is pid even properly modelled ingame?
im pretty sure they’ve said we’re never getting anti era tips modelled
I think they just said they think they didn’t make a difference, at least that’s what they said with M829A3.
i find hard to believe they said that, i remember them saying they arent going to model them, sure i dont really have alot of trust in war thunder research them but i dont think they would go as far to say the Anti era tip doesnt work against era.
Not really no, PID takes the place of all guidance schemes in game as it is the only control system actually implemented, and is effectively universal across all missiles. That doesn’t mean that the implementation is optimized for each specific missile. And entirely lacks any ability to dampen the commanded response so you get things like, the following video that make no sense, and waste energy, and are near impossible to control for a variety of reasons (Also as designators are not modeled, so induce pointing error / parallax issues, and are exacerbated off axis missile installations / sights makes performance vary depending on which sighting method you use )
https://old.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1gqw1rh/i_know_atgms_have_been_broken_for_a_while_but/
But for the most part it comes down to the fact that accurately modeling these things is significantly more computationally expensive, and would be difficult to keep track of universally considering how many variations there are with slightly different properties, but yes a more advanced system that is closed loop would fix the issue, but again requires significant work to occur before it can be introduced.
Yeah, they did. You would think that if Kontakt-5, Reilkt, Kacktus or one of the various Multi-hit ERA projects, had a significant impact on M829A3’s effective combat range. M829(E)4 would have been rejected ( basically Insensitive propellant version of -A3) and a crash program started up to adjust for it (even then a number of potential options already exist, be that upgunning to 130 / 140mm (e.g. M1 TTB / CATTB or M1 Thumper),or reviving XM943 STAFF / M1111 MRM among others.) and restore said effective range; Approx. 1.5~1.8km.
3 Likes
You have to understand, propaganda is a powerful tool. The army testing and developing an improved round was total BS. They knew just stamping a 3 on the end was enough to make peer nations shiver, they didn’t even need to make the round better. 3 is better than 2, and the army needed a new round. So obviously 829a3 is better than 829a2, with no improvements necessary.
In all seriousness I think they use a real formula, something that starts with an L I think. However it doesn’t really calculate or include material properties. Just as ERA as far as I understand it and it in game doesn’t have its material properties modeled. However, it’s a game and not everyone is running a >4070 who’s be able to handle a game having the plates launch and calculating all this stuff on the fly and not bogging down systems. However, idk shit about shit so I’m probably wrong.
Didnt they specifically state that itd be “unfair” to a specific nation if anti-ERA tips began being implemented?
Edit: was misremembering it seems, though the truth is even more stupid…
1 Like
Considering that it should turn the UFP & Turret of most Eastern designs into less then paper out to ~ 1.5km, and their propensity for brawling and face tanking. Yes.
Lanz-Odermatt / and variants of De marre for earlier shells
The issue is that various things aren’t taken into account, and that the reference shell that it requires, to use as a basis to estimate performance is a complete fabrication, due to inconstant testing requirements across nations so. Its entirely based Gaijin’s numbers, and thus projects some specific issues forwards that just happen to somehow have a tendency benefit Eastern design methodologies (e.g. APDS / APCR projectile’s sheathe mass is / not considered, only the core of the projectile).
There are further issues with how HE & HEAT are relatively modeled (and the baffling lack of alternate HE warheads for many Western rockets e.g. HVAR / FFAR / Hydra / Zuni etc. ) as well for example.
Take the “70% effective radius against Personnel of M151 vs M247 warheads” approximation (once the ratio of TNT equiv. is taken into account this increases to 80% for small caliber HEAT), and compare that to what we find in game. The recent changes to Larger caliber HEAT (e.g. Maverick) are only the beginning of what should have been a complete revision.
Which can be sidestepped as an issue of course if your nation(s) happen to have both HEAT and HE (and FAE, for a time) warheads for their rockets implemented.
5 Likes
The issue is there is no standard. There have been cases where 'There isn’t enough" while in other cases it “there is enough and all it is is a newspaper article which shouldn’t even be considered a secondary source but a 3rduary”
That’s a legacy mechanic funnily enough
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
I think the issue is that they are never going to make everyone happy and it has potential to get some of the biggest spenders angry for a few certain nations if they come right out and say “well, we didn’t actually have a source and instead tried our best to implement X thing in a balanced fashion” that’s just going to open a whole can of worms.
We all know they pick and choose when to balance and when to historically do stuff, I just hate the inconsistency of it. What is really like to see is their internal numbers for win/lose rates and kills to death ratio.
Yes, please at least cite what material was referenced when making balance changes
Also as already mentioned, the inconsistency when it comes to what changes get accepted and which ones do not is frustrating. There should be clear guidelines which both people who submit bug reports for changes AND the people who accept or deny the reports have to follow.
2 Likes
but at least then you could call them out if there was a double standart
well theyre undoubtedly morons as even with what is publicly available there is no reason to believe it to be anywere near ineffective, ESPECIALLY in war thunder ranges.
gotta love that video, happened to me quite alot when i was using the ratel and warrior.
and even if they did have particular effeect on the shell, it would be at far higher ranges than war thunder happens at 2000+ meters, if i remember correctly m829a3 development was made exactly to insure penetration at long range (correctly if im wrong) of Kinetic ERA
Ive tried citing the official USMC NAVAIR flight manual and bc the plane isnt russian they deny it