10 tech trees - all shallow gameplay.
If you play a single vehicle, and deeply understand its issues and strengths compared to other vehicles of the same BR, then you understand most of the others.
You can’t have that same sense with just shallow gameplay.
You know a bit about everything but not enough to explain their issues and strengths.
Sure, but when we look at stats, KPS matters more in general.
Your K/D is great for 12 matches, but your Kills per Spawn is abysmal.
It’s around a 1.42, which is much worse than your K/D, and means that every time you spawn in the G-LYNX, you are playing passively and are getting a kill and or maybe 2 every match - which isn’t a lot for a CAS aircraft of its stature.
It’s why I never insult others because of their battle counts.
Valid points are valid irrelevant of the stat.
Are they using the helicopter for heli rushes? I did, that’s why my deaths are so high in most of them.
Are they using it for recon for their team? Stats won’t show that.
Kill assists never show up despite me taking out engines and cannon breeches of countless tanks with Kamov and Apache then left them alone because a tank was nearby that deserved the rewards as well.
I’m not a selfish player, I’m not a stat padder, I don’t play vehicles to meme on other players.
Which is fine, but I can say that most people enjoy getting as many kills as they can.
And that you are mostly a casual player, if I can describe you as such.
Every time I talk about these vehicles, Honda or someone else insults me without any provocation which provokes me.
All I want is civil discussion and people not to feel like bigger amount of time spent in recorded time means more knowledge.
I’ve played DCS, etc. I’ve learned from instructors and other experts THEN I applied experimentation and/or learning.
So yeah, my recorded battles are less, because I didn’t learn as much from in-battles as I did outside battles.
I also play all game modes of War Thunder in all 10 tech trees.
To get to Honda’s battle counts I’d need to do another 10 years of War Thunder cause I play more variety.
It’s not hard to ignore peoples’ stats, I do it exclusively.
Fair enough, you do you.
You don’t have to play vehicles you don’t want to.
But I can tell you that learning from DCS, instructors, and experts is different to learning from in-game experience.
And because of that, you may think something else (that would be reasonable in DCS or in real-life) than what experienced helicopter players (who play competitively by the way) say about such vehicles in this game - because vehicles in this game perform differently to in real life and in DCS.
And then no wonder they get frustrated with you when they know that something is better than the other (based on tons of personal experience and by looking at facts shown in-game code and in-match performance), but you say otherwise.
Auto tracker can stop tracking if it has foliage or other crap in it’s sights.
Target can die, smoke off, go behind cover, etc. so you should be paying close attention.
Well, if it isn’t curb stomping other CAS it doesn’t make it any more special than those other CAS as well, at least for A2A.
Vehicles can be bottlenecked by the pilot, so you might be able to see the full performance.
I’m passing out after like turning for 170 degrees.
Yeah, thus the APS itself isn’t really a gimmick as it can save you from reasonable engagement distances.
Yeah, it will completely stop darts at well under 1000m which will make you much more tanky in those few first engagements.
Personal experience causes anecdotes very quickly.
It’s why I use cross analysis personally. I made sure to take a college course on it to know that I’m doing it correctly.
Personal experience leads to personal biases.
God knows how much I’ve argued about APCR’s usability based on personal experience, but other players are so reliant on post-pen that they’ll never be able to utilize APCR’s better pen.
And those that flank better than I do will have biases about vehicles they’re good at flanking with.
So on and so forth.
In this case of helicopters, HondaCivici is PERSONALLY better with SACLOS, I am PERSONALLY better with laser.
@HondaCivici and I should agree they’re equivalent and put our obvious biases aside.
Hence why you’d want to keep an eye on it every couple seconds or so.
I’m not saying forget about it all together.
Sure, and within each cycle of looking through the camera, and looking around yourself, you should aim for just around 3-5s in-camera, and then maybe 5-15s outside of the camera.
At least for A2A, sure. But it doesn’t just ground pound a bit.
It ground pounds by quite a bit due to its large number and variety of ordnance, unlike with the F-5Es or Tornados, or even the Mirage 2000DR-1.
As well as dealing with helicopters without much issues.
Possibly.
Yes, I can see that.
But you gotta remember that G overload is not the same as turn rate (in degrees per second).
G overload depends on the turn rate and the speed at which you are turning.
Something turning a little bit (let’s say 0.0001 degrees per second) going at the speed of light would face a lot of Gs, but you can’t say that it turns well.
If it can turn well at low speed, you won’t have to deal with much G overload, hence why your pilot isn’t blacking out that quickly.
Fair enough.
I’d still say it would be fine at 11.7.
100% agreed, and that’s why it’s useful to note that all competitive players either use the Ka-52, Z-10, or AH Mk.1 in SRB - which usually only the best vehicles can compete well in, at the certain BR.
If everybody is using it, then that probably means that it isn’t just your bias that is saying it’s good.
It’s also their bias, and even then they’re not using against other top 20 squadrons or they’d lose.
They’re looking up squadron during load then picking a vehicle to use they’ll think is weak against the squadron.
And any squadron that dies to helicopters in SQB will never be top 20.
I was hoping you would say this because it just shows how much you only think surface level without even spending more than 5 minutes on what the numbers mean.
This is why understanding statistics matter. Do you honestly think my lifespan is 2 minutes in ground? Guess what it is a combination of? All realistic modes…
You’ve played the Apache A and the Ka50. Let’s get that straight. No one cares that you play DCS.
If I say that I’ve played more sports than a soccer player therefore I’m better than him, do you understand how foolish that is?
Your RP gained says otherwise.
Because you state misleading facts and claim that they are fine at it’s fine at it’s BR. One would think that you’re experienced when you make these claims but what a suprise a lot of your games are from PVE not ground RB.
Applying “Real life” tactics or things you’ve learned in DCS as a way to say that you’re experienced, is irrelevant. It’s how you perform in thos vehicles in warthunder.
It’s the same. Your Peten has a KD of 1.11. My AH-1Z has a KD of 1.16.
Mind you, this is a TT vehicle.
Jesus christ man, spend at least some time thinking before you say something
“But, but battle count.” That only shows which tech tree they finished first, not which one they prefer.
You’d have to ask them which one they prefer. It’s clear they hunted the new helicopters after they released though, and considering how much time SQB takes up, that’s a slow process.
And @HondaCivici your entire post is just provocations rather than listening.
Rainy’s doing an excellent job conversing and trading perspectives with me.
Thank you, Rainy. For both your civil discussion and valuable perspectives.
Oh, and Ka-50: 31,247RP x 7.42 multiplier = 231852 RP before winning and loss bonuses added.
Peten is 195858RP before win/loss bonus added.
All I ask is for you to listen like I listen to Rainy.
I think that’s quite taxing to do for prolonged periods of time, especially when you have mediocre camera without thermals.
I believe something like a Kurnass is definitely on par with Su-39 when it comes to overall performance. 6x 65Ds, 2x GBU, 6x Pythons, good speed, CM count, etc.
Yeah I know that, I was doing it at 0.8M which is almost it’s top speed and it still didn’t put that much Gs through my pilot.
Of course, I was just arguing that APS isn’t just a gimmick.
We’re talking about the KA52, it’s performance and how it compares to other 12.0 helis…
That is extremely rich coming from you. When the first message on this thread is:
No explanation, no reasoning, nothing.
Even after rainy picked apart what you said, guess how you responded?
You get mad when people make personal statements agaisnt you when in fact it’s usually you who starts it.
Not only that, you make statements like this:
No one is a mind reader. That is why in almost every single thread, post I made, I assume the person I’m talking to hasn’t read prior posts from different thread. Unless, it’s you because you still make the same points and haven’t learned anything from our prior posts.
I could see that, though if you thoroughly check behind you and their air spawn before going for an attack run, you don’t really need to cycle through that too often. You aren’t the main target that they’d care to go for anyways - especially if they’re just planning to CAS anyways.
The camera isn’t too bad - it has good enough zoom to reliably track people at <10km.
Except I’d say the flight performance (although is faster than the Su-39) is worse when it comes to fighting other planes, as it turns worse and / or bleeds a lot of its speed while trying to maintain it (at least from my experience).
(This is if both had landing flaps on - the Su-25 will win the rate fight).
(The Su-25 generally still wins, or just shoots an R-73 if he decides to extend away last minute.)
6x 65Ds is nice but generally is not as useful or as numerous against helicopters as Vikhirs are.
GBUs are laser-guided, so they’re generally worse and take longer to impact than Kh-25MLs.
You generally have more killing potential with the Su-25T / Su-39 than with the Kurnass - albeit the Kurnass may be able to dish them out quicker and more easily.
6x Pythons is nice but are much less useful than 2x R-73s when the enemy decides to preflare.
I guess it depends on which one to be exact.
The Merkava Mk.4’s APS is only really good at dealing with ATGMs from helicopters, from what I can tell.
Plenty of CAS can just drop their FnF load (all they have) and hunt for planes. CAP exist as well.
It’s okay for a RU plane.
Good thing that turn fight isn’t the only way to fight planes.
Also, I’ve had landing flaps break well below 550km/h on the deck, so I hope that graph counts for that as well.
Just had them break at 490km/h with minimum fuel and only AAMs.
Preflaring exist, especially when you have infinite amount of flares.
That might be true on paper when you look at their loadouts. Kurnass shits out his 6x 65Ds and goes to rearm, all the while Su-39 is busy guiding his Laser stuff while being really exposed to any CAP around.
The time you need to spend in battle to use all of your weaponry should be taken into consideration as well.
China has APS that can intercept targets up to 1400m/s, but still Iron Fist is easily the best one out there and definitely isn’t a gimmick.
I’m not really scared of any of them other than maybe the F-5E FCU or Mirage 2000DR1.
Until you realise that you can’t use your energy against rear-aspect R-73s…
It doesn’t, but you should look at the graph where it is below 490km/h, as that would show you its practical instantaneous turn rate rather than some theoretical turn rate past that speed.
Preflaring can help quite a bit (especially in front-aspect), but no amount of preflaring can help when you have an R-73 2km behind you while you’re slow.
If you decide to just zoom past then you just lost a ton of position over the Su-25T / Su-39.
You think I’ve never seen someone try do that to me?
Agreed.
I can see why I’d take 6x mavericks over the Su-25T’s.
Though it may just depend on the situation.
It’s like with the F&Fs helicopters and Kamovs.
Kamovs are way more capable of getting more kills per flyout and time flying, but it also is more risky.
Agreed.
That too I guess, though from what I can remember, its armour or mobility is worse than the ZTZ99A, so it’s just as good if not worse.
