Tried playing Meteor to see how F3H performs, but just like everything else the F3H whiners said, the claim that 8.0s are endlessly sucked into 9.0 is a lie.
All F3H whiners have to stand on is lies.
1 Like
play 8.3 then :)
1 Like
mhmm. When one lie doesn’t work just move on to the next.
1 Like
ur helpless
genuine spacebar main mentality tho, “hey i played one match and it didnt happen so it shouldnt happen on every matches!”
even if you got matched against F3H you can dodge sparrows all day even in a meteor XD
1 Like
You keep looking at these engagements as if War Thunder is supposed to be a fair 1v1 dueling simulator. It isn’t. The game is fundamentally asymmetric—it plays out like poker. Every single nation and lineup has matches where they get to be the bully, and matches where they hold a bad hand and have to fold. Trying to force every head-on engagement to be an equal, honorable duel is just fundamentally misunderstanding how the game is designed.
Look at Ground Forces as a clear example: if you are driving a 76mm Sherman or a 6.7 US tank and you run into a Tiger II (H) or an IS-3 head-on at 500 meters, what are you supposed to do? Sit there and pray for a pixel-perfect weak spot hit or cast a magic spell? No. Your shell will bounce, volumetric math will eat your round, or you’ll get deleted instantly. You track them, pop smoke, turn around, and run as fast as humanly possible. You use mobility, you flank, and you shoot their 80mm side armor. You don’t go cry on the forums demanding an immediate BR nerf for the IS-3 just because you couldn’t pen its front plate in a medium tank. You adapt
Ok, show me where?
Bro, I’m pointing things out. You have to literally not be playing the game to ignore it.
1 Like
you literally have to be trolling
and i presume most people defending the buff is trolling as well, as it seems yall hasnt even read the thread to comment stuff like this
i think i clearly stated the issue by asserting that by F3Hs getting altitude advantage via BVR at the start of the match, the other team is forced to stay below or stop climbing, which results in a low energy state.
if you have low energy in early jet BRs, you are dead.
and guess what? now altitude advantaged demons dont even have to dogfight you, they can infinitely boom n zoom you with their superior energy which you lost becuase your team has no ability to BVR at 9.0, and it will be an automatic win for them
is this that hard to understand? genuinely please think, just at least try to think logically instead of just blatantly saying “oh you have a skill issue because you cant dodge an aim 7C” or “just dont climb” or “you can beat an F3H in a 1v1 all day”
air RB is NOT a 1v1, the game values positioning and energy and people should capitalize on it. thats how you win matches and thats how you kill other players. a plane that forces other almost equally performing jets to lose their altitude advantage at the beginning and making them stay on the deck is NOT how you balance the game and it is clearly a biased matchup
a plane that loses in a dogfight does not mean it is an inferior plane
please, PLEASE think
and also if you dont even play the BR, i dont see why you even comment.
4 Likes
cry me a river, you are just bad.
You dont have to lose the altitude, just outturn the missile lol
In order to not get launched at you need to be lower.
Possible a lot of the time, but not always depending on the plane/energy state you are in.
1 Like
I very much agree that it should move up to atleast 9.3, 9.7 is debatable as I think it COULD be given the same treatment as the Mig21S at 9.7. But the stats are not 1-1, for one the mig has better flight model but worse missiles, and demon has better missiles but a WAY worse flight model, what do you guys think guys, do you reckon its a true sidegrade to the mig21S or a downgrade. On a funnier note it’s a rare case of non-russian bias lol
4 Likes
First of all, I do play around this BR, so I know what it is like to fight aircraft with a significant advantage. Yes, it is frustrating, but that does not mean the solution is automatically moving the F3H to a BR where it would be heavily outclassed.
For example, at 8.3, US aircraft can constantly face 9.3 aircraft with better climb rate, energy retention and missiles, while many US aircraft are stuck with AIM-9Bs. Some also have poor maneuverability and relatively weak gun power. You simply cannot out-turn, out-climb or outrun many of the aircraft you face.
The Yak-130 is another good example. If you are flying something like the F-9F, you need to be a very good player to consistently put a Yak-130 in trouble. There are also British and Swedish aircraft around this BR that can create similarly difficult matchups.
So I don’t think the solution to the F3H problem is simply putting it at 9.3 or 9.7. Maybe its BR can be discussed, but difficult matchups alone are not enough to prove that a vehicle is over-BR’d.
War Thunder is not a 1v1 game where every engagement is supposed to be perfectly equal. The game is asymmetric. Sometimes your vehicle has the advantage, sometimes the enemy does. The same applies to ground: a Sherman facing a Tiger II or an IS-3 from the front is obviously at a disadvantage, so you adapt, flank, use terrain and play around your vehicle’s strengths.
There will ALWAYS be some imbalance between vehicles. One tank will have a better gun, one aircraft will climb faster, another will turn better, another will have better missiles. You cannot make every vehicle perfectly equal without removing the differences that make them unique.
I’m not defending the US, the USSR, or any particular nation. Some vehicles are easier to play than others, and that’s simply part of the game. I’m defending the same standard for every nation.
If a Yak-130 has an advantage over another aircraft, that doesn’t automatically mean it needs a BR change. The same applies to the F3H.
The AIM-7 received a buff, and if the missile is capable of doing that, then it should be represented in-game. Likewise, the capabilities of the Yak-130 should be represented. What matters is whether those capabilities are reasonable for the BR, not whether another player dislikes fighting the vehicle.
There will always be bad matchups. The goal shouldn’t be to eliminate every advantage one vehicle has over another, because that’s impossible. The goal should be keeping those advantages within a reasonable range for the BR.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
So his idea of balanced game design is himself launching missiles/bombs at enemies from outside their effective range. Seems about right.
1 Like
most failures where do to the conditions rather than them being bad missiles they were very poorly maintained they worked good elsewhere when not horribly maintained
warthunder doesnt really model mechanical break downs other wise quite a few countries would be pretty bad eg russia late WW2 germany etc
This kind of reminds me of when they first released SARH and top tier was mig21 with r3s vs f4e with aim7e.
They used to model germany’s poor quality steel for late war german tanks. That was probably the only thing i remember them doing.
