
It doesn’t exist bro, there is no documentation to go off, only rumors and a supposed test
It do exist. Search it up. Even a simple search tells you that the missiles do exist and that they use slanets ARH seeker head
There was a brochure for it I believe. Anyways then gaijin should just remove all experimental vehicles in the game
Literally not, no proof of testing, no proof that it was ever carried on the planes that carry it in game.
They dont but it is quite funny when a 50s vehicle has more pictures of it than a missile in the information age.
100% agree but i dont think we agree in the same way lol
such as?
Sure if we get corrections to manual loaders and autoloader damage corrections as well.
I really dont think you want to bring FCS and such things into this discussion lol
Yeah and they should be even better
2 Likes
Sources found with ‘A simple google search’ wouldn’t work to buff NATO vehicles would they?
Double standard no?
It isn’t a buff. It’s proof of existence
Of which there is little to none,
Only single reported test, sourced from a Russian news source, which are inherently untrustworthy
I don’t understand why some people feel the physical need to participate in discussions about BRs they don’t even own, especially when their player card can be consulted very easily. Are they just pathological liars or simply that biased? Boggle my mind.
So we should remove all experimental vehicles in game
Plenty of modern vehicles are highly classified. Try finding sources on the S500 for example.
3bm59
Autoloaders are literally worse than manual loaders right now.
But it is for realism?
1 Like
Little to no improvement over 3bm60
Experimental vehicles ≠ Fictional missiles
Laughs in Leclerc, Type 10, BVM, HSTVL, Pt16, strv 103, etc
1 Like