Testing of the Stinger C and the Mistral in the late '80s show that the Stinger C does in fact have the same (or very similar) maximum range as the Mistral, although the Mistral could effectively reach higher ranges easier.
And how can you get this? What strange missile thrust, burn time and drag would result this? Sorry, I can't believe this. Hungary had Igla and has Mistral sincs 1995. The eng. zone of Misral is significantly greater what Igla has which is twin sister or Stinger concerning on kinematics.
Except the M60 line both authentically and for gameplay deserve higher stats, specifically AP and accuracy
Authentically...? Why...? Gameplay wise...? Compare the M60A3 with T-64. Both cost 50CP...
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... =523369225
Of course the Super Patton would deserve a buff (18 AP for M900?)
Can I ask why? MI1P has the same gun and IOC is later. M60 ERA also is a later model. So should not they get also 18 AP in this case...?
I would suggest more ammo (+ 8) and maybe a cheaper price
The problem is they do not have morale for hit and 5 man sq. looses very fast morale and dies easily especially if they are regular inf.
3 Cards since the BMP-3 (which is arguably superior) has 3 cards, furthermore the M2A2 deserves 13 availability, and the M2A1 deserves 18 availability
Except when to tire tank comes. With 21 AP BMP-3 has literally no firepower while TOW2 even against T-72BU is a big hammer not mentioning anything up to 20AV. Tanks even with 17 AV are too hard for BMP-3. Avail can be the same.
It should have a lower price but also its ROF is unnecessarily Nerfed, it could use a small ROF buff
AS-90, K9 both have 4 RoF and only best guns have higer RoF. Considering RL RoF 4 is totally fine and good absraction.
How would we change the Patriot into a M270? Move the Patriot to Japan, they need it more and with it gone we can focus on greater US issues
You simly use the existing unit slot to model anoter unit. Adding new unit is maybe a problem but unis and reallocate only existing stuff is not a problem I guess. Patriot to Japan? Why? Would not be OOTF? BTW most of players simply wist to see gone the Pat. no matter where you see it.
The F-18 had an inferior sustained turn rate at super-sonic speeds, at sub-sonic speeds the F-18 has far superior AoA and has a good sustained turn rate, 300 for the F-18 is completely justified
Only problem turn rate should not represent such very limited thingsa as high AoA and insta turnrate. BTW high AoA is useful only at very slow speed... The turn rate should represent both turning capability and as well as the general flight performance. And considering all factors F/A-18 is inferior comparing to Eagle and Viper. Period.
Nope, the F-111F was notorious for carrying LGBs, restricting the F-111F to clusters is a crime
I wrote the same. F-111F was THE LGB bomber of Cold War. I was against make it cat B or A just for higher ECM. Keep in mind still era games.
I think he means AIM-120s + 50% ECM OR 2 per card
I could live with it but most player would scream because "USA bias"... Considering how over modeled AIR tab of USSR and how under USA my vote is yes with my hearth but in case I listen to my mind, the answer is no even F-16C wold be similar multirole to MiG-29M. Of course USA would lost Patriot 2/card F-15E with AIM-120 is mandatory.