Add SAM and radar sites as ground targets for high tier battles

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

one of the most important missions aircraft take part in is destruction of enemy air defenses, however currently the only air defenses are those around airfields, and the spaa escorting convoys.

I suggest the addition of surface to air missile sites, placed behind airfields, such that their effective range covers much of the territory from the airfields and backwards.

doing this would make allied territory seem safer than it normally does, as it would prevent aircraft from simply sitting behind enemy territory and waiting for people to take off, allowing for more head on encounters, which are more enjoyable for both players.

additionally this allows for missions to have objectives centered around destroying these defenses, making it easier for ground attackers to destroy bombing targets and airfields after their protection is removed.

such air defenses can include vehicles that would normally not be placed in the tech tree; such as the 2k12 kub system for the soviets, or the mim-32 hawk for american teams.

additional radar sites could be used to reveal enemy aircraft in allied territory, incentivizing players to destroy these sites to give their team an advantage in combat.

this could potentially improve the player experience for ground attackers, who would now feel more useful to the team.
this could also improve the experience of the fighters, who can now retreat to friendly territory as needed. having a safe space to retreat makes it more like that players will disengage from fights, allowing for long range air to air missiles to have greater use, as players will likely want to engage enemies with missiles rather than risk chasing them into hostile SAM coverage.



We need a greater variety of objective types in Air RB, and removal of various arcadey crutches alongside them.

The main thing standing in the way of adding new objectives for non-fighters is matches ending purely from PvP, which non-fighters are not built to partake in seriously outside select high BR machines fitted with AAMs. The “no active players left on hostile team” bleed needs to go - all ground targets are worth tickets now, and paired with the AI attackers there is rarely a situation where you can’t end the round by PvE after the player aircraft are dead.

If you add new objectives without first removing the ability to end games from PvP alone, people will not go for them very often, and they’ll eventually be removed.

1 Like

According to GJN, “they believe” anti-radiation weapons don’t really work in real life, and that’s why they’ve not bothered adding things like the AGM-88 HARM. As they continue to give Russia OP SPAA, and they are reluctant to even give NATO nations a top tier SPAA option, we should at least get the opportunity to counter them with anti-radiation weapons so we can do SEAD missions.




Really!? Where did they say this? It’s a super Gaijin thing to say, but I wonder if it’s relating to a specific weapon or to ARMs in general and would like to see for myself

One of the pointless Q&A sessions they did a long time ago, where they try justify their awful decision making.

1 Like

I’ll bet we could give Gaijin some stats on the R-27EP and it would be in-game with no argument.

or allow for buddy lazing and then F-16 can do some wild weasel shenanigans with someone lazing for them

yeah that would be too much fun, apparently

Is this real
I fully believe it is real but that sounds so outlandish that it almost is a parody of itself

1 Like

We have already commented on the ARM issue in the recent Q&A. This is a rather complex type of weapon and, in our opinion, rather overrated in the eyes of our players.

1 Like

More of the cause they do not want to bother with that stuff cause its a coding pain in the ass and has been tested.

Anyway there’s this thing

so there’s still some hope for ARMs. Especially with a few concessions made I think ARMs are perfectly feasible.

Translation: they don’t want to admit that Ukraine has taken out any Russian SPAAs with AGM-88s.



While I don’t support any specific implementation, I do believe that we need to change gameplay in a way that encourages taking realistic loadouts, i.e. mixed ones.

i tried lol, a tech mod wasnt for it. but that was back in the better days

Definitely could be a very good addition to Air Sim / EC battles.

Air Sim desperately needs more content, which I guess true for all game modes.

Dear Gaijin, War Thunder needs game modes overhaul.

1 Like

I love the idea of SAM and Radar sites. The SAM sites should use the Radar sites to lock onto targets unless the Radar sites get destroyed. Then the SAM sites switch to IR lock which requires the aircraft to get closer and the IR missiles are flared a lot easier. These should also be placed around bases and ground forces. Then allow Strike aircraft spawns to take out these sites before everyone else gets there. then when the Strike aircraft are done. They should have the option to switch to a fighter back at base. As far as the aircraft just sitting around waiting for you to take off. If more moving parts are added to the matches there wouldn’t be this problem.