Some Mod might want to update the title of the thread
2 Likes
hey, not 28, but ATLEAST. 16.
So, is the PL-12A essentially just a PL-12 with a completely replaced seeker? Currently, a suggestion to increase the missile’s weight has been accepted—from 198 kg to 214 kg, a whole 16 kg increase. However, there’s still no news about enhanced propulsion. In the game, does the PL-12A’s performance actually support its claimed 120+ km range? In normal matches, when I use the R-77-1 or AIM-120C/D, I can confidently engage targets beyond 25 km, but with the PL-12, I only dare to shoot within 20 km.
2 Likes
really? I’ve gotten 40km+ km kills with pl-12 before.
and 60km+ kills with r-77-1 and aim-120.
50+km kills with mica em
Currently, shots beyond 40 km are considered “area suppression” launches, as their probability of a hit is negligible. I’m more inclined to call them “lottery tickets.” I believe engagements beyond 20 km are necessary to ensure a reasonable hit rate, because the enemy isn’t a static target flying directly towards you.
So, ample thrust during the missile’s propulsion phase is essential, along with low aerodynamic drag. That’s why, during the dev livestream, when the planner said “the PL-12A is similar to the AIM-120D,” I thought the PL-12A’s propulsion would be improved. But…
Furthermore, compared to other lower-tier missiles with engagement ranges around 20 km, the effective range of the AIM-120C/D and R-77-1 stands out as significantly superior.
1 Like
i feel that you might as well shoot off a few missiles early game, especially in down tiers. It’s how I’ve gotten 40km+ kills with r-77 in full down tiers to 12.3 for example
Everyone has a different playstyle. If you have ample energy (e.g., in a Rafale, Eurofighter 2000, or Su-30SM2), your missile performance is good, and you’re in the first wave of defensive launches, then these shots beyond 40 km are indeed necessary. However, if the missile performance is subpar, and you choose to flank the battlefield for a second-wave attack, I don’t think initiating an engagement beyond 40 km is necessary.
true, if you can get mc 1.6 at alt and the target is 60km i take the shot every time C-5 will still be going over mc 2 at those ranges and is still pretty dangerous
2 Likes
Will we finally get a 3D model update for the Fw 190 D series and Ta 152 H1 in the near future? The 3D models are so incredibly outdated. New aircraft, tanks, etc., are all well and good, but there are other areas in War Thunder that people enjoy playing besides high-tier matches. This update includes various updates for the lower tiers, which is a good thing. Lately, I’ve had the distinct feeling that low and mid-tiers are being completely neglected.
So many new tank detailed physics, yet we are still missing some of the most iconic physical elements on a tank… :')
(As I mentioned earlier, all of the new physics are warmly welcome! But I can’t help but to notice the lack of Merkava chainnnns :P)
4 Likes
I’ll point it out here again but any chance the JAS-39D can receive the proper canard modeling/function like the rest of the Gripens fixed for this patch? (Reference to the bug report that I submitted: Community Bug Reporting System)
I did a slow speed high AoA flight to show the canards.
JAS-39C for ref in the dev:
JAS-39D in dev (note the difference of angle vs the 39C):
1 Like
Wait is the F-15I really gettijg spice 250? Did I miss it in the changelog/datamine somewhere?
Here
2 Likes
Thx, I guess I read over it.
It’s around 5:00 in the morning and I just woke up, was hella confused when I saw all the people talking about the spice 250 on the F-15I.
1 Like
Hey, are there any fixes planned for this bug report about freezing on alt-tab? The game is nigh unplayable at times, and it’s so frustrating to have to reboot the game and get crew-locked because of an issue on the game’s end. It’s been five months since the last dev response, is there any work being done on this?
Where is it
Time for a counter report
[DEV] ZA-35 accuracy incorrect
Value of 1,5mrad directly contradicts the source that i provided, both now and previously. This should be corrected.
And we get a double down.
I guess when you pretend that the issue does not exist, everything is fine, right?
9 Likes
As funny as that would be, is it even possible?
Possible in what way?
Technically? Yes
Practically (cough, Gaijin letting it happen)? Prooooobably, maybe.
1 Like