What we have in the game is quasi-LOAL with their implementation of POINT/TRACK mechanic.
IR working with GNSS isn’t modelled in the game and Hammers wouldn’t be the lone recipient of that as well.
So is going from 1.5km to ~13km of lock range.
quasi-LOAL and LOAL are greatly different, especially in this game (you know like not even being in LOS of your target)
But one of the most greatly affected. Your nerf is based on a biased mechanic implementation. That’s all there is to it.
realistic would be :
- KH38 ML (limited F&F with laser adjustments)
- Mavericks (LOBL F&F)
- Brimstone (LOAL)
- Hammer Laser (Limited F&F with laser adjustments) and HAMMER IR (LOAL on semi-mobile and slow targets)
They can, but not 3rd gen. Not like the missile has any documentation of it being used anywhere, only some brochures and models. IR sensors are not exactly cheap, especially when increasing the pixel count and sensitivity.
There’s also some slight economical differences between then and now, but i won’t get into it, off topic
1 Like
You need to be in the LoS as long as it takes to send a missile down at a predetermined location, so not that different.
Locking after launch is the main part that already happens.
Some mechanics simply aren’t implemented yet and I can give you some that are biased for the western equipment.
I’m trying to change the stats of a fully implemented mechanic which is as easy as changing numbers in a sheet somewhere.
Seeker going from 13km to 1.5km lock range is a clear nerf, no matter how much you want to spin it around.
2 Likes
No, i use the map cursor (I mostly play Hammer Laser when i do CAS tbh)
Yeah sure go ahead, this topic is basically here for this purpose
La-200 and Object 906 are suitable for 8.3.
so cas no win maches? really? 2 su30 and mi 28 oblirate all team…
afther gaijin added the turret basket all time my turret ring and engine is destoryed and no chance to survive … but one question only abrams and leopard 2 have turret basket?
I was talking about IR version.
IR Hammer with fully functional LOAL mechanic would still benefit from the increased (fictional) seeker range, so it being a clear advantage is pretty obvious.
Also, just because your weapon gets nerfed in some way doesn’t mean you’re eligible for other buffs.
That’s like you get nerfed in some way and you ask: “B-b-but where is my regenerative steering ?”
Game doesn’t work like that.
In real life, no.
so only abrams and le4opard 2 nedded this realictic modeling?
We are talking IRL vs in game performance. The devs choices, nerfs or buffs have little importance here. Russia shouldn’t get any compensation for the KH38 removal too, especially since LMUR addition (which at least exists)
I don’t disagree, and it should be nerfed all right (assuming KH38 gets removed as well, for balance and realistic considerations).
I will also re-iterate my invitation, if you are willing to do so of course
it has been to all reasonable standards
with absolutely no compelling evidence that it exists and only images of two mockups
Nor should IR Hammer get any compensation for fixing it’s comically overperforming seeker.
Asking for a completely new mechanic just because one part of your missile has been nerfed (legitimately) doesn’t hold water.
Once 38MT is proven to be fake then removing it could be a possible option to ask for.
On the other hand, 1.5km lock range on the Hammer is pretty much set in stone at the moment.
Thought you were being sarcastic about that.
I think it’s really unrealistic that manually loaded tanks with two crew left can reload and turn their turrets at the same time. One guy constantly jumping from the gunner’s seat to loader’s would drastically increase the reload times as well.
One simple mechanic that would seriously cripple vast majority of western tanks found at top tier.
one easy fix would be for gaijin to remove kh38mt until they provide some sources for the missile existing
You can cry and seethe all you want, KH38 is not getting removed.
1 Like
kh38mt doesn’t exist, thanks for acknowledging that gaijin went wot mode for russian top tier
IDK at least it’s realistic unlike 38
You can’t prove something doesn’t exist. You skipped science classes ?
An impact that cripples half of western tanks when 2 crew members are sent to sleep, such wow (Let’s not forget Type 10 and Leclerc existence, as well as a potential KF-51 addition)
Meanwhile :
- A missile not proven to exist serves as best in class for CAS in a certain nation
- DIRCM and rotor return not being modelled properly serving as force fields for helicopters (and who mainly uses helis for CAS ?)
- T-series caroussel eating spall like there’s no tomorrow, and somehow not generating any when hit
- Anti ERA tip not being modelled on some top end ammunition
- the US not even having access to its last APFSDS (A3, A4), France not having Shard, Germany not having DM63 and 73 (and no, VACUUM is not yet proven to be compatible with anything other than t-14)
- The manpads article (we believe lmao)
- The spall liner addition (merely avoided being added only to russia because everyone rightfully complained)
- Relikt ERA somehow having 200mm of efficiency against kinetic round and 100 more mm against chemical rounds compared to the absolute blocks on western MBTs while being paper thin, because of course it makes sense
- LOAL ground to ground missiles not being modelled
- Western ATGM loft being too low, ending up in the turret mask or gun instead of the turret top. Coding or technical issue maybe ? Nope, LMUR can loft all right
- R-77 double racks
Shall i continue ?
2 Likes
How they even proven it exists? Bc depents on their fuckup logic it can be proven that it exist
this one is such BS because they proved that they can make them loft with LMUR but apparently they only can for russian ATGMs
3 Likes
good point indeed
1 Like