I think people are well within their right to be doubtfull, when this
makes this
3 Likes
I understand that, being doubtful doesn’t neccessarily mean it’s right, as that has been proven before in a multitude of instances.
Regardless because the missile operates on this principle, it wouldn’t change anything with more or less fragmentation. Even if it was changed, people would presume it’d be a “nerf” but with a radar lock it’d still detonate and destroy the aircraft regardless. The fragmentation count very well can be exaggarated but the cone it’s spread across wouldn’t change.
Also can’t forget how a hollow thin skinned pre-fragmented dart can somehow also maintain sufficient structural integrity to penetrate 300+mm of armor but also be weak enough to generate that level of fragmentation consistently
yeah its fragment count is way over tuned
I dont have any good screenshots but if the missile detonates far away from the aircraft you can very clearly seen the outline of the aircraft in the approaching fragments
and remember its a tiny warhead
I’m not denying detonation method, nor shrapnell pattern
Just showing that the number of it is, well, huge.
it absolutely is over preforming compared to every other missile
it has less than a KG of TNTe, while having a much higher kill radius than other SAMs
1 Like
Something, something, Starstreak Dart being the same thing, but smaller, while not acting in the same way, something, something
1 Like
I understand that. But most people that do mention it assume that making it lower would make the missile “worse” in some metrics. Which it wouldn’t, so overtuned or not overtuned there’s really nothing concrete to prove or disprove the count that would meaningfully make the missile worse. Not saying I want it to be worse, but I understand that is the motive behind the fragmentation regardless
It would definitely make it worse, but it would depend on the reduction amount how much worse.
Damage wise, definetely not. Standard air to air missles that carry only hundreds of fragments still reliably take out planes in normal AIr RB matches. Damage model in this game is also questionably weak for a lot of aircraft. It fundamentally wouldn’t change anything
yes because it would
given that it is command detonated instead of a proximity fuse it will always detonate when it reaches the range the aircraft is at, even if the missile was not on target
with the current overpreforming kill radius this makes it much harder to kinetically dodge than it should be
I said earlier that reducing the fragmentation cound would NOT reduce the cone or radius of shrapnel.
yes and that is part of the problem
because the cone and radius are also overpreforming
this warhead has barely more explosives than a stinger, which in game is known to be semi unreliable at killing aircraft even with an only 1m proxy fuse
1 Like
Not the case. If you use LOS mode and a target manuevers in a way that would require the missile to use lead and is unable to reach the target, it will simply not detonate.
The stinger doesn’t use the directed fragmentation principle this missile does, so the comparison wouldn’t matter. And comparing missile sizes is unreliable as fragmentation count can vary between many similar sized weapons or munitions.
Partially this is an aircraft damage model issue in the case of stinger; IRL examples of stinger during tests would embed themselves into QF-106 drone targets and destroy them without an explosive warhead.
Missiles are both too weak and too strong at the same time.
1 Like
so I guess what you are saying is that 770g of TNT in russia is more powerful than 10-20kg of TNT in other countries
because the explosive mass is very relevant to the quantity and energy of fragments produced
and there is no evidence that the missile even does direct fragments laterally like you are trying to imply
Energy focused in one direction versus being spread out makes a huge difference. And given this missile was also claimed to be aple to intercept hypersonic munitions, the format of detonation of makes sense for the task. Granted you have weapons that use pure kinetic energy and reliance on directly hitting the target, which is a much harder feat.
I already explained above and showed a picture regarding the translation and testing of the warhead type.
and none of those indicate that the fragments are dispersed in a non uniform radial pattern like you are implying
and if you look at the testing of nearly any missile the fragments will be dispersed in a similar pattern
Reducing the number of shrapnell would have an impact tho.
If anyone played with missiles long enough, you can confirm that you had an get good moment, where the missile that should have obliterated a plane, does only minor damage, even if the same detonation 2 games earlier grinded the target to a fine powder.
The less shrapnell, the greater chance of Gaijin moment.
Current implementation of Ya6M effectively removes the chance of Gaijin moment.