Active defence systems? (once again)

[PlasmaKrab]

Question is:
Shouldn't the various active protection systems (VIRSS/Arena...) be considered some upgraded abilities in most (all?) cases?

* First, to this day these systems only engage incoming missiles. Technical evidence shows that both types, particularly the destructive CM (Arena/Drozd) work at least as well against unguided projectiles, particularly AT rockets. This is confirmed by the fact that the Russian Drozd system, when first tested in Afghanistan, was engaged mostly against the rebel's unguided RPG-7s and derivates and scores a high success rate.

So shouldn't these systems be given some capability (maybe lesser due to smaller launch flash and absence of giveaways like radio transmission or laser pointer) against unguided projectiles like infantry rocket launchers, and maybe HEAT/HE tank and RLR rounds? Sadly some of these weapons don't have a dedicated weapon class, which would surely make things harder.

* Second point is about point-defence against infantry. There again, most if not all of the active defence systems (destructive) have the secondary use of protecting the AFV against close-by enemy troops. This is pictured in-game f.e. by the Galix weapon mounted on the latest French Leclerc tanks (by the way, this weapon is part of the tank's protection system, meaning that such A/P charges can also be fitted to any VIRSS-type systems). Even the charges of the Arena system can be command-launched and detonated by the tank commander for this very case.

To sum it up: shouldn't the systems modelled as "ARENA" in the game give the equipped AFV some additional protection against infantry, at least some chance of repelling assaults (maybe only lessenning the chance of successful assault)?

Thanks for any answer about this.

Regards,
Plasma