You’ve clearly never used the tow-2b.
Gaijin butchered it so much it’s pretty useless sadly.
4 Likes
I’ve used the less accurate BILL and it works fine from my experience.
Be lucky TOW is as accurate as it is, IRL it’s a squirrelly missile that barely flies straight for the first 200-350 meters.
1 Like
Wasn’t talking about the flight profile, was talking about the damage. All atgms in game are not really true to life. There’s no gathering time as an example.
It’s supposed to have two EFP firing down into the top armour of the tank, but it’s modelled as a single heat penetrator.
1 Like
Which is what the BILL has on top of having 5x the pen 500mm vs 100mm TOW2B
2 Likes
Pretty sure the bill is tandom heat, not efp?
Are there open source documents on it that could constitute a bug report?
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
No, it’s a top attack, BILL 2.
Has two EFP’s one in the nose and one in the midsection. First to defeat ERA, second to pen.
1 Like
“Not a bug”
Just normal USA needs balanced so the game is fair gaijin antics.
3 Likes
Thank bug report moderators; they absolutely suck at their job and are extremely biased. They ignore anything they think shouldn’t be added and pass things they do. But don’t try a ‘Russian bias’ narrative, they declined the proper engine and HMD for the Su-34 as well as for the KA-50’s HMS.
Then things that do get passed, like modeled landing gear bogies get ignored for years.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/4g1HTvMf8wk8
7 Likes
Fair enough, the docs I was looking at simply called it a shaped charge.
No no, you mistake what I’m saying and try to put words in my mouth.
I’m not saying russian bias. More of a russian and all factions handicap.
I’m saying it’s a fair handicap because the game wouldn’t be fun if USA had realistic tech.
The M1A2Sepv2 with actually correct armor and M829A3 rounds? OP
Bradley with one shot top down missiles? OP
USA jets with AESA and AIM-120s that are harder to defeat? OP
It’s okay to admit it.
I said don’t try it. I said nothing else, proved my point that it’s not just NATO equipment bug reports are being ignored. In the case you tried it anyway.
The Rafale already exists btw.
4 Likes
Then why mention it if I didn’t say it?
But back on topic
Terminator should be 11.3 or 11.7
Because:
I knew this would happen, and always does.
10.7 or 11.0 is better, but 11.3 and 11.7 are too high.
4 Likes
I think the missile speed and how high it is mounted will prove it’s usefulness. Like an ADATS but on a vehicle with armor with resistance against other faction’s CAS due to it defeating tandem.
2 Likes
Brimstones and hellfires I’m assuming you’re referring to. Just use LGB’s or Mavs like everyone else, they work like a dream.
1 Like
You mentioned something about an attack from above. Could you elaborate?
1 Like
Could you, for example, compare a US tank at BR 10.3 with the Terminator’s armor?
1 Like
Yes, if you think about it, the Terminator is even better than the ADATS. The Terminator has a low silhouette, armor, and third-generation thermal imaging. The only advantage the ADATS has is four more missiles. Otherwise, the ADATS is inferior to the Terminator in terms of anti-tank combat.