ka-52k Ka-52K Mud Shark

[MCmaddawg 341]

Ka-52K "Katran" (Russian: Катран, 'mud shark') with folded stub wings and rotor.

 

Spoiler

 

Ka-52K landing on a carrier. Note shorter stub wings for carrier and ship based operations.

 

The Ka-52K, a navalised derivative of the Ka-52, has been selected as the new ship-borne attack type for the Russian Naval Aviation. Its features include folding rotor blades, folding wings and life-support systems for the crew members, who will fly in immersion suits. The fuselage and systems receive special anti-corrosion treatment and a new fire-control radar will be capable of operating in "Sea Mode" and of supporting anti-ship missiles.

The first of four Ka-52Ks ordered for the Russian Navy flew on the 7 March 2015.

 

The Ka-52K only has 2 weapon mounting pylons per wing, unlike the Ka-52, which has three. This means that the proposed helicopter would not necessarily be an upgrade, but a side-grade to the existing Ka-52, as it would carry less weapon systems. With the hermes-A missiles, that would mean you could only carry 8 of them (4 missiles per mounting point), so it would be on par with the EC-665 Tiger UHT.

 

The Ka-52K also receives a new "Резец" radar. It can work not only in the millimeter range, which is effective for detecting small ground targets, but also in the centimeter range, which allows you to notice large sea objects at a distance of up to 180 kilometers. Once the naval tech tree catches up to the current tank and helicopter age, this radar along with the ability to carry Kh-35 anti-ship missiles would bring an interesting dynamic into the game.

 

Spoiler

 

Ka-52K specifications. Note that the weapon system specification does not include Kh-35 and hermes-A missiles due to the fact that it was proposed later.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Hermes-A guided missile.

 

The main armament for Ka-52K are going to be the latest anti-tank guided missiles Hermes-A (Russian "Гермес-А"). In terms of their range (20 kilometers), they significantly surpass the vikhr and Ataka missiles.

Hermes is a family of modularly-designed guided missiles developed in Russia by the KBP Instrument Design Bureau. Capable of being fired from aerial (Hermes-A), land based (Hermes) and naval (Hermes-K) platforms, the Hermes system features a multistage rocket missile with a high-powered booster, and fire-and-forget capability with laser guidance and infrared homing. It is designed to engage single and multiple targets (including tanks and other AFVs, fortifications of various types, naval surface targets and high-speed flying vehicles) with single or volley fire at ranges of up to 100 km and can track and destroy over-the-horizon targets.

The Hermes-A missiles in-game would work similarly to PARS 3 LR missiles carried by EC-665 Tiger UHT.

 

Spoiler

 

Hermes-A missile launch tubes mounted on a Ka-52K.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Kh-35 anti-ship missile.

 

The Ka-52K is also to be armed with Kh-35 anti-ship missiles.

The Zvezda Kh-35 is a Soviet turbojet subsonic cruise anti-ship missile. The same missile can also be launched from helicopters, surface ships and coastal defence batteries with the help of a rocket booster, in which case it is known as Uran or Bal. It is designed to attack vessels up to 5,000 tonnes.

With (someday) upcoming top tier naval vessels, the possibility of using helicopters with anti-ship missiles is intriguing and I believe would be a great addition to the game (at some point in the future).

 

Spoiler

 

Kh-35 guidance system.

 

Spoiler

 

Ka-52K with a Kh-35 anti-ship missile displayed next to it.

 

All in all, I believe the Ka-52K would be a great addition to the game, especially once the naval tree catches up to the rest of the trees. The Kh-35 anti-ship missile would be a great counter for top tier ships with CIWS. For those of you wondering if it would be too overpowered - to overpower CIWS, you have to oversaturate it with targets, a couple of missiles from a helicopter, will be shot down very quickly. To overcome that, you must coordinate with other ships and aircraft.

And if at some point in the future, the naval mode will allow top tier planes and helicopters, taking off with the Ka-52K from a carrier or another suitable vessel would be pretty fun, considering it was built for that.

 

Another great addition that this helicopter brings, is the Russian equivalent of the PARS 3 LR - the hermes-A missile. The ability to quickly launch a missile and duck behind cover - a fire and forget functionality.

 

All this modernisation in missile technology for helicopters doesn't only mean constant death and destruction for the ground team, maybe it will incentivize gaijin to add soft kill and hard kill APS systems, such as the trophy systems on the merkava and abrams, or the shtora systems on the T90 tanks, etc.

 

 

Sources:

https://ria.ru/20171013/1506794877.html

https://www.rbth.com/defence/2016/10/28/russia-to-test-new-anti-tank-guided-missiles-in-syria_642965

https://www.deagel.com/Defensive_Weapons/Hermes/a001878

https://web.archive.org/web/20180916060100/http://www.heliopsmag.com/heliops-frontline/ka52k-katran-for-the-russian-navy

https://ria.ru/20170619/1494836793.html

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/kh_35.htm

https://ria.ru/product_Ka-52K_Katran/

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201607110954-fyt0.htm?utm_source=tvzvezda&utm_medium=longpage&utm_campaign=longpage&utm_term=v1

http://bastion-karpenko.ru/ka-52k/

http://bastion-karpenko.ru/arbalet-rls/

https://rg.ru/2019/10/30/rezec-dlia-alligatora-ka-52m-poluchit-novuiu-rls.html

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/year-2012-news/august/559-special-version-of-ka-52-helicopter-with-advanced-radar-and-antiship-missiles-for-russian-mistrals.html

https://nplus1.ru/news/2019/10/29/radar

Edited September 7, 2020 by MCmaddawg

[Princess_Pinch 5,625]

Open for discussion. 

[Lucky_E_06 0]

Yay another reason for F-16

[eleks12 1,079]

Im not really an RB player. But i guess my opinion is that it could be at BR 11.0 or higher. But i think the same with the ingame KA-52 and the ADATS. But i don't know if that is a crazy idea.

 

But in any case +1

[Milocat 4,857]

+1 if we get other naval helicopters.

[ACOMETS 977]

-1we have no counter for it in other nations and RUSSIA is over powered now.

[MCmaddawg 341]

14 hours ago, ACOMETS said:

-1we have no counter for it in other nations and RUSSIA is over powered now.

Sure you do. Germany has the EC tiger which fires fire and forget missiles. Britain has the apache with those insane AA missiles that can even kill light tanks.

 

Then you have various supersonic jets, which have AA missiles, some even have radar lock missiles.

 

Then you have various AA vehicles, adats, otomatic, just to name a few. Hell, you can use the M1A2 with those proximity shells to shoot down helos, I know I do.

 

And on the topic of USSR being OP. That's absolutely false. With all the you tubers and redditors screaming at the top of their lungs how "OP" it is, obviously people start parotting them. But people seem to be forgetting that leopard 2a5, strv 122, leclerc are as OP if not more. Sweden in general has VERY capable vehicles. Then there's the tigers fire and forget missiles, G91's and FJ4B's with bullpups. NATO should be wiping the floor with the soviets, but because they are either inept or leave after one death, the soviets win.

 

And just out of curiosity, what counter would you even propose to the Ka52K?

[Foche 888]

4 minutes ago, MCmaddawg said:

Sure you do. Germany has the EC tiger which fires fire and forget missiles. Britain has the apache with those insane AA missiles that can even kill light tanks.

 

Then you have various supersonic jets, which have AA missiles, some even have radar lock missiles.

 

Then you have various AA vehicles, adats, otomatic, just to name a few. Hell, you can use the M1A2 with those proximity shells to shoot down helos, I know I do.

 

And on the topic of USSR being OP. That's absolutely false. With all the you tubers and redditors screaming at the top of their lungs how "OP" it is, obviously people start parotting them. But people seem to be forgetting that leopard 2a5, strv 122, leclerc are as OP if not more. Sweden in general has VERY capable vehicles. Then there's the tigers fire and forget missiles, G91's and FJ4B's with bullpups. NATO should be wiping the floor with the soviets, but because they are either inept or leave after one death, the soviets win.

 

And just out of curiosity, what counter would you even propose to the Ka52K?

 

 

so the state of helo EC is a fake ? , are you xxxx serious ?

 

never encountered a UHT or apache with a 26 to 1 kill/death ratio 

[MCmaddawg 341]

15 minutes ago, Foche said:

 

 

so the state of helo EC is a fake ? , are you xxxx serious ?

 

never encountered a UHT or apache with a 26 to 1 kill/death ratio 

I'm not talking about helo EC. That is a seperate issue and it's never going to be solved. Helicopters were never meant to fight each other in the first place. And obviously when you put a helicopter like an apache that uses hellfires to attack ground targets vs helicopters with line of sight missiles, the hellfire missile helicopters are not going to stand a chance.

 

I'm talking about ground RB/SB, where these helicopters are meant to be used. And this is a great example of what I said above. Helicopters, especially those that use hellfire or similar missiles were never meant to fight other helicopters, but they excell at anti tank roles. Every time someone pulls a tiger UHT out, they score 5-6 kills in less than a minute. And if they know what they're doing, it's basically impossible to shoot them down.

 

So to summarize this, don't use a hammer to chop firewood.

[Jεcka 4,618]

55 minutes ago, MCmaddawg said:

Sure you do. Germany has the EC tiger which fires fire and forget missiles. Britain has the apache with those insane AA missiles that can even kill light tanks.

And they're nowhere near as popular nor good as Ka-50/52.

 

Quote

 

Then you have various supersonic jets, which have AA missiles, some even have radar lock missiles.

That's the problem, with various supersonic jets come various munition loadouts. Some jets can only take AAMs and nothing else at the same time, other jets can do the opposite. 

Besides that, helicopters are way cheaper to spawn with ATGM ordance than supersonics are with AAMs in ground RB.

 

Quote

 

Then you have various AA vehicles, adats, otomatic, just to name a few. Hell, you can use the M1A2 with those proximity shells to shoot down helos, I know I do.

If you present me even a single video where M1A2 shoots down a Ka-50 with a proximity shell from over 4km's, I will follow you to the ends of the earth.

 

Quote

 

And on the topic of USSR being OP. That's absolutely false. With all the you tubers and redditors screaming at the top of their lungs how "OP" it is, obviously people start parotting them. But people seem to be forgetting that leopard 2a5, strv 122, leclerc are as OP if not more. Sweden in general has VERY capable vehicles. Then there's the tigers fire and forget missiles, G91's and FJ4B's with bullpups. NATO should be wiping the floor with the soviets, but because they are either inept or leave after one death, the soviets win.

Neither Leopard 2A5, nor Leclerc, nor Strv 122 have back-ups that can bring the same kind of firepower and armour and at times even speed to the table as backups for T-80U and T-72B3 do. Lets not forget about the fact that almost all of NATO backups are by this point antiqued MBTs that work only because players force them to work even when facing tanks that outclass them in every category. Leopard 2A4 is the best example...

And all 3 of them cost a humongous amount of cash to repair compared to their soviet counterparts, especially T-72B3 which costs laughable 3.7k SL to repair when stock.

 

No matter how strong these western MBTs are, it won't matter in the end if they get swarmed by the Soviet horde of 3BM42 wielding StalinWagons, which is a very common occurace at 10.7 as of now.

As a matter of fact, no helicopter in the game is capable of causing the same amount of damage to the enemy team as Ka-50/52 are. Tiger's F&F ATGMs are unreliable while the heli itself is very uncommon. Even the infamous Apache is nowhere near as powerful as Ka-50 is, despite the fact that Hellfires should be the best helicopter ATGMs in the game, but they're barely capable of killing the Leopard 2K with a single hit. 

 

Now on to the topic of aircraft. Germany has only one CAS capable jet in the entire game at top tier (G.91). It is not OP, it's just spammed because it's cheap. NORDS are wrose than Bullpups. Then there's the German Mig-21 that is worse than the soviet one. Bruh.

As for US/UK aircraft, they're very expensive, usually at BRs higher than 10.0, have no ballistic computers etc etc. FJ-4B was an event vehicle therefore only a limited amount of people can use it, unless you want to prove us wrong and buy one for yourself?

 

How many does Russia have? Two Su-7s, 2 Mig-21s, all of them capable of wielding S24s which are pretty good. Need to hit the target to kill, but so do NORDS, so what is there to complain about? 

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by _Noint

[MCmaddawg 341]

6 minutes ago, _Noint said:

And it's nowhere near as popular nor good as Ka-50/52.

The popularity of it isn't anyone's problem. Also did you really just say that fire and forget missiles are worse than regular ol' line of sight missiles? If a decent player brings it out, he gets 5-6 kills under a minute.

 

8 minutes ago, _Noint said:

That's the problem, with various supersonic jets come various munition loadouts. Some jets can only take AAMs and nothing else at the same time, other jets can do the opposite. 

Besides that, helicopters are way cheaper to spawn with ATGM ordance than supersonics are with AAMs in ground RB.

You don't even need loadouts to kill helicopters, just main gun them. Most of the time they have tunnel vision trying to kill the tanks.

10 minutes ago, _Noint said:

If you present me even a single video where M1A2 shoots down a Ka-50 with a proximity shell from over 4km's, I will follow you to the ends of the earth.

Too bad I don't record my games. I'll have to next time I play americans. I've even shot down jets before with the proximity shell.

 

12 minutes ago, _Noint said:

Neither Leopard 2A5, nor Leclerc, nor Strv 122 have back-ups that can bring the same kind of firepower and armour and at times even speed to the table as backups for T-80U and T-72B3 do. 

And all 3 of them cost a humongous amount of cash to repair compared to their soviet counterparts, especially T-72B3 which costs laughable 3.7k SL to repair when stock.

 

No matter how strong these western MBTs are, it won't matter in the end if they get swarmed by the Soviet horde of 3BM42 wielding StalinWagons, which is a very common occurace at 10.7 as of now.

As a matter of fact, no helicopter in the game is capable of causing the same amount of damage to the enemy team as Ka-50/52 are. Tiger's F&F ATGMs are unreliable while the heli itself is very uncommon. Even the infamous Apache is nowhere near as powerful as Ka-50 is, despite the fact that Hellfires should be the best helicopter ATGMs in the game, but they're barely capable of killing the Leopard 2K with a single hit. 

 

Now on to the topic of aircraft. Germany has only one CAS capable jet in the entire game at top tier (G.91). It is not OP, it's just spammed because it's cheap. NORDS are wrose than Bullpups. Then there's the German Mig-21 that is worse than the soviet one. Bruh.

As for US/UK aircraft, they're very expensive, usually at BRs higher than 10.0, have no ballistic computers etc etc. FJ-4B was an event vehicle therefore only a limited amount of people can use it, unless you want to prove us wrong and buy one for yourself?

 

How many does Russia have? Two Su-7s, 2 Mig-21s, all of them capable of wielding S24s which are pretty good. Need to hit the target to kill, but so do NORDS, so what is there to complain about? 

 

Alright, let's see here.

Russia - only has 3 viable MBT's, others are so slow there's no point bothering. T80U, T72B3 (which you have to spade to get the engine upgrade) and then there's the T80B, which can be penned anywhere by virtually anything. Also remember that if you do pen these tanks, it's mostly game over, whereas NATO tanks require 2-3 shots to kill most of the time.

USA - only has 2 viable tanks, M1A1 and M1A2. USA along with Japan are the ones that really lack decent vehicles. If gaijin fixes the HSTVL, the lineup would be much better.

Germany - Leopard 2a5, leopard 2a4, leopard 2K (with that pesky 20mm that can destroy cannons) and an infinite amount of various light tanks that are fast and have decent pen.

Britain - 4 challengers and a vickers MBT.

Japan - 2 Type 90's. Terrible loadout.

China - Basically nothing. I don't even see people playing it at top tier.

Italy - 3 arietes and a centauro MGS's, that's 4 vehicles with 120 mm guns. Plus otomatic.

France - leclerc and AMX-40. And a few other lame tanks. France needs more vehicles too, but atleast the leclerc is better than the Type 90 and the M1A2.

Sweden - Strv122, strv121, CV 90120. 3 vehicles with 120 mm guns and an infinite amount of light tanks with autocannons that make short work of cannon breaches and then slap you in the side.

 

So basically every tank in the NATO arsenal, minus the Brits, are really fast, while the soviets only have 3 tanks that are relatively agile. The germans, italians and swedes have either better or the same lineups.

 

Mig21MF has the same loudout as the Mig21SMT, so I don't see how it's worse for CAS. But even then, the soviets have a big ol' ZERO of guided plane missiles. Gaijin also did something to the FCS, so when you're aiming the rocket it goes miles away from where it's supposed to hit. Su7's are absolutely terrible in terms of flight performance, it's a flying brick. Also plane BR's have no influence here since it's top tier, so I don't even see the reason why you brought it up.

 

I have the FJ4B with bullpups and my winrate with it is 64%, compared to my T80U which has a winrate of 68%. It's a very good aircraft and if more people played it to it's full strenghts, they'd cry less about soviets being too OP.

 

And as for repair costs, if it is as people say and soviets are truely OP, it'll sky rocket when the next round of economy balancing happens.

 

Also, there's a suggestion in the US helicopter tree for line of sight hellfire missiles, once that's implemented, the apaches should suck less.

 

[Jεcka 4,618]

53 minutes ago, MCmaddawg said:

The popularity of it isn't anyone's problem. Also did you really just say that fire and forget missiles are worse than regular ol' line of sight missiles? If a decent player brings it out, he gets 5-6 kills under a minute.

Have you forgot that it is WT where gaijin can break even such a basic thing as the F&F function on AAMs? 

If so, look no further than any thread about SRAAMs on this forums. And yes, Tiger's missiles are currently broken.

 

Quote

 

You don't even need loadouts to kill helicopters, just main gun them. Most of the time they have tunnel vision trying to kill the tanks.

Too bad I don't record my games. I'll have to next time I play americans. I've even shot down jets before with the proximity shell.

The point is if you take AAM loudout in ground RB, you're next to useless if the enemy doesn't spawn any air vehicles and also streamrolls over your ground team.

But at the same time, if you take CAS loudout, there's a greater chance that, if there is a heli, it will simply AAM you.

 

Quote

 

Russia - only has 3 viable MBT's, others are so slow there's no point bothering. T80U, T72B3 (which you have to spade to get the engine upgrade) and then there's the T80B, which can be penned anywhere by virtually anything. Also remember that if you do pen these tanks, it's mostly game over, whereas NATO tanks require 2-3 shots to kill most of the time.

Don't pretend T-72B. 1985 and 89 doesn't exist as well as the T-64B(V). All of them are in posssesion of a round that negates any armour advantage NATO tanks have over them. There's also the problem of Challanger 2s and Arietes which are both fat, slow, with pretty bad gun handling characteristics (T-72B3 for example has better gun handing characteristics than all NATO 10.3/7 MBTs except for 2A5, M1A1/2 and Strv 122.

 

And please don't use the "they're so slow" excuse, all T-72s (except for A) are great for sniping and while they don't have as many chances to shine as 80U/B or 72B3, they're still capable of holding their own against other TTs. Besides that, if you really do want to press on with the "slow" argument. Challanger 1s and 2s and Ariete's say hello.

Quote

USA - only has 2 viable tanks, M1A1 and M1A2. USA along with Japan are the ones that really lack decent vehicles. If gaijin fixes the HSTVL, the lineup would be much better.

Thank you for ignoring that M1 and M1IP exist but i guess that's a testiment to the fact that they don't matter at all as backup vehicles for the M1A1 and M1A2.

 

Quote

Germany - Leopard 2a5, leopard 2a4, leopard 2K (with that pesky 20mm that can destroy cannons) and an infinite amount of various light tanks that are fast and have decent pen.

Did you really just call 2K a backup for the 2A5 while ignoring M1s which was basically a statement saying "they don't matter". Why does 2K matter while M1 and M1IP don't?

All 3 of them are huge, all 3 of them have no armour when pitied against TT rounds, all 3 have to pixel hunt for their enemy's weakspots.

 

2A4 on the other hand should've gotten DM33 a long time ago, but as of now, it's in the same situation T-80B was before it got 3BM-42. 

They're "decent" but nowhere near as efficent at being backups for their respective top tier MBT as Soviet backups are.

 

Quote

Britain - 4 challengers and a vickers MBT.

All of them are extremely slow, in fact less mobile than T-80s, with bad armour, giant weakspots, bad gun handling and some of them don't even have a top tier worthy round. Vickers is the only backup that's worth looking at, Challanger 1s aren't. 

 

Quote

Japan - 2 Type 90's. Terrible loadout.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

 

Quote

China - Basically nothing. I don't even see people playing it at top tier.

China doesn't matter, dead content since about 5 seconds after after it was added to the game.

 

Quote

Italy - 3 arietes and a centauro MGS's, that's 4 vehicles with 120 mm guns. Plus otomatic.

Ariete's only saving grace is the gun, it doesn't get armour of the 2A5, nor gun handling of the M1A2, nor the speed of the T-80U. It's the base-line average at best and defnitely worse than the T-80U and 72B3.

Centauro is more akin to a top tier vehicle, not a backup. 

 

Quote

France - leclerc and AMX-40. And a few other lame tanks. France needs more vehicles too, but atleast the leclerc is better than the Type 90 and the M1A2.

Leclerc. That's all, there is no other vehicle above 9.0 that's worth looking at in the French Tree. Don't get me wrong, when AMX-40 still had its 520mm of penetration shell, it was worthy of being called a backup, that's not the case anymore.

 

Quote

Sweden - Strv122, strv121, CV 90120. 3 vehicles with 120 mm guns and an infinite amount of light tanks with autocannons that make short work of cannon breaches and then slap you in the side.

Strv 121 is a copy-pasted 2A4 but with higher repair cost... it doesn't stand out. CV90120 is the same as Centauro, a top tier vehicle, not a backup for the Strv 122.

 

Quote

 

So basically every tank in the NATO arsenal, minus the Brits, are really fast, while the soviets only have 3 tanks that are relatively agile. The germans, italians and swedes have either better or the same lineups.

I'm honestly astonished that you're coming out with such a bold statement while you must know fully well that Ariete's are just as awfully immoblie as Challanger 1 and 2s are.

Then again, why did you downplay the existence as well as importance of T-72Bs and T-64BV while calling 2A4 and 2K capable backups?

 

Quote

 

Mig21MF has the same loudout as the Mig21SMT, so I don't see how it's worse for CAS. But even then, the soviets have a big ol' ZERO of guided plane missiles. Gaijin also did something to the FCS, so when you're aiming the rocket it goes miles away from where it's supposed to hit. Su7's are absolutely terrible in terms of flight performance, it's a flying brick. Also plane BR's have no influence here since it's top tier, so I don't even see the reason why you brought it up.

My point was that the German MiG-21 is worse than the soviet one as a full package, not just at one aspect. Despite that, people have very little to no problems making S-24s work on the german MiG, why is it so hard for the soviet players though? I've no clue myself. Maybe you do?

 

And again, Su-7B gets 6xS-24s and even if they're not guided ATGMs, while being a bit harder to use, that's not an excuse since you get, theroretically about 16 S-24s in a single line-up, though more realistically about 10 of them. Their flight performance matters very little in ground RB where most things they will be doing is going to be CAS related.

 

I brought up the BRs to showcase the G.91 problem. It's at 8.7 while being an ERA5 jet so it costs a lot less RP to research than its counterparts, hence the spam. Once the RP requirements go up and the G.91 gets moved to 6th tier, the problem should be resolved... assuming Wehrboos allow gaijin to do that. Don't worry, i hate the G.91 just as much as you do.

Quote

I have the FJ4B with bullpups and my winrate with it is 64%, compared to my T80U which has a winrate of 68%. It's a very good aircraft and if more people played it to it's full strenghts, they'd cry less about soviets being too OP.

 

And as for repair costs, if it is as people say and soviets are truely OP, it'll sky rocket when the next round of economy balancing happens.

Soviets have been enjoying a 60%+ WR since January yet have not been a subject to repair cost increases, then there's Leclerc.

 

Quote

 

Also, there's a suggestion in the US helicopter tree for line of sight hellfire missiles, once that's implemented, the apaches should suck less.

 

Depends whether those Hellfires will be implemented properly, or in the same manner as Tiger's ATGMs that currently have problems tracking non-moving vehicles. :P

Edited September 12, 2020 by _Noint

[MCmaddawg 341]

For some reason you assume that every soviet MBT is impenetrable from the front. Your only straw is the pen of soviet tanks, but yet when you talk about arietes you call them bad and say (only their pen is good).

 

Every tank below T72B3 and T80U you can pen with virtually everything anywhere, they're slow and have horrible armor, they're just food for NATO tanks most of the time. And speaking of arietes, they're sure as hell faster than most soviet MBT's. Hell, pretty much every NATO MBT has thermals, only a handful of soviet MBT's get them.

 

Anyhow, the reason there's a winrate change right now is because most people are grinding the soviets, that implies there are more higher skilled people playing soviets now. Later on when the grind will die down and people will go back to playing or grinding other nations it'll work itself out.

 

Also, not sure why you say the tiger UHT missiles are bugged, but every time I was targeted, I got destroyed and frankly, ingame performance of those missiles says otherwise.

[Aerobane 4,140]

Its not needed and adding it would only inject more Ka-52s into heli EC, both from people playing it and people playing the Ka-50/52 to grind it. Considering USSR already has the best top tier helicopters by a significant margin, I don't think this addition would contribute anything of value to their teams in GFRB. The only way you could improve over the Ka-52 would be to add some mindbogglingly OP feature as its already better than anything else in the game. So its either irrelevant or gamebreakingly OP because of the strength of existing Russian Federation helicopters.

[Jεcka 4,618]

4 hours ago, MCmaddawg said:

For some reason you assume that every soviet MBT is impenetrable from the front. Your only straw is the pen of soviet tanks, but yet when you talk about arietes you call them bad and say (only their pen is good).

I'm being realistic. How you came to that assumption though is beyond me, but alright. My problem with SovietTT is the fact that about 6 of their tanks get top tier ammo and are insanely cheap to repair for how good they are.

The conclusion about the Ariete's is from my experience of playing them on my friend's account, they're nowhere near as good as people make them out to be, without the CLXX round, they'd be borderline horrible, even now they're barely hanging onto good WRs, but that's thanks to mainly Germany and Sweden for holding their own.

 

Quote

 

Every tank below T72B3 and T80U you can pen with virtually everything anywhere.

That's an actual lie. Every soviet MBT shares the same weakspots and as a matter of fact, only TT rounds can perforate T-64B and 80Bs armour *anywhere* at combat ranges. When it comes to T-72Bs, they're all as impenetrable to rounds such as DM33 as the're to DM13 etc etc. 

Anyhow my point is that with the soviet tanks at the moment, NATO has to pixel hunt, it wasn't like that before, i'm speaking from experience.

 

Quote

 

 they're slow and have horrible armor, they're just food for NATO tanks most of the time. And speaking of arietes, they're sure as hell faster than most soviet MBT's. Hell, pretty much every NATO MBT has thermals, only a handful of soviet MBT's get them.

The only soviet tanks with horrible armour that i know of are the T-64A and T-72A, which both are at 9.3 and nobody ever (probably) thought of using them as their backups for the 80U. If you meant armour scheme, perhpaps, but otherwise their armour is great for the most part with only 2 weakspots from the front that can be hidden very easly.

 

Quote

 

Anyhow, the reason there's a winrate change right now is because most people are grinding the soviets, that implies there are more higher skilled people playing soviets now. Later on when the grind will die down and people will go back to playing or grinding other nations it'll work itself out.

I already mentioned that the Soviets have been enjoying a 60%+ winrate since early january and it has only been on the rise.

 

Quote

 

Also, not sure why you say the tiger UHT missiles are bugged, but every time I was targeted, I got destroyed and frankly, ingame performance of those missiles says otherwise.

Personal experience, missiles lose lock on even immobile objects about 40% of the time i was playing it. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by _Noint

[ACOMETS 977]

soviets have 5 tanks to respawn  each with low repair cost but others are only 3 (at most) with heavy repair.

[MCmaddawg 341]

16 hours ago, _Noint said:

That's an actual lie. Every soviet MBT shares the same weakspots and as a matter of fact, only TT rounds can perforate T-64B and 80Bs armour *anywhere* at combat ranges. When it comes to T-72Bs, they're all as impenetrable to rounds such as DM33 as the're to DM13 etc etc. 

Anyhow my point is that with the soviet tanks at the moment, NATO has to pixel hunt, it wasn't like that before, i'm speaking from experience.

Aww, well would you look at that, seems like the DM23 can infact penetrate the T80B front plate at 1000 meters. That's not the drivers port by the way, I would upload more pictures, but it only lets me upload 1.1 mb's.

And when you're talking about pixel hunting, you mean shooting the drivers port that's like 50 cm by 50 cm? Oh boy, such a hard to hit weakspot. Meanwhile the leopard 2a5 can only be penned in the lower plate (smart people don't carry ammuniton there) or the neck seam and with the new volumetric shells, it's harder to do.

Sounds to me, like you just need to git gud.

[Jεcka 4,618]

13 minutes ago, MCmaddawg said:

Aww, well would you look at that, seems like the DM23 can infact penetrate the T80B front plate at 1000 meters. That's not the drivers port by the way, I would upload more pictures, but it only lets me upload 1.1 mb's.

And when you're talking about pixel hunting, you mean shooting the drivers port that's like 50 cm by 50 cm? Oh boy, such a hard to hit weakspot. Meanwhile the leopard 2a5 can only be penned in the lower plate (smart people don't carry ammuniton there) or the neck seam and with the new volumetric shells, it's harder to do.

Sounds to me, like you just need to git gud.

First off, you're aiming from above, that is wrong. You're supposed to aim from hull's height, otherwise you get things like DM13 from the L/44 penetrating T-64B from 1.5km's.

I don't even own the 80B but here you go, even without the Kontakt-1, it can resist the DM23 at 500 meters around 50% of the time.

 

Second, there are no NATO MBTs that can resist the 3BM-42 on the hull below 10.7 with the sole exception being the mighty Strv 122 (full arc protection for your information, that's what i'm talking about).

 

 

In fact, here you go; 

3BM-42 perforating 2A5s hull from 2000 meters (4/5 shots) when done correctl, but if i did it your way, i could do shots like that from well over 3000 meters and still penetrate the hull no problems.

 

Here's an example of what i'm talking about, incorrect way of aiming = 2A5s hull getting penetrated at 3000 meters

 

To me it sounds like you need to L2Aim if you want your arguments to carry any ounce of weight behind them 

Edited September 13, 2020 by _Noint

[MCmaddawg 341]

You aim slightly from above because the soviet tanks are so low to the ground compared to everything else.

 

Also, was the armor on the leo2a5 always like this? I swear, back from when it was introduced you couldn't pen it there, and I've never tried again, so I just always go for lower plate or neck seam. Anyhow, you just saved me alot of trouble I guess.

[Jεcka 4,618]

16 minutes ago, MCmaddawg said:

You aim slightly from above because the soviet tanks are so low to the ground compared to everything else.

You're not supposed to, that's the point, otherwise you get falsified results. I committed the same mistake as you did some time ago and was corrected by Necron.

As you've seen, if you aim from the same point everytime, you get the most consistent results, but if you don't, there's a good chance the viewer will show you lower/higher armour estimate than it should be, for example, it might show you that Leopard 2A5s hull can be penetrated up to 3500 meters wherever it is not possible in the game unless you're playing an Ariete or the Leclerc, at times it's hard do that even below 2000 meters because even a slight deviation can result in lesser penetration of your APFSDS.

 

Quote

 

Also, was the armor on the leo2a5 always like this? I swear, back from when it was introduced you couldn't pen it there, and I've never tried again, so I just always go for lower plate or neck seam. Anyhow, you just saved me alot of trouble I guess.

Leopard 2A5s hull has always been pennable to the 3BM-42, you must've shoot at it with the 3BM-22 which cannot penetarate the upper hull at any distances, but that's the point as the C-tech was designed and developed to defeat short-rod/sheated APFSDS that the 3BM-22 is.

Edited September 13, 2020 by _Noint

[whosmans 70]

+1

[Yay5379@live 11]

+1 KA-50 is balanced ))))))))))

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

i would really like more modern ship to go with it , will be a pretty interesting gameplay , jumping from island to island to attack some ships +1 only if others nations got something similar , i don't want to see the Vikhr fiasco once again

[SturmWerwolf 793]

+1 I support this, we need more naval helicopters and planes for all nations. They could aid the later Costal Fleet Frigates in Bluewater Fleet battles.

[CubicSquare 156]

Kh-35s on a helo? That sounds amazing!