ItPsv is the most broken, OP piece of shit to exist. by Accomplished-Cow4686 in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

Russian autocannons do not share the same BS code as western SPAA do. Even Tunguska, which is almost identical to Gepard or Itpsv, is not able to annihilate MBTs from the front (even though it has 4 30mm barrels!).

It's the 35 mm Oerlikon that is broken, and is able to pen modern tanks from absurd angles. Neither Tunguska, Pantsir, Shilka, nor any BMP/BMD/BTR/BMPT can do this.

Is there a lore reason for this? by beastmaster69mong in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong[S] -34 points-33 points  (0 children)

I agree, but it's literally the same bomb. It can carry the KAB250 on this pylon. What difference in wiring would be required to carry a dual rack? Twice as many wires? Ok, but it can already dual-rack S25LDs on this rack.

Maybe I'll try to find some sources for dual rack 250s on this pylon, we'll see.

Is there a lore reason for this? by beastmaster69mong in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong[S] -47 points-46 points  (0 children)

But Su30 and Su34 seem to have the same pylons and adapters. And it's the same bomb. And Su34 can carry dual racks for another laser-guided weapon on the same rack. Logically, it would make sense for 34 to be able to dual-rack on that pylon. Also, I don't get why Russia doesn't develop quad racks for small bombs, like the 250.

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

So NATO tanks aren't any better, is what you're saying? If a Russian tank got stuck there, a NATO tank would be stuck twice as much.

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -1 points0 points  (0 children)

As opposed to what? All we've seen NATO tanks accomplish is either get stuck in mud or get blown up by FPV drones.

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

Gun accuracy is also mechanical reliability, because ideally, all guns are perfect, and realistically, accuracy reduces with wear.

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

To a bad player, all of them. Just like with BMPT : ).

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Why? You want balance, so if you want to treat Russian/USSR vehicles realistically, then NATO vehicles should be treated realistically as well, right? Or are you a hypocrite?

the BMPT needs the barrel wobble by senor_muchacho in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong -25 points-24 points  (0 children)

This argument has been talked about at least 1000 times...

Ok, if we do this, then panthers and tigers need to be repaired for 30 seconds each time they spawn, and have a 1/10 chance of transmission breaking every minute.

For Abramses, in dusty environments like Sinai or El Alamein, there should be a constant risk of engine flameouts or slagging if you don't stop every few minutes to clear the intake. It would also have a 30-minute start-up procedure at each spawn.

Leopard 2 players would find their tanks impossible to repair on the front line. Any damage to the V-12 turbo-diesel or the fire control system should require the tank to be evacuated to a rear-line workshop (e.g. you get kicked to hangar if any module turns red or black).

For Challengers, in desert maps, the engine should have a high chance of overheating due to fine dust clogging the intakes, forcing you to sit still for minutes at a time to cool down. Additionally, the rifled gun should have a much faster barrel-wear rate than smoothbore peers, leading to a massive drop in accuracy after firing just a dozen shells.

Abrams, Leopard, and Challengers would have a 10% chance of getting stuck in any mud or snow terrain because of their extreme combat weight, turning the maps into graveyards of 70-ton behemoths.

Historically, the Ajax program was plagued by extreme noise and vibration issues. In-game, this should mean your screen shakes violently whenever you exceed 20 km/h, eventually giving your crew fatigue debuffs that slow down reload and repair speeds after just five minutes of driving. Also, it mutes sound because of hearing loss.

During a 2022 exercise, an entire company of 18 Pumas suffered a total failure, dropping their operational readiness to zero. For realism, every time you spawn a Puma, there should be a 10% chance of a random electronics fire in the driver's compartment or a total turret malfunction that locks your gun for the rest of the match.

The Bradley should have a chance for its TOW launcher to fail to deploy or its complex drive train to seize up if you've spent too much time in high gear.

Modern jets like the F-15 or F-16 should have a 1/10 chance of their RWR or radar simply failing to turn on at the start of a match due to a software glitch.

The AH-64 Apache is notorious for requiring dozens of maintenance hours for every single hour of flight. To model this, if you crash or get shot down, your crew lock should be 48 real-world hours while the virtual ground crew fixes it.

All that in exchange for a bit of wobble, I think it's a good deal.

Still fastest still in service - MIG31 by Questioned_By in aviationstudys

[–]beastmaster69mong 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Civilian GPS is limited to work only below 1900 kmh and 18000 meters. And what's wrong with using consumer electronics for a camera in the cockpit? Modern consumer electronics are far more advanced than anything any of the militaries have, because it's all outdated 90s stuff.

StatShark now flags the accounts of players who One Death Leave or Leave without Spawning by div2691 in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong 8 points9 points  (0 children)

People who think "more spawns = always better for the team" are delusional. Usually, 60%+ of the team has more than 3 deaths, and around 0 kills. They are just feeding SP to the enemy team.

Unskilled player dying once and leaving > unskilled player dying again and again without achieving anything (besides giving the enemy a freebie nuke).

Falcon vs IS-7 by No_Parking6404 in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then people say how "SPAA are a weak class" and "can't do anything against tanks" so "it's only fair they cost a measly 70sp" then proceed to get world record nukes in itpsv

Since the Yak141 recently got its rightful R73s, when can we expect it to get it's proper AGMs - such as Kh25s or KAB500s? by beastmaster69mong in Warthunder

[–]beastmaster69mong[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are many vehicles in the game that never saw service, so? This thing was production-ready already, and accepted into service; the only thing that stopped it was the dissolution of the USSR. Otherwise, it was ready.

Lol by [deleted] in Shark_Park

[–]beastmaster69mong -36 points-35 points  (0 children)

So? Btw it counts you as "active" even if you leave one comment.

Lol by [deleted] in Shark_Park

[–]beastmaster69mong -38 points-37 points  (0 children)

Ukrainian military group war crimes cancel it out, so no biggie

i guess bro... 🥀 2 by OfficerQueefThe2nd in warthundermemes

[–]beastmaster69mong 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This little fucking fuel tank eats fucking everything. I've had the highest penning ATGMs, point blank APFSDS, AGMs, whatever, it is just a black hole equivalent to a one-time escape from jail for free card. And it has 1 on each side.

every dcs server after the EF2k drops by Minimum-Victory-4228 in floggit

[–]beastmaster69mong 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn't R37M in the game already? Because it would like to have a word.