Every radar AA using 35mm Oerlikon or their derivatives is very unfair to play against at 8.3. These are vehicles largely from the 1970s & 80s which fight largely WW2 and very early Cold War aircraft, plus tanks from the early post-war period which they are frequently equally deadly against. They are designed to engage fast & low flying jet aircraft delivering unguided munitions, aircraft which were often equipped with self-defence suites and are, at least, a generation ahead of the current adversity. Currently no aircraft facing these AAs in the 8.0-8.7 can defend themselves effectively. This disparity in tech between AA vehicles and the aircraft they face is prevalent up until top tier, another issue which would be nice to be addressed.
1 Like
Planes are op against tanks, aa’s are op against planes. That’s how it’s supposed to be.
11 Likes
They can only hit you reliably within like 2km, and only out to 4km max. And only if you are high in flying in a straight line (like in a dive for instance).
You have to stay low constantly (easier to spot enemies planes this way and stay hidden anyways). And really only engage ground targets when they are scouted. Capping etc, so you window to be killed by radar spaa is like 5 seconds to see lock and fire.
Also if you ever played radar spaa and had the misfortune of dueling a heli 3km away you will see how even something with virtually no air speed can easily dodge radar spaa with just slight manauevers. Now apply that to a jet going 1000 as fast.
4 Likes
They are designed to engage fast & low flying jet aircraft delivering unguided munitions
Such as idk an f84f or something?
A plane which is at 8.3
If youre in a plane and dont want to get shot at by spaa go play arb
3 Likes
Currently no aircraft facing these AAs in the 8.0-8.7 can defend themselves effectively.
Defens themselves how? its a gun not a missile,
I believe defensive flying has been around a lot longer than most 8.3 planes
4 Likes
CAS players really do struggle even against 35mm cannon SPAAs, huh.
3 Likes
Considering most just fly straight the whole time, yes.
2 Likes
You need to remember both CAS mains and zombers ale allergic to term “defensive flying”.
There is only forward, towards victory!
1 Like
You have to fly straight to do things like use any air to ground weapon
I don’t see why any plane from the 40s or 50s (which is all of them at the ~8.3 range should face a radar AA from, at the earliest, 1975.
Maybe that is impossible when delivering ordnance if you want to ensure a hit
sounds like me like it is banalnced then. CAS cant just beeline straight from spawn towards its target, but actually has to “deserve” it, so to say.
That isn’t what happens ever in my case, strawman arguments are pointless. A 30 year technological disparity between planes and AA at the same BR is mad.
And yet people are arguing some CAS planes are too low when compared to the AAs they face.
That being said, if you really think that is strawman argument, i dont see reason to continue further.
Best of luck to your effort actually changing gaijins mind ;)
Some people (incorrectly) arguing that. There is no reason for late 40s jets to face mid-late 70s AA. It’s not a controversial suggestion to say that vehicles of the same time period should face each other. 99% of current discourse on this game is about stopping WW2 tanks from facing Cold War tanks. No reason why the logic should be any different for different classes of vehicle.
according to who?
the game balance revolves around vehicle capability, not DOI or such. MiG-21Bis DOI is 1972, making it only two years older than F-14A. Should they share the same BR?
T-62M is 1981 upgrade package, making it older than Leopard 2A4 that was introduced in 1979. Should T-62M be higher than Leopard 2A4?
TURMS is early 2000 upgrade package for T-72s, Leopard 2A5 DOI is 1995. Should TURMS be higher than Leopard 2A5?
Planes are simply more capable than air defense systems of the same time period. Putting them against systems from their time period would make the current CAS fiesta even worse.
Seems fair. Not my fault the Soviets have bad, outdated crap.
There are more examples, ive just picked few.
Point is, game is balanced around capability, so theres that.
I mean by this logic we would also have unstabilized M60A1s vs T-64As, M60A3 Passives vs T-80Bs etc. Date-based matchmaking would be a nightmare for gameplay, not to mention it would be terrible for player numbers. No one is going to want to play a match where they are outclassed, so people will just flock to whatever area they have an advantage in.
This is all neglecting the fact we have many vehicles in-game which, yes, were introduced at some point close to the introduction of a system that would eventually evolve to be a very capable and superior platform, but possess modification that actually date from far later into their service lives, such as new ammunition types and so on. For these reasons you can still separate vehicles by BR in a way that does not pit a MiG-21bis against an F-14A (even though this does happen in uptiers and isn’t really unfair if you can survive the Phoenix wave). Gaijin doesn’t do this however, an excellent example being that the Chieftain Mks 3 & 5 sit at the same BR as the T-55AMD-1, despite the latter receiving ammunition from the 1980s (APFSDS), a laser rangefinder (which the Chieftain received before anything Soviet) etc.