Very cool document! The guidance part is something I never even thought about but makes great sense. Trying to lead missiles feels very wonky.
The missile selection priority is neat too, even though its not really relevant to WT. Guess TOW crews have access to lots of old stocks of missiles? and don’t wanna waste the new ones on softer targets? Neat!
11 Likes
gaijin in a nutshell
1 Like
How do I like a post twice?
1 Like
what we get
7 Likes
Because, it’s not utterly useless…
The penetrator had issues before the “updated TOW modeling” if we can label such horrid modeling a legitimate update. Now besides struggling to get the penetrator to kill anything inside the enemy tank besides the roof machine gun or commander optics we have to fight Gaijin’s inane attempts to model gravity.
I like realistic changes. The change that was made is not realistic. Tow missiles do not dip and dive, they fire in a straight line. I understand wanting to punish sloppy quick jerking movements but this change to them doesn’t do that. It prevents you from firing a TOW in a straight line, you have to adjust because the game fires it downwards then up.
2 Likes
sorry for necro post, but does that mean the pen nerf was based on an interview without secondary sources ? if that’s the case it’s peak cherrypicking
It’s not so much that the warheads pen was nerfed per say as that is accurate. It’s just that Gaijin is vehemently refusing to acknowledge the second warheads existance, believing that they impact the target at different positions and that the penetrative effects wouldn’t add together to 200 something mm because of it, and as usual they blame it on an engine issue as well.
2 Likes
More or less right. The penetration originally was really too high, but this estimate we have now is laughably low. Because a Bradley commander just wanted to make the interviewer go away without revealing classified info.
From what research I have done, the twin warheads are not intended to impact in the same area, and instead are spaced to provide maximum possible damage to the target if a hit isnt perfectly over the center mass of the tank. So yes, while it would be nice for the spall cone to just be super wide and especially angry, gaijin has already claimed this is implemented.
Then we have the lack of penetration due to assumptions about the warhead (single layer EFP instead of dual layer, EFPs losing penetration due to air gaps like HEAT would). They refuse to combine the two warheads because they’re not proven to exactly be tandem. Unlike BILL-2 that specifically states it has both warheads impact the same area. From cutaways and diagrams of the missile, the warheads are angled to intentionally impact different areas, which disqualifies them from being counted as a single higher penetration warhead as “Tandem” ones would be.
Currently the best we can hope for is a 20 to 25mm increase in penetration and reclassification of EFPs as kinetic penetrators before the TOW-2B is made obsolete and the details are declassified. Right now it’s still considered HEAT ammo when the function of a EFP is closer to a small caliber AP throwing gun.
That being said, for game balance it’d be fine to bump the penetration up to 150+mm as a plausible estimate until further data is uncovered/released. BILL-2 ignores ERA and has 550mm, a little buff to the TOW-2B wouldn’t really change a huge amount.
1 Like
But by adding it to MODIFICATIONS, most people have auto set, and they buy it. Along with Drones and Planes they may not ever use… Even if it costs you SL, it costs you, and they nickel and dime you a little more. And BTW, some of the people that post in this forum work for WT, and will gaslight any issue you have in favor of the snail that pays them. But don’t worry GAIJIN isn’t GREEDY, just ask them.
Yep. It’s not laziness though
EFP’s arent KE penetrators so it would be laziness to model them as such
except they do there are many videos from rebels to ukrainians firing those missiles, from gunner sights and from outside view when the missile dips and dives. i have examined many videos but ill only send one. gunner bro literally aims upwards after missile launch to bring the missile faster up from the “dip and dive”
just like how the gunner does in real life
They are closer to a KE penetrator than they are a HEAT jet.
In actuality, both HEAT and AP(FSDS) are KE penetrators, the sole difference is the point at which the penetrator gains their maximum potential energy.
AP gains their max energy at the muzzle, while HEAT/EFPs gain their max energy at detonation. Except that EFPs can and do travel significantly further in open air, while maintaining effective penetration. Because the EFP is formed well away from ERA and impacts at a reduced velocity over a larger surface area, it is closer to an AP round than it is a HEAT jet. Thus, it should resist/ignore light ERA.
The sight was disrupted by the shock of the missile launch, the point of aim did not change in order to compensate for a drop in altitude. TOW exits the tube with sufficient energy to have literally negligible perceived drop in reality. Functionally all SACLOS weapons do the same.
The fairly light remote controlled optics+ missile tube mast experienced a change in point of aim due to the sudden change in mass after launch. This is a well understood phenomenon.
2 Likes
except when we use these words we refer to the mechanic behind it not the “what” which you should know so lets not go into these “achsually” things and use words as they are used scientifically.
which is nothing compared to KE. the penetration retention by distance is closer to heat than ke rounds. if it was modelled like KE you could have the round go 2km and still be effective if the fuze was set like that which is completely unrealistic and non sense.
they are not KE penetrators.
They should never be modelled as KE penetrators instead slugs should be slugs.
Laziness is stupid.
you can literally see the tow in comparison to the target regardless of sight movement lmao
people really love making shit up to not have their weapons nerfed. “the sight was disrupted” yet you can still see it.
BULLSHIT you can see the missile is way out before he lifts up the sight.
if the sight was kicked up by the missile it would have been lifted up on launch not after the missile is out. your “phenomenon” has been exposed and now i ask you to stop making up things.
I dunno man, that looks awfully like the recoil of the launch making the sight rock, not someone deliberately aiming up to account for a drop.
It’s most certainly not clear enough to be used as evidence, you can’t even see much through the smoke for a decent portion of it.
I’m gonna go with the launch making the vehicle rock.
1 Like
stop talking non sense if it was recoil it would happen as the missile is leaving the tube not way after the missile is in flight there is no way it can be recoil
you can see a LOT in slow motion if you pay attention and watch it multiple times
dude physical vibrations arent a stable lift up of a sight way after the missile has been launched while not happening during launch where the vibrations should actually occur
yall just want the tow to not dip yall dont want to accept factual evidence infront of your face and make up crazy reasons that are literally proven false by the video itself
now stop making up non sense. gaijin developers know the reality and you guys just dont like it lmao. the flight path of the missile will not be changed because it is correct. they didnt make it up.
guess what? at first i was also outraged by the change because i thought it was unrealistic but i did real research unlike you guys, and found out that yes it dips. instead of ignoring the evidence, i accepted the truth and learned how to use the tow the way it is in real life and stopped complaining.
stop talking non sense if it was recoil it would happen as the missile is leaving the tube not way after the missile is in flight there is no way it can be recoil
You are failing to account for things like suspension.
you can see a LOT in slow motion if you pay attention and watch it multiple times
I see a lot of smoke. That, combined with a fairly low resolution video means it’s not suitable for your purposes. It’s ambiguous to say the least.
You see someone adjusting for a drop, I see a vehicle recoiling.
Why don’t you find another video from a static launching platform that shows the same thing?