Other nations have noticeably better ARH Missiles, which are a lot more dominant than FOX2’s right now, or better flight models; there’s even better missiles than the 9M in game already, like the R27ET, Magic II, AAM-3, PL-8B. So why not give Israel a good IR missile, when it’s lacking in all other categories already?
1 Like
Don’t worry, lots of whales from asia, buying all kinds of new and rare vehicles which will make up the difference!
Just saw my first VT-1… two actually… haven’t seen one other than in videos.
2.5 km rear aspect launch at against a target going away at <1000kmh is pretty realistic now, before it was closer to 1 km. a huge buff.
There is so much wrong with this lol.
Anyone else have a bug where the second any vehicle is destroyed the game crashes to desktop?
Own vehicle or otherwise.
Do you happen to be on the Linux client?
Nope, windows
And for me it’s not just missile detonations. It happened with ground vehicles as well.
Yeah that also presents for us too.
The current classification of MK103’s default belt (HEIT-SAPHET-API) as “ground attack” solely due to one 58mm API round is unreasonable. Other cannons whose default belt with more than 40 mm penetration have the same issue (here only take MK103 for example).
Let’s Compare with Other Nations:
US 20mm M3 cannon: Ground target belt contains 36mm AP rounds (3/4 armor-piercing) with no SP cost, capable of penetrating many light tanks and the top turret armor of some medium tanks (like Panther and T-44)
Japanese 30mmType5 30mm cannon: Ground target belt (3/4 APHE shells) with 38mm penetration similar to 20mm M3, causing more damage than it due to having 14g TNT filler
German MK103:
*Default belt requires SP cost simply because of the 1/3 API shells composition
*Air belt has no SP cost but only 25% SAPHE-T composition, offering very limited anti-ground effectiveness
*The same SP cost for default belt (only 1/3 shells have penetration of more than 40mm) and the anti-ground belt (3/4 (for Ho229 it self) or full shells (other mk103 carriers) with penetration more than 40mm) is unfair
Here’s the Problem:
US and Japanese cannons can perform CAS attacks with their 36/38mm belts without SP cost, while MK103 must cost SP for acquiring CAS capability.
Suggestions:
1.Revise default belt: Replace API with SAPHE-T ( to HEIT-SAPHET-SAPHET)
2.Add new belt option: Pure SAPHET belt with no SP cost, matching other nations’ “moderate ground attack” standards
3.Just remove SP cost from default belt as its ground attack effectiveness is limited
The same principle applies to many other cannons like the MK214 on Me 262 A-1/U4, whose default belt also has only 1/3 APHE shells.
By the way, I think using rank to determine whether a 40 pen belt needs spawn points is a bit too simplistic. For example, below BR 8.0, as the BR increases, the armor of tanks becomes progressively thicker, so the penetration required for ground attacks also increases. For instance, at BR 2.0, a 20-pen cannon might destroy most tanks, but at BR 5.0, you need over 40 penetration to do the same. At BR 6.7, you need 60 penetration. Therefore, the penetration threshold for requiring spawn points on belts should be dynamically adjusted based on aircraft BR (Battle Rating), rather than using a fixed value like 40 mm.
2 Likes
Shame, worth a shot ig
What makes you think that? That slow reload and limited turret rotation seem quite limiting to me.
I understand that you do not have the opportunity to use Russian resources because of a different language. But I can no longer tolerate the nonsense about the “non-existent rocket”.
Unfortunately, I cannot attach the video. But I can give you excerpts from the video. 2022 Ukraine
in the Russian segment there are many videos of x-38 attacks at the estimated 70km±
study the post above
How exactly is it supposed to be Laser guiding, a Thermal imaging seeker equipt missile?
1 Like
Right now I have about 6 videos from an Orlan drone that points its crosshair at a target. And 6 out of 6 times a missile flies into its crosshair.
Either the missile has navigation up to <1 meter, or it’s a laser. Whichever is closer to u, I think the developer can give u in game. Witch u prefer?
I don’t think the ML version has ever been questioned, what is questioned is the existence of the MT version. The missile family itself exists but many argue that the evidence for it having a functional Thermal seeker version is to little to justify it’s addition to the game.
10 Likes
That’s got nothing to do with the Kh-38MT which is what they were previously talking about.
No one doubts that the Laser and GPS guided versions have seen service.
What is in doubt is the status of the IIR variant, and further its actual capabilities not matching what was specified in the brochure that was turned up, as it is designed for an Anti-Shipping Target set. let alone the quality of the brochure’s stats being far worse than what has been implemented (by at least 16x if we assume what is in game matches the WGU-10/B).
5 Likes