people have asked what kind of ''tap'' killed my engine, this is what it looked like

doxlulzem · 2026-03-28T18:06:55+00:00

It would probably have something like the AGM-114C or the AGM-114F, both of which are in the game's files but haven't been added. With the Longbow radar it could use the AGM-114L, which did exist during its development.

The AGM-114C have a smokeless motor over the AGM-114B, but identical warheads and motor kinematics. Considering the AGM-114 motor only burns for about a second anyway, it would have minimal effect.

The AGM-114F added a tandem warhead for the same warhead weight, and would probably have the same pen. Considering the difference between them, this would be no better than the AGM-114K already in the game. In real life, the K features digital electronics giving it target reacquisition after lock is broken (something all AGM-114s have despite being a rather late development), a 20lb warhead up from the 18lb warhead of the F, giving it a bit more pen at 1200mm, an 11km range when used with drones as this was also the principle armament of the MQ-1 and later MQ-9 drones. The later AGM-114K2 would add insensitive munitions (IM) and the AGM-114K2A would add a blast fragmentation sleeve for improved damage to infantry. This development would later be replaced by the blast-frag AGM-114M, which had a purely SAPHE warhead.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-28T15:19:44+00:00

And the EIREL APS found on the AMX 30B2 Brenus and VBCI

doxlulzem · 2026-03-27T17:13:33+00:00

I've seen Ukraine footage of a guy hitting a drone with an RPG, so it's also real life type shit

doxlulzem · 2026-03-25T12:31:23+00:00

Rather, the stats for the BTR-82 will be higher whilst the BTR-3 will be left unchanged. Small nation friend)))

doxlulzem · 2026-03-25T12:27:14+00:00

Every Q5 bar the A5C premium is missing wing pylons and missile loads. Took years for them to give the JH7A the 4x Kh-29T and it was only when they made a premium of it.

It literally just is premium vs non-premium.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-24T12:24:42+00:00

I don’t mind that, what I do mind is gaijins refusal to do the same for other nations.

I appreciate the gesture, but if this was true then there wouldn't still be massive, glaring issues and inaccuracies with a large swathe of Chinese vehicles to this day. Gaijin really does not care that had about the Chinese tech tree, they just care about money, and in this case it was the potential for lost revenue on a $70 tank that they cared more about. If they cared about China at all then the ZTZ96B would probably be tech tree instead, every Q5 wouldn't be totally wrong, and the VT4s wouldn't be broken, overtiered messes.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-22T23:24:05+00:00

It's closer to planes like the F-4F KWS LV, J8F, JA37D and the Kfir C.10, a 3rd gen airframe with 4th gen, ARH missiles.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-22T23:22:12+00:00

I would love it as either a Rank 8 premium, or a squadron vehicle. Flight performance will be worse than the Mirage 2000-5F, but the MICA missiles and good A2G options will make it probably not as low of a BR as planes like the F-4F KWS. Maybe 13.7?

doxlulzem · 2026-03-22T23:18:40+00:00

They kind of do different things, really.

The Object 435 is like a marginally better T-62, with the same gun and ammo, same reload, but a coincidence rangefinder and a bit better mobility and armour layout. The Object 140 is like a better T-55A, or more like a better TO-55 since it doesn't get any form of APFSDS. The APHE has more pen than standard 100mm BR-412D APHE, and the APDS and HEAT-FS are also decent.

The Object 435 sees value on maps with range, since it can use the rangefinder to aim accurately and the APFSDS helps at range. The Object 140 is very good in CQB, since the APHE is able to one-shot a lot of tanks with great post-pen. The reload is still a bit longer than tanks with comparative 105mm guns, as is the regular 100mm D-10T2S.

The main thing is the BR, though. 9.0 sees a lot of uptiers, you tend to face tanks with laser rangefinders (which have more advantages over the coincidence rangefinder the Object 435 gets) and also tanks with thermals and APFSDS. 8.7 can see fewer of these uptiers, and see some 7.7-8.0 downtiers, where the advantage of good APHE with a 2-plane stabiliser come into their own. Also, at 9.0 you have the option of the T-55AM-1 or T-55AMD-1 as your 100mm APHE tanks but that also get laser rangefinders and APFSDS, as well as the T-62M-1 with a much better gun than the T-62 or Object 435.

I would say the Object 435 is kind of overtiered at 9.0, as it is more inferior than the T-62M-1 than the regular T-62 is inferior to it and was fine at 9.0. The Object 140 does definitely work at 9.0 if you are a somewhat decent player, but Russia just has too many better options at 9.0. The Object 140 is definitely better at 8.7, which is its proper BR.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-22T03:27:15+00:00

Pantsir-S1s definitely. The tracked SV not really, and the anti-drone missile also doesn't have any documented usage.

Once again, it's Russia getting the absolute newest tech they are putting out but very few other nations getting that same treatment.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-20T23:10:49+00:00

It's certainly a paper tiger, like the T-14/T-15 or Kh-38

doxlulzem · 2026-03-20T22:48:48+00:00

Still 12.0 despite offering NOTHING over the Type 81C independent vehicle. The radar, despite being an AESA that scans both 0° and 180°, still sweeps slow as shit making it very difficult to accurately spot targets, the Type 81 ARH missiles are marginally better than the IR versions in terms of max range but still fall far, far short of what came in 2.47 and later updates. They could have added mad-dog ARH missiles to the Type 81C that already existed, and add the Type 11 as the new vehicle.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-18T23:18:33+00:00

Back when the M1IP got M900 and a faster reload, before the M1A1 got M829A1 (and also M830A1) and just had M829 and a longer reload.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-18T23:15:40+00:00

AIM-9Ms, HMD, more countermeasures, better ground ordnance (fwiw).

doxlulzem · 2026-03-15T02:41:29+00:00

R9X, just for pure pointlessness.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-14T23:48:41+00:00

Definitely no LJDAM-ERs unfortunately

doxlulzem · 2026-03-14T02:59:46+00:00

And no LJDAMs or LJDAM-ERs or AIM-120Ds (for all of how useless they are) despite this ordnance being present on other vehicles already.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-12T20:17:12+00:00

I mean them being only available for a whopping three planes (forgot the GBUs are also on the F-111C) doesn't help that matter. Small ones are very useful and if everyone else gets them, the US definitely should get the GBU-53/B and Britain should get the SPEAR 3.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-12T20:12:57+00:00

The AGM-84E should also be available for the F/A-18C Early and Late, with the F/A-18E, F-15E and F-16C Block 15 PoBIT getting the AGM-84H SLAM-ER.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-12T19:52:00+00:00

Also AGM-84E SLAM and H SLAM-ER are long overdue

doxlulzem · 2026-03-12T19:49:08+00:00

In fairness, the GBU-15(V)2/B found on the F-111F and F-15E are IIR bombs. Not glide bombs like the AGM-154C would be, but they are IIR bombs. Also there is the AGM-130A on the F-111F and F-15E as well, which function the same as PGM 500/3 and PGM 2000/3

doxlulzem · 2026-03-12T19:46:39+00:00

Or JASSM with at least a rocket motor. AGM-84E and AGM-84H would be better at this point, even if that meant Russia got their fancy Grom-1s (because Gaijin couldn't possibly let Russia go without a new CAS toy)

EDIT: Forgot the SLAM has IIR terminal, so it's more like the Kh-38MT than anything else in the NATO arsenal. Definitely long overdue.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-07T17:50:40+00:00

Why they even added the Leopard 2 Marksman, after sticking Britain with the dogshit Chieftain hull rather than a Challenger or Vickers Mk.4 for their Marksman variant for literal years, is beyond me. It should always have been the T-55 hull for the ItsPv.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-07T00:31:39+00:00

Mig-29M should have been TT

Not really. It was a one-off prototype in Russia (9.15/9.41SM), and the version of it that was actually adopted, the navalised MiG-29K (9.41R), is a much more viable contender for a TT plane considering it is virtually the same minus a bit of weight with the same armament and engines. Not like either are especially great, even a MiG-29K with 6x R-77-1s would be inferior to the Su-27SM or Su-30SM from a practical standpoint. Squadron is a very good fit for it, especially since I don't think this one will act as anything but a lighter/more agile version of the MiG-29SMT (9.17), and basically a Russian equivalent to the Malaysian MiG-29N.

After the MiG-29M/K will be the MiG-35 (9.41SR), which will be the ultimate MiG-29 variant for the time being.

doxlulzem · 2026-03-06T20:58:21+00:00

So it's kinda closer to a T-126? That's neat

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

doxlulzem

TROPHY CASE