Gaijin, What is the point of separate BRs for ground and air if some tornadoes sit at 11.7?

[Aegis270]

@Skyzonix

1. Running is stupid against anything faster then you, thought that was fairly obvious so I don’t really take that point seriously.
2. Don’t ignore the Tornado for the same reason you wouldn’t ignore another fighting rushing into to help secure a kill his team member is fighting, I don’t see how a Tornado getting to you slightly faster then any other fighter would makes any difference at all. Also there are supersonic fighters at those BR’s that are faster then the Tornado and can hold a turn fight better.
   Guess what, this isn’t a 1v1 game so your just out of luck and now have to deal with 2 planes, just like any other battle regardless of what ever plane is coming.

3.Turning in statistically gives you the worst chance to avoid a Tornado.

So to summarize, all three options are terrible, and yet you see no problem with this?

And remember, it isn’t about dealing with the Tornado (That’s the easy part), it’s about dealing with the missile the Tornado can fire. Which is impossible without flares and difficult to do even with them.

@Skyzonix

At 10.7 if your turn fighting a GR.1

Why would a Tornado be turnfighting me? Why wouldn’t it just boom and zoom over and over again? Is your BR change based on the idea that the Tornado would willingly throw away it’s advantage?

@Skyzonix

At 10.7 … Aim-9L’s isn’t hard to flair off or out turn.

This is a great relief to the many flareless planes in the 9.7 to 10.7 bracket. And no, you cannot outturn an AIM-9L fired by anyone who knows what they’re doing. Nor can you turn in such a way to deny a shot to an incoming Tornado.

@Skyzonix

At 11.7 for a GR.7 I’m sure most if not all ( citation needed ) have flairs to pre-flair to mess with Aim-9M’s, and there are very few planes at 11.7 that aren’t supersonic and at low level are actually faster then the Tornado so statistically speaking you’d be in one of those.

AIM-9M IRCCM requires both a large amount of flares and decent flight performance to consistently dodge. A lot of planes within 10.7-11.7 lack the number of countermeasures required to do this, or would have to fire so many they’d be defenseless afterwards. Many get 60 or less, and if you want to bring any useful amount of chaff that number gets even lower.

They also need enough flight performance to escape the inertial tracking, something that’s a bit much to ask of a Phantom, MiG-23, Viggen, Harrier, etc. Hell, it’s something F-16s can struggle with if they’ve blown too much speed in a fight.

@Skyzonix

Or the most obvious point of all, most Tornado’s prioritise bases and will actively avoid the furballs and fighters, maybe on the return they might try and sling there missiles but most likely will once again avoid fighting to go re-arm faster and try and get in a second bomb run.

Why would they do that if they go down as you suggest? As you’ve already stated, bombing bases is inconsistent at best, so if they got sent to a tier where their missiles effectively print free kills, why would they bother loading themselves up with bombs when they can just fly out and net themselves those free kills before RTBing?

@Skyzonix

Aim-9L’s have a much closer range to lock in front aspect you will absolutely know if something is going to shoot at you with a tiny bit of situational awearness.

This doesn’t help you if you don’t have flares. Which many of the planes that would be seeing it don’t have.

@Skyzonix

Tornado’s aren’t outturning missiles very much at high speeds due to wing sweep and poor turning.

They don’t have to, they have plenty of flares. And unlike the AIM-9L, earlier missiles have effectively no flare resistance, so just dumping a few behind you, even with afterburning on, will easily spoof them.

[Skyzonix]

@Ion_Protogen

There’s a difference between something that can catch a Mig-21 vs something that can barely catch a P-51.

Why are you all thinking about straight line out speeding it?? Dam I mean the Lightning is incredibally fast and can supercruise at 9.3 with missiles and you don’t see them domenating there BR bracket because everyone knows you just turn and they overshoot and miss, its exactly the same with the Tornado but you all act like its some type of god tier machine.

@Ion_Protogen

So it’ll be the same BR as the J35D, while having flares and 2 more missiles.

What the hell are you talking about??? a GR.1 has 2 missiles only pretty sure the J35D gets 4 missiles. So i have no idea what your even talking about.

@Ion_Protogen

Av-8s at 9.7, or the Hunter F.58 at the same BR? They would need to go down too, because they aren’t only 0.3 worse than the Buccaneer with 9Ls.

Now your just talking crap, Both of those aircraft are better then the buccaneer. AV-8’s have much better turning and acceleration and climb way better. The Hunter can maintain a higher speed in a turn, can actually turn and outclimb the buccaneer, and again its a dam bomber basically so its going for bases so 99% of the time its been chased not chasing someone else.
Look I’ve gotten an Aim-9B kill on someone using the Buc at BR 9.3 does that mean its now OP god Tier and should be moved up???
Its easy to get kills on straight line flyers who aren’t awear of anything around them.

@Ion_Protogen

They would be OP at 10.7. That would put them on par with a Sea Harrier, which is something that can’t really go down either.

No they wouldn’t be OP at 10.7 they would just be like every other strike aircraft trying to hit a base and carrying missiles as a defence for brain deads who want to head-on. there speed would make them no different that whats its like with the Lightning at 9.3, bad turning, horrible energy retention in a turn and when caught slower speeds is dead.

@Ion_Protogen

You can’t ask for decompression, and then ask for the tornados to be moved down by 0.7-1.0 BRs.

Since decompression is something every one asks for and we get ver very little of it that does a dam thing, then yes asking for BR changes is perfectly fine. since a BR change would make these planes usable now instead of wait 5-10 years for enough decompression to happen ( if it ever happens ) to make the planes usable again.

@Ion_Protogen

That isn’t unique to tornados. Go play a 10.7 or lower Mig-21 or any other delta wing and you’ll experience similar things.

I have played them, the mig can turn fight and is light and nimble compared the the bulk that is a tornado. Have you played a tornado??

@Ion_Protogen

Depends on the plane. The Mig-21S only has R-3Rs and R-3S’s at 9.7, and it lacks flares completelty. Aim-9Ls also have an extra +10g of overload over any other missiles at that BR, as well as being all aspect (which doesn’t just include headons).

Sorry am I supposed to care that they are 2 prem Mig 21’s at 9.7? The other Migs are 9.3 where they wouldn’t meet a Tornado, or there 10.7 with R60’s that can be uptier to 11.7 where they meet Aim-9M’s, Aim-7’s ( SARH ) R-60M’s among other SARH and All aspects. So your point is just mute.

[Skyzonix]

@Aegis270

So to summarize, all three options are terrible, and yet you see no problem with this?

And remember, it isn’t about dealing with the Tornado (That’s the easy part), it’s about dealing with the missile the Tornado can fire. Which is impossible without flares and difficult to do even with them.

So if dealing with a Tornado is the easy part whats the issue?? Missiles aren’t gods and are easy dodged with some effort.
Saying that the primary role of a Tornado and what to expect is a terrible argument then this just shows your not arguing in good faith but bias as hell.

@Aegis270

Why would a Tornado be turnfighting me? Why wouldn’t it just boom and zoom over and over again? Is your BR change based on the idea that the Tornado would willingly throw away it’s advantage?

Exactly why would a tornado be turn fighting?? Why would it be trying to boom and zoom with such a huge turning issue??? The abvious answer is they probable tried once, missed and already running back to there airfield. Dropping bombs for RP/SL is there advantage, trying to fight isn’t an advantage but rather a risk that often doesn’t pay off.

@Aegis270

you cannot outturn an AIM-9L fired by anyone who knows what they’re doing. Nor can you turn in such a way to deny a shot to an incoming Tornado

Who said outrun it?? Your just making things up as you go along.
Out turning an Aim-9L is actually not at all difficult and many people do it regularly every single day. And yes you can deny a shot to a Tornado, turn and dive and you have just avoided it, if there stupid enough to try and follow they crash after a blackout.

@Aegis270

AIM-9M IRCCM requires both a large amount of flares and decent flight performance to consistently dodge. A lot of planes within 10.7-11.7 lack the number of countermeasures required to do this, or would have to fire so many they’d be defenseless afterwards. Many get 60 or less, and if you want to bring any useful amount of chaff that number gets even lower.

They also need enough flight performance to escape the inertial tracking, something that’s a bit much to ask of a Phantom, MiG-23, Viggen, Harrier, etc. Hell, it’s something F-16s can struggle with if they’ve blown too much speed in a fight.

Cba to go through all this, I’ll just say A10-C x4 Aim-9M’s if others can learn to dodge aim-9M’s then I’m sure with some practice you can too.

@Aegis270

Why would they do that if they go down as you suggest? As you’ve already stated, bombing bases is inconsistent at best, so if they got sent to a tier where their missiles effectively print free kills, why would they bother loading themselves up with bombs when they can just fly out and net themselves those free kills before RTBing?

Base bombing at there current Tier is inconsistant because everything gets there quicker then a GR.1 and you have to not die to Aim-120’s in a GR.7, so your lucky if you make it to a base at all. Hense the move down should make it more possible, its really that simple.
Now why would anyone want to rush in and try and kill 2 targets and then get killed when the kills aren’t a “free kill” as you say, when they can happily base bomb which for using actual bombs not rockets or fire bombs is actually decent RP/SL if you can get there and back twice. and less risk then fighting other jets

[Ion_Protogen]

@Skyzonix

Why are you all thinking about straight line out speeding it??

You are underestimate how much that speed would give you at 10.7 relative to the A10 (which shouldnt be the same BR as a tornado).

@Skyzonix

What the hell are you talking about??? a GR.1 has 2 missiles only pretty sure the J35D gets 4 missiles. So i have no idea what your even talking about.

The J35XS is 10.7 with 6 Aim-9Js and flares, and the J35D is 10.3 without flares and only 4 9Js.

@Skyzonix

No they wouldn’t be OP at 10.7 they would just be like every other strike aircraft trying to hit a base and carrying missiles as a defence for brain deads who want to head-on. there speed would make them no different that whats its like with the Lightning at 9.3, bad turning, horrible energy retention in a turn and when caught slower speeds is dead.

The tornado has a vastly superior platform to the Sea harriers at 10.7/11.0. What should be done about them? Should they stay at a BR where they are objectively worse than a common enemy they would face? They certainly can’t move down lower than 10.3/10.7 either.

@Skyzonix

I have played them, the mig can turn fight and is light and nimble compared the the bulk that is a tornado. Have you played a tornado??

The Mig can’t turnfight, it’ll lose all of it’s speed if it doesn’t take time to reset the fight.

@Skyzonix

Sorry am I supposed to care that they are 2 prem Mig 21’s at 9.7?

Yes, because they are arguably undertiered due to compression.

@Skyzonix

Aim-7’s ( SARH )

SARH missiles aren’t some “I win” button, especially in something like a tornado which has decent RWR.

@Skyzonix

Missiles aren’t gods and are easy dodged with some effort.

That’s not what 9Ls are to flareless planes.

@Skyzonix

Out turning an Aim-9L is actually not at all difficult

me when i lie on the internet

@Skyzonix

Cba to go through all this, I’ll just say A10-C x4 Aim-9M’s if others can learn to dodge aim-9M’s then I’m sure with some practice you can too.

Once again, there is a vast capability difference between a tornado and A-10.

[Morvran]

Compare super-sonics with super-sonics and sub-sonics with sub-sonics.

Tornado Gr1 should get Mk103 engines and should be 11.3 along with the ASSTA1 and A200A.

All 6 Tornado IDS might be better suited at 11.0. but that is highly unlikely given that most equivalents are 11.3.

Whilst the Tornado IDS is a fairly limited platform when compared to a fighter like a Mig-23 or F-4. It is reasonably fast, has an excellent RWR and a good supply of CMs. Whilst its handling isnt great, you can do ‘fine’ with it since the new FM. But its purpose is to base bomb, and the ability to take out 2 bases does annoyingly factor into Gaijins balance. (Despite the fact there is rarely 1 base to kill let alone 2)

There is no reason for the Tornado IDS to be anywhere near 10.7.

[Aegis270]

@Skyzonix

Missiles aren’t gods and are easy dodged with some effort.

You cannot kinematically dodge an AIM-9L. Not unless it was fired by someone giving it the worst possible shot on purpose. At roughly equal energy states, any shot within ~3km of a target will result in a kill unless they have flares.

@Skyzonix

Who said outrun it?? Your just making things up as you go along.

The quote literally says “outturn”. Not outrun. Who exactly is making stuff up?

@Skyzonix

Out turning an Aim-9L is actually not at all difficult and many people do it regularly every single day.

This is just blatantly false and frankly a bizarre claim to make to people who have experience at this tier. But hey, if it’s so easy, I’m sure you can prove it with a few clips of your own.

@Skyzonix

And yes you can deny a shot to a Tornado, turn and dive and you have just avoided it, if there stupid enough to try and follow they crash after a blackout.

This would only work if the Tornado is too close to you in the first place. Any reasonable player would be easily able to follow the movement from distance and fire off the missile at 2.5+ km.

@Skyzonix

Cba to go through all this

Now who’s not arguing in good faith?

@Skyzonix

I’ll just say A10-C x4 Aim-9M’s if others can learn to dodge aim-9M’s then I’m sure with some practice you can too.

The difference being the A-10C is a massively slower plane, meaning that you can literally just stay away from him all game long without trouble. You can use positioning to ensure that he never gets close enough for him to get a shot off unless you’re ready for it.

Put those same missiles on a supersonic airframe, and suddenly you don’t have that option.

@Skyzonix

Now why would anyone want to rush in and try and kill 2 targets and then get killed when the kills aren’t a “free kill” as you say, when they can happily base bomb which for using actual bombs not rockets or fire bombs is actually decent RP/SL if you can get there and back twice. and less risk then fighting other jets

They would be free kills, but you’re massively underselling how strong AIM-9Ls would be when combined with a supersonic airframe.

Regardless, they’d also still be slower than Phantoms/F-111s/Kfir Canard/etc that you’ll be seeing in most games, so you’re still not guaranteed to get to the bases first.

In fact, you’d just be moving this problem lower down, as now F-105s, Jaguars and other transonic strike aircraft will be the ones unable to reach the bases.

[hinjanattori]

All that long explanation doesn’t explain why certain tornadoes are set at a higher BR when they don’t get anything extra which is relevant to air battles compared to the 11.3 ones. That’s what this post is about.

@Night_Trapper

So either accept it,

If your argument is just accept it, you don’t understand the point of this forum and you should refrain from participating in it. Player feedback is a necessary part of a thriving game.

@Night_Trapper

or look for an air simulator game

I do play it in air sim. It is not easy there either. Fun fact: Mig-23ML/A/D sit at 11.3 in sim when this thing sit at 11.7. The former is faster and deadlier compared to the tornado.

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@Skyzonix

Tornado GR.1 should be no higher then 10.7

Has 9Ls so no thanks.

@Skyzonix

Tornado GR.4 should be no higher then 11.7

Has 9Ms so no thanks

@Skyzonix

Buccaneer 2.SB should be at 10.0 - 10.3 That thing should never face SARH missiles or MIG 23’s ( Aim-9L’s aren’t justification enough for the sheer pain these are to play )

9L sure is enough of a justication! it will stay where it is.

@Skyzonix

Phantom FGR.2 / FG.1 should be 11.7 They aren’t on Par with other Phantom’s at 12.0

Compression is bad, please learn this.

[DiamondCraftLP]

Back in May it was:

Regarding Strike Variants of the Tornado and Bomb Carriers in General

At the moment, most aircraft that primarily bomb bases in Air Battles are as effective, if not more, than fighters of the same Battle Rating, although they often have much weaker weapons and air combat capabilities than fighters.

We’re aware that many of you think that the Battle Rating of bomb carriers in Air Realistic Battles is too high, comparing them with fighters solely in terms of air combat capabilities.

However, on the economy side of things, the Battle Rating of bomb carriers — which are discussed in many topics — are optimal or even underestimated. This means that their weak capabilities for air combat doesn’t prevent them from receiving on average a good or even great reward. As noted above, the average reward is one of the main factors in determining the Battle Rating of a vehicle. Therefore in order for us to be able to reduce the Battle Rating of these aircraft while maintaining healthy economic progression, the rewards for damaging and destroying bases would need to be reduced so that the average reward (the effectiveness) of bombers and fighters is equalized.

We fully realise that a change like this will not receive any support from players who are asking for a reduction in Battle Ratings at the current average reward values.

Therefore in the summer, we’re planning to give more clarification and bring this issue up for discussion — whether or not we should reduce the rewards for bases in order to reduce the Battle Rating of aircraft that mainly bomb bases, or leave everything as it is now. Please follow the news for more details on this.

Based on what we’ve written above, as of now we are going to leave the strike variants of the Tornado at their current Battle Ratings in Air Realistic Battles. The Battle Rating of the Tornado IDS ASSTA1 (Germany), Tornado GR.1 (Britain), and Tornado IDS (1995) (Italy) will not be lowered, and the Battle Rating of the Tornado IDS MFG (Germany) and Tornado IDS WTD61 (Germany) will not be increased to that of the other Tornadoes mentioned above.

btw they never adressed it in summer again afaik

Nothing has changed from that it seems, at least until October

Tornado GR.4: Tenacious Tonka

We addressed this at the start of summer regarding Tornado BRs: Responding To Your Feedback On Separate Battle Ratings

The different BR between them is a relic of the time before split battle ratings.
The IDS all had guided munitions, while the WTD and the Marineflieger had not.
Therefore they were a higher BR.

They now could lower the BR of the IDS to match the lower Tornados, but they don’t cause the efficiency of the higher Tornados seem to be slightly higher than the lower ones and therefore a BR change is not needed (in their words)

A classic case of:

[magikvfx]

@Ion_Protogen

Or a Mig-23 because that’s a thing. (napalm on fighters was a mistake)

God I despise MiG-23/21 bombers. One of the few types of people I enjoy to see get tk’d.

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@Ion_Protogen

(napalm on fighters was a mistake)

You are blaming the playerbase using a tool given to them for an obvious singular purpose (Napalm is not used in any other capacity in the entire game, full stop) instead of blaming gaijin for not updating their ancient gamemodes.

[Night_Trapper]

If you believe in the power of this forum to change the game, then I congratulate you on your huge optimism…

If Gaijin changed the battle rating of the aircraft, then those were the changes that the developers had the most influence on and Gaijin once explained that it counts among other things…

• the overall percentage success of the aircraft, depending on aircraft of comparable configuration and their settings in battles…
• the popularity of the aircraft among players (Gaijin wants players to play with all aircraft)
  I.e. if one aircraft is highly profitable (SL), its battle rating is raised to be profitable on average, the same applies vice versa, if the machine is below average, the br is reduced here…

The exception is premium machines (see the endless “wall of lamentations” here on the topic of Wyverns)…and nothing will happen anyway…

Yes, the discussion about machines is stimulating, but it has to be something extra for the developers to deal with it… and I don’t wonder about them, mostly it’s just the crying of players who can’t do it, as they would imagine…

Regarding the MiG-23, we don’t know what the developers are counting in the battle rating, it’s not worth comparing different game modes…

Here’s a screenshot of the repair table from the new wiki…just the differences in the cost of repairs…

[Night_Trapper]

Both machines are, as far as the former Soviet Union is concerned, the first multi-purpose type machines…
A huge number of them were produced (especially 21) and they were used for a large number of tasks… From reconnaissance, through fighter tasks, as fighter bombers to the first attempts as CAS …

Here I see a few other things…

• maps for the tactical frontline combat method, based on game maps for WWII

• maps of ground units, where it is purely about loading bombs and going to bomb

• and the navy, it will not be different here…

• a lot of players, want to play only fighter combat and see planes/players with bombs as a burden that weakens the team…

• but not everyone wants to just spin in a never-ending furball aka kill or next game…

• then there are players who need planes only for ground/sea battles and for them it means the simplest grind and done…etc.

There would probably be plenty of ideas here on the forum on how to transform the air, land and sea modes of the game, but if that is the developers’ goal… who knows…
This game is a game for all regular video game players and Gaijin once said that he did not want to make it a simulation game focused on a narrow group of players (i.e. only fighters, only bombers, only tankers, only helicopter pilots, only sailors, etc…)

[magikvfx]

Now here’s the thing, what you’re saying about the MiG-21/23 being used as fighter bombers/CAS is false. For the MiG-23, there was specialized versions, like the MiG-27 and MiG-23BN (flareless/missile-less). The MiG-23M/L/D/A/F are not fighter bombers. As for the MiG-21, the only attempts at making it into a fighter bomber were when they were completely obsolete, like in Egypt facing F-14’s and whatnot. Now in War Thunder we have Battle Ratings, so most planes aren’t forced to compete in historical matchups, and thus should not be bombing in their very capable air-to-air fighter.

[Night_Trapper]

We are already off topic…
If the MiG-21 was supposed to be a direct competitor of the F-104, then the MiG-23 should have equaled the F-4 Phantom II, and in the latest versions, it should have almost equaled the F-16A block10 aircraft in some parameters…

But it’s much more complicated, the MiG-23 ML had a lot of subversions…
Briefly like this

• version - 23M - Flogger B, primarily a pure fighter, testing anti-ground attacks
• version - 23ML - Flogger G, pure fighter, primarily pure fighter, anti-ground attack testing
• version - 23ML/MLA - Flogger G, multi-role, primary fighter aircraft, secondary attacks on ground targets
• version - 23 MLD - Flogger G/K, multi-purpose, primary fighter aircraft, secondary attacks on ground targets

MLD had 4 other subversions - Product 23-18, Product 23-19, Product 23-19B, Product 23-22A…

That plane was simply a modular box, where different versions and subversions were built from a fighter plane with anti-aircraft missiles, to an airplane capable of fulfilling a whole range of different missions, with various suspended weapons.
I counted for the complete MiG-23, a total of 15 built versions and another 12 versions that ended up only on the drawing board…

Gaijin put into play and not only what concerns the MiG 23, it can also be seen with other aircraft, real - advanced versions of the aircraft that allow to fly both anti-aircraft and anti-ground missions … if they put all versions of one type, for each aircraft, that would be madness…

They are not machines of the first production units, such as MiG-21/F13 or F-104A, which only have 2 rockets and a few cartridges for the cannons and after firing, they are just such “doves of peace” …

And not all players necessarily want to play only fighters…

[MotorolaCRO]

@Skyzonix

Tornado GR.4 should be no higher then 11.7

Why ?
It has enough bombs for two bases which is more than enough in that department.
It comes with 2x 9Ms and a decent amount of CMs.

I don’t think it should be at the same BR or just above than Su-22M3 which is slower and has only six keypresses of flares.

@Skyzonix

no one is realistically using brimstone in ARB

It’s funny to see how Brimstones are actually more useful than R-60s.

The Terminator Has Arrived

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@MotorolaCRO

It has enough bombs for two bases

Are we pretending this really matters for BR balance

@MotorolaCRO

It comes with 2x 9Ms

Only reason I think it should stay 12.0

[MotorolaCRO]

@AllNationEnjoyer

Are we pretending this really matters for BR balance

Yes it does as both speed and bomb load affect base bomber’s efficiency which is something Gaijin is looking at.

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@MotorolaCRO

Yes it does as both speed and bomb load affect base bomber’s efficiency which is something Gaijin is looking at.

You have two options here. Either you fully commit to the idea that what gaijin thinks is the only thing that matters, and therefore we have to disregard common sense and vehicle capabilities in favor of thinking about what earns “too much silver”; or you stop using what gaijin thinks is important and instead talk about real vehicle capabilities and whether a BR is actually balanced or not. The playerbase does not give a damn if a vehicle can bomb 2, 4, or 28 bases when it comes to BR balance.

[MotorolaCRO]

@AllNationEnjoyer

The playerbase does not give a damn if a vehicle can bomb 2, 4, or 28 bases when it comes to BR balance.

Now that we have separated BRs for different modes, base bombers should be balanced with base bombing in mind, as that’s their main purpose in ARB. Yeah, A2A capabilities are nice to have but in my opinion those should have much less importance when deciding vehicle’s BR.