In my opinion, simply improving the AIM-120 seekers would already be an excellent start. I was 5 km away in an F/A-18C against a Su-34 flying away from me i launched an AIM-120B, and after just two chaffs it completely lost track. It’s ridiculous when you think that not long ago, you could launch an AIM-120A from an F-16 at 40 km and still hit some unaware targets.
All I want is for my Swedish Tech Tree to finally have an SPAA that has more range than 12 km and Yes Im aware we have the EldE 98 but to be fair, its effective range is 6 km
Agreed
1 Like
it is inaccurate though, its missing its fragmentation lining, and the blast frag effect that it should have
there should be absolutely no situation where a soft skinned vehicle survives a direct hit from it while it happens all the time in game
Theres no point telling me anything, glad to know and listened to what you have to say, respectfully i do not care until you bug report it and what the mods have to say for it. Until then its really not my issue.
Source it and bug report it, i will accept your stance in any circumstance if the mods accept it too, unless you were rejected from the bug report falsely, but other than that. Im going to ignore on how it should be implemented
LMAO, dont believe in reality and only what gaijan says is true
the reason they changed to this warhead for the AGM-114R was a significant increase in effect on soft targets such as AAs and soft skinned vehicles while in game it is significantly worse
as such it is factually inaccurate and significantly under preforming
Z10 is in the same place (by your stat criteria… if there is such thing) My goal post stay the same… your standarts are floating all over the place, when it suits you.
2 Likes
One of the only accurate things about russian top tier is the R-77 being a shit missile, they are hideous irl
1 Like
Do we have test, similar to those done in Sweden in the 90’s, with A3/A4 vs Relict? If not everything else is wishfullthinking/gueswork and marketing (from bouth sides, don’t get me wrong… every arms manufacturer will praise his weapont to be superior, no doubt about it). But telling with certainty that all those anti-era tips work against the new versions of ERA is just wrong.
If they do… make a bug report and ask to add them. I’m not against it.
1 Like
Having played a lot of top tier nations, I can confidently say that it’s decently balanced bar reloads, and only Italy suffers.
1 Like
Just like how the abrams reload is magically faster than it should be? Or how USA tanks that are auto loaded get correct loads but Soviet and other don’t?
Favoritism much??
Pretty ironic
2 Likes
My god. Your initial comment was about the 64e, no mention of the z10 whatsoever so yeah your goalposts moved.
My standards are consistent. Your reading comprehension isnt
you need skill :)
Once again to remind how funny this thread is,
“Russian teams steamrolling nato teams” meanwhile russia teams getting paired with nato teams is literally part of the game. Lol
1 Like
Wait so the Abram’s 5 second reload isnt accurate?
If only Gaijin decided to actually fix tanks that aren’t doing well, instead of just going “oh this tank isn’t doing well statistically, here have a 5 second reload” everywhere.
2 Likes
Maybe, because most USA autoloaders are autoloaders that move with the elevation angle of the breach because they are oscillating turrets.
Most Russian autoloaders (if not all) don’t move with the elevation and in real life would need their barrel set an exact angle, this movement id calculated in the reload of the tank because of the lack of this feature in Warthunder
3 Likes
…Would you like to back that one up before I point out the absolutely bottomless supply of evidence showing sub-5 by-procedure reloads, or after?
4 Likes
It’s not accurate. It can be 5 sec but eith many IFs irl. Otherwise it’s 5s autoloader
How come