Comments - ikalugin

There is a substantial difference between Cobra and Pugachev Cobra.

The aircraft on the picture was not capable of executing a relevant manuever.

Do you plan to do any coding changes to missile guidance?

Can you use modern digital pattern?

Why base BMP1 is used and not BMP 1P?

It is for technical reasons - fortifications have no owners hence flint won't work there.

hm great build, really. it would be nice though to make all atgm flint and add antiflint capability to panzir/vulcan and tor.

even i did XD

I hope ru team will also get proper datalinking XD i do wonder though if like 2 arty noobs (2 on each side) set up counter battery sets and then some other player fires...

well sure thing XD.
so i think in the end we would have tor properly integrated.
btw is it possible to change ru team sam concept (for the future)
and have tor as point cpgm defence (highly capable sam system with full iads integration ect) and tungustka as the support spagm/sam (so you make it dual chanel in a sense of wic homing shooter missiles (maybe flint?) and predictor guns being on the primary shooter with ammo) instead of shilka? (as shilka isnt in the aa role anymore, although sometimes it is used as direct support weapon in mountains/cities due to good angles of elevation and rapid fire canons)
although getting iads down to the mobile sam units will be nice (as to the strela/tungustkas on the move).

also later you can shift to the sam batery concept (where you have a cp/radar unit to provide iads datalink and 6 shorad (strela/tungustka) units in a squad, for tor - 4 units.

Actually to think that automation was brought in b/c non iads sam couldnt intercept the cruise missiles in earlier builds. And helicopters were quite overpowered.
Now we have massive and powerfull iads software, yet it still cant power through competent missile spam. Which is a shame really.

Awesome, i hope russian inf models and cammo textures are also updated at some point.

Lol i like it :) still how about s300?

btw havent been testing for a while, so why is t90 useless?

Well against the mbts - sure. But the inf balance can be afected, depending how you make the bmp3. Imo the bmp3 ingame concept should be:
1) stronger, than bmp2 armour.
2) primary shooter 30mm canon
3) secondary shooter 100 he frag shell
4) magazine spec ab with atgm, fired from the main gun

Thus it will provide good anti inf(with canons)/light armour(with a good amount of atgms) firepower. And even the cms fited stryker will be chalenged.

i wonder if bmp3 is intended to replace the bmp2 outright and how it will affect the balance. as the bmp3 is quite firepower heavy, especially against inf and light armour.

Nice, now we need some gameplay videos :) and how did you fix bot spams?

Not as of now (atleast yet).

btw is it possible to replace the dumb tell model with a smart one? i mean if we use total of 8 tells per site then atleast 2 have to be smart. if you change to the s400 standart - then all tells have to be smart, as all s400 tells have launch control electronics boxes.

hm i hope and prefer it "soon" rather than "later" XD

why not su34 though? i think there are enough numbers now? although yes, most likely sead mission candidates do seam to be su 24 and 25.
imo sead will be a logical introduction to balance op patriot and s300 sites with pac3 and 9m96

nice, although imo warhead stage is slightly over complicated

Also sead aircraft should have jammers to counter haa radars.
In the airsuperiority strike the sead targets are predetermined and the aircraft will come at low altitude to avoid detection.

Imho there should be several clases of aircraft should flint project be a sucsess.
1) cas aircraft - a10 and su25, they patrol an area but can be summoned by any friendly air trafic controler into the needed area (via datlink), with 2 types of atack
a) cas aircraft goes into the area and engages all targets at wil with pgms.
b) cas aircraft makes a roket/gun run.
2) air superiority aircraft - they loiter and engage air targets at wil (su27 and f22)
3) sead aircraft - they atack radars (you can use su25/a10 for this but i rather would have f16/18/su34)
4) awacs aircraft - it organises the work of fighters and sead aircraft, maybe even the cas aircraft too. Have special ability - direct a airsuperiority or anti ground strike this orders a group of air units to go to a specific area and perform threir duties.
Air superiority strike - up to 4 fighters and 4 sead aircraft go onto the area x and defeat hostile air/sam units on the way.
Cas strike - up to 6 cas aircraft and 2 sead aircraft go to the area to clean it up from ground units.

Ewar modification
1) emiting radar coordinates are entered into the list
2) elint sensors can chech if there is a such coordinate at its range
3) shohld there be - tiny areal reckon is spamned on top of it and keeps being refreshed.
4) thus emcom of haa will be usefull as the sead aircraft will otherwise spawn evil arm on top of your radar.
5) iads with a search radar keeps emitions to minimum and thus is also usefull.

Well soon tankbuster will be replaced with a shootable tank buster.

I guess no more tankbuster runs though. I do hope they introduce su25sm though

On the aircraft - i hope they will be uncontrolable for the player (but player should be able to create fire missions) with automated cms (like the ones on the t90 and apachi). Also it will be nice to have russian planes too if possible.

Nice work, but what role does the aegis play game wise? I mean will you have an airdropable cruiser? Also for the sam systems - is it possible to introduce new search radars that add targets to the aegis code que, but do not triger high prf warning and thus are not seen by air as imidiate threats. Also this will allow the fire units to work in stand by mode till targets enter the nez.

Well it depends how you gather and present them. I say this b/c i worked for a media agency and have expierence in that. Also the methods ans sources are not clear too, prices should be added where possible.

Well tbh i have not seen decisive proofs and i underdtand that they cant be presented b/c of secrecy rules. So what i say - good work but it is over biased from my perspective. Hence the hawk statement. And no i have no real problem with that as any military tech lovers ( me included ) tend to be fanboys of some or other piece of equipment. And i really dont see how nationality matters here especially between uk and usa.

Hawk is better than s400 b/c it is american xD

as always perfectly done blahdy )))