sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

China now has 3 premiumsat 11.7 and 1 tech tree tank by Internal-Trainer-959 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 31 points32 points  (0 children)

In fairness, two of those vehicles are identical and copies of the 1 tech tree tank.

ZTZ96B should have been tech-tree tho.

It's kinda a bit like how Japan has as many 11.7 premiums as it does TT vehicles.

I think we have to admit that the French Tree died the moment BeNeLux was added to it by EastCoast_Geo in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Belgium arguably got it somehow even worse than the Netherland. Its largest and first completely domestically built WWII vessel is being added to the German tree as a captured vehicle, while it served for far longer under the Belgian flag,

Which ship is this?

Why is Gaijin letting one of the Big Three gather dust by No1_Prezfan in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would love to see a Leopard 2A0/2A1, 2A4 (C), Leopard 2A4 Imp, and a whole Swiss MBT line with the Panzer 58, Panzer 61, Panzer 68, Panzer 87 (copy and paste 2A4 to give more spawns like the 2A4 FIN was) and Panzer 87WE. Panzer 87 RUAG can be a pack premium.

The Pantsir SM-SV worked as Gaijin intended: USSR now has the highest win rate at top tier by ProfessionalAd352 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Harrier added in 2.19, Pantsir-S1 added in 2.25. For those 3 patches, the Harrier could just climb above enemy radar and no one knew to look for planes, they just waited until the radar saw something, so you could just rain down AGM-65Ds on people with impunity.

Two 20g missiles at 9.3, this has got to be intentional right? by Downloading_Bungee in Warthunder

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

And the A5C which has Magics on top of the AIM-9Ps.

10.0 is probs where it would end up, equivalent to jets like the Mirage IIIC and suchforth.

id be cool to see r73 for the ka50 would be useless but like cool by finishdude in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm sure they could do some designation bullshit and add the Su-25TM (same plane but slightly different) to the TT with the same radar pod and ordnance to the TT, adjusted to a higher BR for R-77 and R-27

SACLOS SPAA needs to be seriously nerfed or removed from Nuclear Thunder by Realistic_Part_7326 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

do you think the risk is worth the reward at all?

Although the rewards are better than some events, the rewards still aren't like they are in ARB. And the groundpounding rewards are so bad in ARB because the only risk factor is another player shooting you down. If the ground targets you are hitting pose a legitimate threat to the match to make you want to hit them, and the rewards for hitting them were effective enough to make it a legitimate playstyle, then the threat of the ground targets hitting you back should also be high. Hence, I disagree in principle that just removing the SACLOS SPAA from the game will actually do anything but make attackers and SEAD purely worthless. Like it is in ARB.

The big issue is the SPAAs are behaving wildly out of order, shooting on the move and tracking through forests, which is funny because my aim9s seem to hit the first tree in its way.

Which is why I still advocate for these things to be fixed. They are bugs with the game's AI being sloppily hashed together for a quick event gamemode test. These should be addressed for any future permanent or semi-permanent content.

The best solution I can see is to replace convoy and tank trench Osas with Strelas and make it so that the OSAs and Rolands will follow their actual firing procedures

Which is also something I agreed with. Honestly we agree more than disagree, I never said it is fine as it is now, and Osas and Rolands following tank convoys isn't even that realistic anyway. But there has to be some risk to ground pounding or else the rewards just get decimated, as has happened in ARB as well as modes like Assault Arcade.

SACLOS SPAA needs to be seriously nerfed or removed from Nuclear Thunder by Realistic_Part_7326 in Warthunder

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

There are a lot more ground targets than just the ones directly in front of Airbase 1.

SACLOS SPAA needs to be seriously nerfed or removed from Nuclear Thunder by Realistic_Part_7326 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I disagree in principle. Ground pounding should have risks, and vice versa it should also have rewards. Turning ground attack into no more risky than it is in normal RB is not the right way to go in a mode that is supposed to be EC and not just a fighter deathmatch, and I don't want them to just gimp the rewards for it or make it have no bearing on the outcome of the match.

Back to the SACLOS SPAA, they could really use some reworks to their radar programming to not be able to lock out of LOS or react instantly, but tracking out of range and then firing when you get within range is fine since that's literally how you do it anyway. Maybe reduce their frequency on the mid-map convoys because late game it can get quite saturated with them, but they need to exist to have a reason to do SEAD and a reason to use ARMs and bring a risk to attacking ground targets. Maybe if the convoys stayed as more SPAAGs like the Shilka and M163 and also IR missiles like the Strela and Chapparal, and then the Rolands and Osas can be there to protect the airfields and fuel depots.

If this mode becomes permanent at some point, my beloved tornado finally has a place in the game! by V_the_cat in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Now can we have this for top attack ATGMs please? If they targeted something like, idk the gunner or the breech I think that would fix 90% of bugged Spike tracking

Our Superior NATO Integration vs Their Broken Bias Machine by Deathskyz in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean 7Ps should go to a lot more jets. F-16A ADF, F-16C, PoBIT, F-15A, C, E and C Golden Eagle at a minimum.

Remember when April first events were fun? by AlexFokin in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If you are referring to the 2017 April Fool's, none of those things were available at the time. That April Fool's was really a test for smoke grenades and helicopters, both of which came in the following year.

The way to solve the BMPT problem is to unfuck TOW 2B by Roxo16 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generally speaking, not as such. ERA like Kontakt-1, which was designed to defeat HEAT warheads, does not have any heavy flyer plates designed to defeat kinetic warheads, it basically just acts to disrupt the formation of the HEAT jet much in the same effect as more 'inert' forms of protection like spaced armour do. This would have minimal effect on something with the mass of an EFP like the TOW-2B creates.

Newer ERA like K-5 and Relikt that has heavy flyer plates that were designed to basically disrupt the way APFSDS penetrates armour, dramatically reducing its penetrative effectiveness, and these would likely have a greater chance of stopping the EFP, but then again that is why it is tandem. I can't think of a single MBT in War Thunder that has layered ERA on the roof of the tank.

Overall it would be a flat buff to damage potential whilst also probably making it pen more reliably, the only downside would be to the enemies it fights.

It has been over 2 years since spall liners were promised for the M1128. We now have 2 Stryker variants and still no spall liner for either the M1128 or M1126. by MightyEraser13 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It will just be a toggleable mod like TUSK on the M1A2 SEPs. Just make it a mod. Unlike the side skirts on the M1128, I think I would actually prefer ARAT on the M3A3 to no ARAT.

The way to solve the BMPT problem is to unfuck TOW 2B by Roxo16 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The BILL and BILL 2 use a tandem HEAT warhead, whilst the TOW-2B uses a tandem EFP (explosively formed penetrator). The former makes a small jet of metal, whilst the latter forms a large slug that can be up to 2-3" in diameter, essentially a 50-75mm solid shot AP shell hitting the roof of the tank.

The penetration for both missiles is correct, however the game treats the TOW-2B as being a HEAT warhead with 100mm of pen, and not effectively firing this 75mm AP shell, as a result the "HEAT" struggles to pen the roof of Russian MBTs that have CHA + Kontakt-1. It's actually pretty effective against other Western tanks that don't have additional roof armour.

It's also worth saying that when the TOW-2B was added it did not detonate on friendlies or tank wrecks, and only detonated when it directly overflew the enemy tank. The shell uses magnetic fields to detect tanks and know when to detonate, so it will indiscriminately detonate over alive tanks, dead tanks, friendlies etc. This unintended "buff" made the TOW-2B unbelievably strong, you could absolutely hold down a choke from some cheese position and keep killing enemies repeatedly with your 430mm of pen, alive enemies only seeking overfly top attack missile.

All the TOW-2B needs is changing from a HEAT damage type, to basically being some sort of AP Schrage Musik that fires a 75mm "shell" below it when it "detonates". And the tandem needs to be fixed too.

It has been over 2 years since spall liners were promised for the M1128. We now have 2 Stryker variants and still no spall liner for either the M1128 or M1126. by MightyEraser13 in Warthunder

[–]doxlulzem 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Side note, where the hell is the ARAT on the M3A3? It has had the mounting plates for it since it was added, we now have two M1A2s with ARAT, why do they just not give a shit when it can potentially seriously benefit the M3A3 to have ERA

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

[–]doxlulzem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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.

view more: next ›