I just saw the way you've made kh59M and kab-L bombs is absolute gold.

Gotcha

if you want to argue about something ingame, then tell me specifically what the issue is so i can look into it

So the main takeaway is that if we want to argue about something in the game we should test it ingame/datamine and then we can talk about sources.

i would say it's a bit ridiculous for me to have to justify every single line of code i've written for a mod for a videogame, if you guys find something reputable that disagrees with my mod then share it with me, otherwise im not going to compile everything i know into a document for you guys to pore over

so unless you have sources of your own i'm going to assume everything that i think is correct in my mod, is actually correct to the most reasonable degree, until proven otherwise

Id argue that giving sources (even if theyre in a text dump) is helpful as there is alot of variance even within soviet sources (e.g. technical specifications vs practical tests or even prototypes vs operational performance atleast within my own research of soviet aircraft and books written for the public having alot of exaggerations, military primary sources are much more reliable) . It would also be great if we can check if the sources are primary or not or if you guys misinterpreted some of the data. Still great mod though, it seems you guys did your research and stuck with reliable (mostly primary) sources.

its to deter people who ask for what sources i used for the mod as a whole, who don't realize that soviet sources exist and all data is export or from testimony/russian data

much of the data collected for the mod is from online sources that are readily available, very little is from western books on the topic, and a significant portion of the research comes from russian books and manuals, alongside first/secondhand accounts and reasonable extrapolation in the absence of data

furthermore, I'm not the only person who's done research on this, so the mods data (especially subsurface) is carried on the back of valoda's exceptional work

this doesn't actually deter people from using gathered information to contest my data, i appreciate it when someone corrects me, but usually it ends up being someone doubtful soviet equipment actually worked and the USSR apparently lied about everything on documents they never released

For the section on sources in the mod description, can I ask what you mean by that? I interpreted it as citing sources are not needed for clarity. I personally believe you should as it allows people to correct you, though but that's just my opinion.

i also intend to rework all guns whenever ivan reworks gunnery as most guns cannot even get 25% of their rounds without the proximity fuze distance at most ranges

ive done plenty of tests, and most engagements ship guns do not shoot down any missiles without excess preparation time, and manage a kill every other engagement

it's random chance, so perhaps you are simply getting lucky/unlucky

many incoming weapons were recently intercepted in the recent red sea campaign, and there are dozens of recorded tests where 3-5 inch ship guns have downed incoming sea skimming missiles, target drones, and aircraft with relatively small fire salvo amounts

there's even official USN documents to congress to show ammunition expenditure and drone usage, and gun performance in the cold war in exercises can be extrapolates based on expenditure, and hit rates overall are above 5%
there are also papers highlighting some of the advantages and limitations of main guns in air defense, they aren't completely hopeless in the role and are generally underestimated in most representations

In practice, with these settings it was destroying about 20% of an incoming missile swarm (almost as much as the SAM defense net) which seems totally implausible. 1% seems more realistic. In general guns in AA mode seem way too effective even in the base game. Manufacturer ratings and actual practice are very different. In numerous engagements, I don't know of any documented case of 100mm+ guns actually intercepting an incoming missile.

remember that its 10% for every round it can actually get in the fuze range, so actual kill chance per shot is significantly lower
AK-176 is rated to kill a missile target in 25 shots, and AK-130 is of a significantly larger caliber, iirc armat only requires 10 rounds to kill a missile on average

also, this is only a 10x increase from stock because it clamps to the nearest percent, meaning all base game guns have a 1% chance to hit

Gun hit percentages seem way out of line with reality in this mod. Take the 130mm: It's set to a 10% hit probability against missiles which is a 2000% increase over stock game and seems totally implausible. Even with radar guidance and proximity fused shells, this is an artillery round, not a CWIS

It showed the Late loadout in the same line as Default right before I made that comment

it should definitely be fixed now though

uh, how? i havent updated the mod yet?

The Late loadout is now in the proper place

there actually is a late loadout, there's just an accidental duplicate loadouts section higher up in the file than it should be
fixed, will be in the next patch, thank you!

@nuclearstonk Second Slava in wp_rkr_slava_variants.ini has a nonexistent loadout "Late." There's only Default and Top_Plate in wp_rkr_slava.ini right now.

my bad, will fix

Great job!
Found one small bug:
Kara_89 Kerch-loadout aft SA-N-3 launcher is not functional.
Delete "Default" from "WeaponSystem2Default".

None.

Steregushchiy-class
Gremyashchiy-class
Admiral Gorshkov class

are the ships that have Redut

what ship in pelt use 9M96?

do you have NTU and PELT installed? do you have another mods installed as well?

Why all the names in the encyclopedia show up, for example, "MISSING: usn_bb-iowa89 name or squadron reference" ?

copy that,thanks

@BINOGX the type 033 is not a WWII ship (its a mid 60s diesel electric romeo clone) and the four homing torpedoes i gave it are 70s spec because the representation of the 033 ingame is of its 80s type (given the entire class is ingame)
if you want a 60s version of the ship it would be easy to make, but there is literally zero difference between them other than the inclusion of 4 crappy ASuW torpedoes

Could you separate the more capable type 033 and the base game ww2 version?

yes, they should, will be in the next update

Will Chinese submarines get "Active Intercept Warning" like all the other subs?

oops

I think I found a small mistake. Why is there a SPY-1B radar in the sensor's list of 1990's Slava? lol

mod's updated

ships that are firing 48N6 that still have the 4R41 "Top Dome" radar can only fire out to 50nmi, despite the missile being capable of longer range

In ur updates can you plz check some of the ranges of the s300/400 on ships like the kirov? it seems that the actual range of them doesn't match the stat card at all

expect a patch to drop within 15 minutes of the PLAN update

PLAN coming 1st october can we expect PELT update soon after that?

The mod is on top of the modlist but if I start the mission editor to choose a modded ship there is writen, for exampel, "missing: wp_rkr_frunze_94 name or squadron reference`" and in that way for every modded ship. How can I fix that?

thank you guys for 20k subs, sorry there hasnt been an update in a couple months, but trust me when i say i've been working on this every week, and the next update will be huge
i'm just waiting on the devs to add PLAN stuff to the game so i can update the mod, because certain new features require the PLAN assets

@nuclearstonk
Thank you for your reply. I just tested PELT without anchorchain, same problem.
I'm going to completely reinstall the game at this point.
Thank you for your help.

@nuclearstonk
Understood. Thanks for such a quick response.

@bg0504
shtorm-N is already in the mod (has been since release) but currently no ship uses it because i dont have 1989 versions of kara/kresta II yet

kresta I probably wont receive CIWS until i get confirmation from the devs that they wont add it, since it requires some additional work other than just bolting on CIWS (there's an entire superstructure addition!)

Superb mod.
Are there any plans of adding 4 ciws to the 1989 Kresta's? Also, will the M-11 "Shtorm-N" with improved low-altitude target engagement capabilities be implemented in the future?

well I understand, I was thinking especially about earlier ships for early cold war scenarios

well, the earlier and later units simply do not fit within the balance of the game, so there's no way to separate them (and it would require a huge amount of work from me regardless)
if you dont agree with the balancing you can always make a local copy and change whatever you want, after all

Like project 613 ships etc.

From the rest of the mod without changing the balance of the game

@Brzoza what does that mean? standalone from what?

Can we have just the new ships standalone pls?