gaijin releasing all full of content to make us forget the problems with the vehicles of minor nations “GAIJIN NO JUTSU”
4 Likes
gaijin: “hold some poop,”
chinese players: “mmmmhh thanks”
6 Likes
Buddy, the source has not been given, and the source has not been given
2 Likes
They blocked my report while I corrected it with the source IDs. T-T
https://warthunder.com/fr/tournament/replay/356251980835287402
ID :4f1a94a0037716a
https://warthunder.com/fr/tournament/replay/356122856938366610
ID : 4f133da00356692
6 Likes
The current performance of the CS/SA5 in-game is entirely unworthy of its 12.0 battle rating. As a 12.0 vehicle, the CS/SA5’s missiles cannot even engage helicopters beyond 4 km. Furthermore, the warhead explosive filler is clearly mismatched with the missile’s weight and dimensions, resulting in extremely inconsistent combat effectiveness. Additionally, the FB10A missile lacks its essential dual-mode guidance capability (command + infrared), and it also lacks image-lock anti-jamming capability. In contrast, systems like the Strela-10 or Type 81C possess corresponding image guidance capabilities. Moreover, the feeble 20g overload capacity of the FB10/FB10A missiles is the weakest among all 12.0 SPAA missiles, making them essentially ineffective against fixed-wing aircraft beyond 5 km. In summary, I believe the CS/SA5’s current level is completely unsuitable for 12.0; it belongs at 11.3, if not 11.0
5 Likes
As far as I can find trough English sources I simply can’t find an “official” source for the document
It was accepted briefly but unfortunately since no "official " source it was denied in the end
1 Like
FB10A’s warhead mass and maximum G-load really don’t deserve the BR 12.0.Other players have provided detailed data on the CS/SA5 and FB10A. Why Gaijin consistently ignored?
4 Likes
I’m not even complaining about the terrible performance of the FB10A—that radar alone is shockingly bad. It’s not even as capable as the Type 09 at 8.7 BR. The CS/SA5 poses less of a threat to enemies beyond 10 km than the Tunguska does.
3 Likes
Perhaps some players from other countries think that Chinese players’ complaints are always exaggerated. I bet those who hold this view have probably never even tried the Chinese tech tree themselves—they’re just posting out of pure nationalistic motives. Then they’ll throw around a “Commie game” rant and walk away.
10 Likes
1008弹链，会不会比8001弹链更好？
虽然有装填，但是补弹会更快。
Friends, visit my topic and you will find out that the FB-10A missiles are not only infrared, but also must be radio-controlled, since even Wikipedia has information about this.
3 Likes
It’s obvious that the FB-10A has dual mode guidance, you can’t make a ir missile with 18km range without it.
BUT Wikipedia is not a source and neither is China equips light brigades with SWS3 air defense systems to counter drones during reconnaissance missions this article which Wikipedia uses as a source
True, but at the same time, Gaijin is way too selective with sources (if it’s not Russian). To be honest, it’s not looking good for us CN players. They’ve denied all of our sources and decided the CS/SA5 was good to go.
It doesn’t make any sense that they would implement a new vehicle without sufficient information. They could’ve done the FK-2000. The FK-2000 is well-documented and is within the new standards of SPAA.
Apparently in Gaijin’s mind, a modern vehicle such as the CS/SA5 has rudimentary IR missiles? Like what? It makes way more sense that it has radio command guidance and IIR (as it should have) because it is a modern-day vehicle. There is not a single source out there that says it doesn’t have these 2 guidance modes.
Gaijin seems to think it’s just a longer range HN-6 and apparently that warrants a massive BR increase. Typical big brain snail move.
5 Likes
I believe Gaijin should be required to disclose the “credible, non-third-party, publicly available without breaching confidentiality” sources they utilize when introducing a new vehicle, either in the Dev Blog or the Update Notes.
5 Likes
Furthermore, these sources must also be “non-student-thesis, accurately translated, conceptually consistent, non-forged, and pertaining to the specific vehicle variant in question” (and so forth).
5 Likes
Gaijin can’t even be bothered to implement image recognition and log guidance systems. I suspect they actually don’t know how to play their own game.
1 Like
There’s something very wrong with the FB-10A aswell it simply does not track properly it’ll just miss stationary targets or one’s flying in a straight line
1 Like
A top tier AA vehicle but only has 20G IR missiles with 1kg TNT equivalent warhead, so ridiculous. Cannon lacks APDS too. It will be better in 11.0 br or even lower.
Link doesn’t seem to work, was this deleted by bug admins???
The FB-10A model is still wrong even tho they marked it fixed on the dev server…
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/og3tXkBs1Qm5
Why on God’s green earth are we adding systems to the game if they’re not ready?
1 Like