i have a very hard time believing a 11000T Type 055, a 9000T Arleigh Burke, or a 7000T Horizon/Type45 will end up in the coastal tree, and to be fair Gaijin plans regarding missile ships was still quite blury as far as i recall.
Subs i could see in coastal though, at least for WW2 ones it kind of makes sense.
Problem is, the separation between blue water and coastal is kind of an artificial limit that does not encompass all classes of ships. Submarine is one example. Modern frigates and large corvettes is an other.
I could be wrong / not up to date though
Refering to the Akula / Typhoon thing ?
In any case and when it comes to submarines, the way they’ll make them OP is by giving them low decibels while going fast while the rest will be stuck at 5 knots or be targeted by the entire vicinity, mark my words
Not to mention the vast majority of modern missile ships will be less effective against ww2 capital ships due to the fact missiles are meant for thinner armored ships
A modern battleship would get absolutely brutalized and murdered by any torpedo in the vicinity (no countermeasure, not fast enough to escape, and modern torps have a tendency to directly go under the keel and not bother with the anti torp protection system these battleships carry)
Yeah they denied modern tanks and planes too, back in the days, see how that turned out
Do note that only surface ship carrying such kind of torpedo is soviet or soviet-derived ones. Westerns surface ships were/are only using light and slow torpedo, which some of them are already in the game.
Even bigger powercreep than now is.
Different story as they still has their internal compartment shown. Problem of ship is that they didn’t even able to gather proper blueprint.
thats the worst part about the soyuz i think, all of its stats are suited specifically for the game AND is given the “benefit of the doubt”
its shells never had a-ix-12, but its given the benefit of the doubt that the russians would surely upgrade the 192x shell’s filler
its reload speed is given the benefit of the doubt that it would be a 25 second reload, despite the turret never being mounted on a ship, nor in a triple configuration
its accuracy is also given the benefit of the doubt, despite the real world tests of the gun, on land, in a single gun per turret config showing just how inaccurate it was.
roma couldnt even get its realistic, fastest achieved reload in game, let alone the benefit of the doubt, vanguard’s and iowa’s FCS is still going off of whatever their ww1 cousins have, not even mentioning their accuracy and reload, that we have concrete evidence for being better than it is ingame.
other nations have to actively fight the bug mods in an effort to get their ship’s real stats into the game, often fruitlessly, yet here’s an unfinished ship that could’ve never have been finished, with stats better than what it would’ve had if it did get finished and with stats that suit the game’s mechanics, because it gets the benefit of the doubt. this is why its such a slap in the face to everyone else, if the G3 was added this update, how much of it would be given “the benefit of the doubt” you think?
Scharn never was so op as Soyuz with this update.
I agree with you. I have a simple solution: I dont play 7.7+ br until they dont fix this crap situation. I have the Bismarck and I play with it only if I dont see Russian rank VII player. So simple solution: boycott the high br if it has Russian ship (rank VII) in.
If anyone do this method: they have to move something: Nerf.
It’s funny that you mention it, since single land mounts should have far better dispersion than naval mounts as a result of eliminating factors. You wouldn’t have to deal with the constant rolling of the ship on the sea and the after effects of gun recoil due be being mounted on land. A single mount would ensure zero blast interference from other barrels.
You can see the dispersion from large caliber single land test mounts in this report from the
US Naval Weapons Laboratory here: Naval Gunfire Dispersion
Most notably, the results of the Mk 7 16"/50 mount firing an AP shell estimates a spread of less than 100 yards at a whopping range of 42,345 yards!
Whatever the case may be, it would be very hard to argue that a triple naval mount could match the dispersion values of an experimental single land mount.
Keel breaking is also conveniently not modeled in war thunder though.
I’d be curious about the performance of AShMs that use SAP warheads and use a terminal attack profile that pops up from sea skimming to attack the enemy target from the top downward are against battleships. It’s obvious the extremely large Soviet AShMs will deal significant damage to anything they hit, even a battleship; but what about a volley of Harpoons or Exocets? Who knows.
Offtopic but the fact they’re giving them bukm3 instead of something worse is insane. Pantsir is already second best spaa with the best survivability and fastest missiles. Give them some lower tier multi spaa to add some flavour.
