Honestly, I’m more interested in the guidance methods of Kh-38MT and IR Hammer being coded for the game than either being removed.
Both would be a “nerf” to the capabilities.
22 Likes
Again, as per;
US Designed Electro Optical seekers should not be able to lock onto the ground.
Here is Developers answer
Seekers like these can track optically contrast objects. As it is not possible to implement true contrast edge tracking in the game we allow seekers to lock on any point on the ground. So any point on the ground is considered contrast object.
Therefore, this issue is considered resolved
In effect they are, It’s Contrast seekers like the Maverick and GBU-15 that aren’t modeled properly as they can erroneously lock onto zero contrast targets like the ground, sure something could be done where after going terminal the IR-TERCOM missiles only update the Predicted Point of Impact once, but with such large warheads it’s unlikely that such a change would be significant due to the time between the last update and how far a prospective target could move in comparison to the blast radius.
though it could be interesting to see how smoke would interact which such a mechanic.
Oh god is that the ugly 2 seat variant
Added another pic, this time an normsl single seat
You probably missed my point
It’s obvious BIAS and this thread is proof of this.
1 Like
Are you a native speaker or did you learn?
What would you suggest to someone attempting to learn (me lol)?
It came to me in a dream ✓
5 Likes
And there has been evidence posted that the missile does exist, tho full production may not have been determined
Stop being disingenuous. The only evidence is a mockup, with zero evidence of it ever being tested or produced beyond the mockup.
By gaijins own standards, the weapon should be removed from the game.
17 Likes
Just don’t
Offtopic.
Let’s not forget about others. I remember the developer changed Rafale’s FM using a video. When you need documents to change the flanker’s flight model. There are many double standards in the game, don’t forget about it.
Don’t try to wash it out. That video was traced frame by frame with data analysis provided. However sad it is - I doubt anyone would argue about it being used as a source.
With Kh-38MT however - we don’t even have any evidence that a fully assembled model exists, let alone works.
3 Likes
And? It’s still a double standard. When you have to use official documents to change a flight model, and videos for another flight model.
Reminds me of the story about the F-16AJ.
Don’t forget that you are playing a game with double standards.
@Smin1080p_WT so question, did this even already reach the devs and are they aware that the current gambreaking missle might not even exist?
Or do they have sources that they exist beyond a mock up and have actively been fired?
5 Likes
The fox and scimitar were nerfed on a literally “I feel the turret traverse is too fast” report, so the rules mean nothing.
6 Likes
Have anyone done the same amount of work with su-27 videos as this dude? If yes - I apologize and accept your point. But I really doubt that.
It’s not a double standards matter, as I pointed out earlier it’s more a deal of undefined standards. And that’s really annoying. I’m not knowledgable enough with F-16AJ situation so I’ll be quiet about that.
whats wrong with learning another language?
1 Like
SquishFace If I remember correctly.
This plane doesn’t even exist.