People will often use hilariously overtiered stuff to try and prove their point that something should move up. Vehicle like OTOMATIC is a perfect example.
2 Likes
i like how these people keep talking about planes / cas and somehow think the A-10 is at all viable. these people are making me laugh.
Same goes for Striela meeting higher B.R. Vechicles ;)
This is the problem, for some reason the gaijin devs WILL NOT DO THIS. For whateverreason they wont give any of the other countries any of the more advanced S.A.Ms
the strela never should have been at 9.3 tbh no S.A.M should be under 10.0
1 Like
So easy game for air vechicles
1 Like
We don’t want SPAA to be too strong, but we also don’t want it to be too weak or too sparse in the tech trees, and right now that’s true of most SPAAs.
An additional issue not talked about often is the place they have in the flow of the battle. There is a clear path to spawning in air, it’s a kill streak power up. There is no clear path to spawn in SPAA.
1 Like
Strelas have more overload than Stingers, thus hit easier. Stinger vehicles are around 9.7 BR. So Strelas new BR makes sense.
That’s the thing though they should act in support of CAP fighters as a backstop to Strike aircraft, not be an “all in one” solution, and anyway with things like the Pantsir being able to easily detect (mostly an issue of the very RCS assigned to ordnance), and shoot down incoming ordnance as long as they are aware, a range deficit vs Standoff Ordnance doesn’t matter as much, past a point.
1 Like
Fighters are the best counter against other planes, yes. But I’m not sure you realise, that’s not a good thing, it’s a sign that asymmetric balance of rock-paper-scissors is not working as intended.
There are huge BR gaps between AAs. Most are over-BR’d and subject to nerfs (no stealth belts, no bespoke reticle), and at a range disadvantage against the planes they are supposed to counter.
In order to be effective, they need to leave spawn: good luck doing that if your team is losing. To reload, they need to drive to a cap, like tanks, even though it is manifestly much more dangerous to them. There is the ongoing problem of how to make them effective against planes without turning them all into tank destroyers.
Finally there is the issue that if you spawn SPAA first, you will likely not contribute to the first engagement (and you’ll get bored). But if it’s your second spawn, a plane has already killed you. And even then, you have to choose between tank (help your team with the objectives or try to turn the tide if you’re losing) and SPAA, and if you choose wrong, it can cost you the game.
Sorry, but in terms of game design, this is not a counter. It’s a band aid. A Dicker Max’s gun is a counter to the Churchill’s armour which is a counter to the mobility of a medium which is a counter to the unarmoured Dicker Max, that is asymmetric balance. SPAA is not performing like that right now.
By the way, you can get empirical proof of this. An SPAA costs between 1/5th and 1/10th of air to spawn. Why do you think that is? What imbalance is that cost difference trying to compensate for? Considering that Gaijin balances by performance and efficiency, if a unit costs 1/10th to spawn compared to what it should “counter”, what does that say about their respective efficiency?
Think it through, and draw your conclusions.
4 Likes
If you’re struggling to leave spawn the match is likely either in its closing stages, or the team has failed to keep it secure, further SPAA tend to be backline units so should struggle for the most part, against anything but the lightest of armored threats.
Further if put in this situation, I wouldn’t be entirely sure that spawning an SPAA was the right call in place of another class of vehicle.
This specifically may get addressed in future as it was indirectly addressed in the 2024 roadmap
The same way they did for the Ho 229 which was solved by not adding pure AP belts, or otherwise reducing their occurrence within said belt to some lower ratio. and subsequently reducing it’s effective rate of fire to some reduced fraction of it’s RoF.
Or otherwise treat it like the ADATS, and reclassify it as a Missile TD breaking the lineup and the meta for US toptier completely without replacement, simply because a dual use missile was too good.
That gives you time to set up properly, reach a good out of the way position and prepare to counter any potential rocket rush by helicopters, which can change the course of a match easily if not accounted for. Further most Light tank’s armor is deficient at stopping said armament, so there’s a more relevant role.
Who said it was a plane, you easily have been counter-peaked or otherwise bean an early death. as will happen on the occasion. and the Low SP cost allows for a cheap buy in of a potential chance to obtain enough SP for a 3rd spawn / nuke (I did this once with the M163).
To give people easy & access to a chance to defeat aircraft, I personally thing a comparatively more important issue would be a rework of the SP cost of A2G ordnance , since that is the major component that decides what they face off against and the underlying offensive capabilities.
For example in Arcade the loadouts and airframes are curated to ensure that SPAA can deal with them.
The fact that Ground battles use an SP system, and that spawning SPAA should not be a reason to not be able to later spawn a heavy or medium and so are a cheap SP investment for said capabilities by design. The additional fact that they don’t raise the respawn cost multiplier, also points to the fact that they are designed to be a reactive choice to potential aircraft spawns, while not being without risk.
The point is mostly to threaten Aircraft to remain at a distance or disrupt strike or defensive maneuvers that would otherwise be successful, and as a backup role a counter to IFV’s / LT’s that push too far, or a cheap Hail Mary to stealthily go after a distant cap point to keep the team in the game. in this role they serve as a way to keep the player invested and give them further opportunities to still have an impact potentially even after a second or third spawn even falls though.
depends on the role in question, but they should have come capability to have an impact on the round, though should either be specific to some threat or or obvious comparative weaknesses where the exploitation of the player’s skill and knowledge of the map of game mechanics is needed for success to a greater degree.
Depends entirely on the intended outcome, and since we don’t have access to the data needed to make said observations.
I’d be interesting to see if there is a link between lineups lacking SPAA, and / or Spawned SPAA and deaths to aircraft or not. Since I’m not entirely sure that the matchmaker doesn’t take that into account.
not really easy when there are proxy round spaa and ifvs in the game.
I don’t see the difference
And tell me how proxy round SPAA is going to fight an airplane that can kill it from 8km.
8km? what plane is killing you from 8KM?
A-10s do it on every 10 minutes, though it isn’t much of a problem with IR missiles
I have showed A-10 can do that
2 Likes
A-10 is very easy to kill.
1 Like
So tell me please what 10.0 SPAA has effective range of 8km
2 Likes
Don’t know but they fly most of the time way closer and I never had any problem with them killing me out of my range.
1 Like