Neither does SLM/IRIS-T; the only reason they reverted this change was because they could literally not get Datalink to work and made long-range shots impossible.
1 Like
Yes because like i said SPAA on its own is probably not what people percieve as oppressive, its the combination with CAS or in the Pantsirs case also the CAS it was pitted against. Ofc the IRIS T is vastly better than the Pantsir but its in a completely different environment.
Do they really? Its a lot better now sure but the only thing coming close to the KH38MT in terms of speed and destructiveness are the Hammers. The rest is either slow, has terrible HEAT warheads, a Mach 1 release limit or all 3.
Seems like thats a you situation since the TT one performs noticably better statistically
Compare the amount of preferential treatment the russian tree got in the past ~2 years with the other trees. Sure everyone gets thrown a bone at some point but you literally need to pull examples out of multiple other trees just to match the stuff russia got. And even then you get unexcusable stuff like the LMUR lofting and the IRBIS performance. Just for clarification i do not think that russian bias makes russia the best tree in the game in any capacity. I think Gaijin selectively bends the rules for russia so they can stay competetive at the top which is why its imo a rather recent Phaenomenon
1 Like
Double loft or IR+IOG+DL fixed yet? I’ll play the SLM again once it is no longer useless to LDIRCM
Oppressive doesn’t mean it has to affect both air and ground.
It can be extremely oppressive against air without changing much on the ground.
The euro fighter typhoon is largely either the best or second best platform in game yes.
And Kh38 again is launched off a far, far worse platform in comparison with the NATO platforms.
that was until Su30, which is still further behind FM wise but closes the gap somewhat.
Perhaps, but the premium one has the misfortune of being just that, it can be bought in literal Droves unlike a TT one which as to be unlocked. The TT one is easier last I checked to be one tapped once penned in comparison to the Premium, unless that’s changed.
uhm what?
T58 was dropped, Scharnhorst dominated navy for years, the Puma dropped at 8.7, XM800T was added stupidely low, FOX absolutely slammed and still does, STRV 122 at top tier, leopard 2A7 still dominates for best top tier MBT.
Tigers, panthers sat at lower BR’s than their counterparts and still do for years.
Leopard 1 sat at 7.3 while every single other MBT which was the same sat at 7.7 or above, even the T54 was 7.7 and leopard was 7.3.
that’s just some of the crap I can think of, off the top of my head. the only two proper russian Bias vehicles we have seen since I started was the KA50 and the 2S38.
Not at all, the list of stuff the other two major nations like USA and Germany have had is massive as well.
People just get hyper fixated on the Russian stuff so they can cry russian bias.
They do not have a russian bias.
it matters for the perception in the community. An IRIS T cant blow you up in a tank without you having any counterplay whatsoever.
Minimal gap with the SU30 and none of the other stuff matters when you have 38MTs vs Mavericks, Brimstones and Spears. The only thing comparable is the Rafale with Hammers.
For the rest. Adding something busted is not russian bias as i understand it. Look at all the things in the past 2 years and tell me where other tech trees got artificially buffed over others or where russia got a completely artificial nerf. Russian bias is not “when T80 is better than everyone else” its “T80 can keep up, because the opponents get targeted unrealistic nerfs and the T80 gets unrealistic buffs”. None of the other trees has profited that massively from dubious changes as ussr top tier has.
1 Like
That minimal gap isn’t minimal at all.
The su 30 flight performance wise is significantly worse than all the euro canards, and F16s.
The mavs are also not bad missiles at all for lock and launch and ducking out.
The euro fighters cas wise are rhe worst cause of only having brim but the newer AESA models have extra CAS ordinance as well.
Everyone goes on about the KH38 being OP af when it’s not that much different to anything else.
I’ve yet to actively see someone make us of the range of it.
Everyone just uses it the same as a mav and flies over the battlefield hurling them out.
Auto loaders.
They were rhe first nation to get auto loaders for the longest time.
Meanwhile other nations which used auto loaders didn’t get them modelled.
Also now saying adding broken vehicles doesn’t show a bias? How does it not.
When you said above the BMPTs are biased?
What massive buffs have USSR had to favour them at top tier please tell me?
Their round is mediocre, they have a 6.4 second reload on tbe BVM, they have the same weak spots since 9.3, they have poor mobility.
The reload on tbe T64 coulr see it moved, amd the 10.7 area adjusted.
But the actual top tier of russia, which you really have never touched, hell you’ve never played them.
Sucks.
T90Ms biggest advantage? Folks continously shoot tbe UFP , t72B3 etc all suck for tbeirBRs.
Meanwhile the USA has the likes of the M1A2 sitting at what ? 12.0? Lower than leopard 2a5, Same BR as the TKX (P) ?
That in of itself is artificially buffing another nation.
The m1a1 sat at 11.3 when all these BR changes came in and ruined 10.3 - 11.3 single handedly.
So yeah what buffs have russia actually had?
Other than a likely not real missile being added.
Cause the stuff with LMUR ive seen being discredited.
Ypu claim it lofts properly but provide no evidence of this.
So again, find me an artificially buffed change russia had at top tier for the past 2 years ?
Another artificial buff for nato, sweden has the J35XS still sitting at 10.3
No one cares about the range, the seeker doesnt even allow it to fully use that. The big difference is that the MT is more than twice as fast as the mavericks and thanks to its 152kg HE warhead doesnt suffer from the terrible inconsistency that plagues Tandem Heat warhead instead it can easily wipe a group of SPAAs.
Great so the one example you could find was from like 3 years ago.
The difference is why the BMPTs are broken. Its not just because its undertiered, thats standard for premiums. Its the blatant bs like the “external” ammo that makes the situation infuriating and the complete unwillingness from Gaijin to do something about it.
Pleas use your eyes, the lofting character of the LMURs is so obviously correct while everyone else has years old, accepted bug reports regarding the trajectories. Just take a look in the relevant threads theres plenty of footage.
Other than that: The SU30SM getting engine racks for R77 for which theres is absolutely 0 proof whatsoever. ERA still being a complete joke modeling wise while western ERA is complete garbage in every regard. Turret baskets being integrated for Abrams and Leopard selectively but when something similar would have happened for russian tanks Gaijin did
that. The good old stinger vs Igla situation. A russian Pesa radar having straight up better scan speed than every single AESA in the game. Russia getting their absolute best possible rounds while everyone else has to deal with decade old garbage. LDIRCM on the MI28NM being so hilariously modeled that a bottom mounted emitter can somehow affect missiles through the fuselage of the heli.
Can do that with the mavs too bud. Easily.
so many people cry about the range dude.
Well aware of that.
That’s one off the top of my head dude.
Was under 2 years ago you realise that?
There are posts on both the forums and reddit about 2 years ago talking about them not having auto loader modules.
Again there are more examples in there if you want me to go digging around for em.
hell the reload speed on the auto loaders has been incorrect for years alone.
R-77 was and still is useless at any longer ranges.
The mig29s were nerfed into the ground to the point their FM’s are still incorrect.
@AlvisWisla can tell you more about the FMs than I can.
Su27, Su30 recently got nerfs to their FM as well last I checked not even long ago.
They already are starting to nerf and change them though the addition of them at 10.3 was ridiculous.
Again, your “eyes” are not how the missile is seen to be performing.
As far as I’ve seen it still doesn’t perform how it’s advertised. Not that I am saying that it should but it genuinely doesn’t get correct lofting how it does IRL.
One google takes me to posts all over the internet showing it with R77s mounted at the engine nacelles, which seems right to me?
Western ERA isn’t a complete joke for what it’s designed for, it doesn’t overperform like russian ERA but it’s still not supposed to be stopping APFSDS rounds.
Auto cannon fire yes, specifically I know about the STANAG protection on the CR2 kits should be far higher.
Though russian ERA isn’t that “op” either, the relic on the sides pretty much disipates and will kill or disable the tank.
unless you use a round like L23 or something daft.
They added them as a test, which can be seen to actually brought them back into the fold balance wise, You can’t even argue that as the damn leopards are still some of the best top tier MBTS, and statistically the M1A2 last I checked still had the best stats of any top tier MBT.
1.60 KD to the 2A7 1.56.
T90M 1.22 and BVM is barely 1.33.
As well as this, turret baskets will still be applied to all of those vehicles and more, the abrams series and leopard series aren’t suffering from it. At all.
T series, chinese MBTs would be completely ruined by it.
Also last I checked the FCS and such have been modelled now as well as the auto loader has more additional parts to it, so again they are still there and modelled.
the Stinger VS Igla situation from years ago , which btw there are factors of balance as well as the fact part of how the stinger operates isn’t even modelled in game which brings it do the level of IGLA.
4
their best rounds are still mediocre rounds? their literally bottom half of hte rounds we have at top tiers and in most BRs, only the 3BM42 at 10.7 is a pretty strong round, even then it is still beaten by the L26, Type 1985-I , DM33 , the M322 found a near full BR lower with near 600 pen, as well as USA getting the M829A1 round at 10.3 , which is better than 3bm60 never mind 3bm42.
Doesn’t the chinsese Z19E or whatever it is do the exact same thing?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/D0UQng0JosZM
You mean this one? which is fixed and the captor M and such are now how they should be?
Can we stop debate something inappropriate here… or someone will end up on my grill…
Spoiler
About 100KG TNT diff tho.
Yeah my bad, i checked it the first devblog i found is 14th June 2024 however youre still lying, because the Leclercs and Type 90/10s got theirs as well only the chinese didnt seem to get them.
Been hearing that forever, never once got a link for a thread or bug report tho, same for the flankers.
Doesnt mean its wrong.
And they changed it the instance a “proper” source was found to the best possible value.
Yeah they changed the upper part of the belt so destroying it disables the turret (like on any unmanned turret in every other tree) but left the lower part thats literally inside the vehicle as external lol
You can just check the hit analysis and see that the angle is vastly higher than every other single AGM. Or this handy comment LMUR's Top Down Attack does not Exist? - #26 by HondaCivici
Not talking about the nacelle ones, i mean the ones in between the engines. The SU35 has those, there is no proof for the SU30SM tho
Im not talking about APFSDS, look at the difference in Chemical protection
Doesnt matter. The simple fact that they have no problem to selectively employ something like the baskets for only 2 tanks but actively refuse and explain why they refuse to do the same for the others is plain bs.
Years ago, not fixed, hilarious explanation by Gaijin, “If Igla formed how can be better than Igla”
Doesnt change that everyone is being held back, because the T series cant keep up
That one has the same LDIRCM layout as the 64E, 2 emitters on the stub wings not the single bottom mounted one of the MI28NM
Nope its not fixed. The Captor E now has the supposed maximum mechanical speed limit for all widths despite the narrower bands being AESA only and its still overall slower than the also partially mechanical PESA IRBIS
Eh, Gajin already reverted the change so its not like this thread serves a purpose anymore
Why this thread still exists??
Which is explicitly not fixed*
Dunno? Because no one bothered closing it?
Well at least Japan, UK, China, France also don’t have better rounds. So there is still zero reasons to introduce better rounds for leo and abrams when they already have best rounds in game.
Ironically enough, in the sqb session I played a couple of days ago my 2A7HU tanked a hammer and 2 Kh38s with only 1 crew member death.
I also survived a direct impact from Kh38 in my M1A2T in normal RB in the weeks after the update.
Doesn’t mean the Kh38 is bad or fully inconsistent, but they do like doing funny stuff sometimes.
1 Like
With the current quality of damage models and server infrastructure pretty much everything does the funny from time to time but bigger warhead still generally means more consistent damage in this game
1 Like
Sure russia got them first, I was checking the update log and wasn’t a mention of Leclerc and Japanese MBTs but could be wrong there.
One google takes you to both the bug reports showing it and countless posts showing it.
on top of that, the dev blog from when they introduced them also shows them nerfing it
One google. Mig 29 Nerf? - #10 by J_ackal
Community Bug Reporting System
MiG 29's and Su 27's flight models
Community Bug Reporting System
shall I keep going?
they literally buffed it last year aka 2025 as it was underperforming so much.
It literally is underperforming compared to it’s in real life metrics.
It’s transonic drag is far, far too high , it overbleeds energy due to the Thrust vectoring still not being modelled on it right and it loses it’s range far faster than IRL as well.
It is artificially under performing.
Exactly? so everyone else has had reload buffs for years now, and this is the first actual buff russian vehicles have had?
Again, they’ve since stating that originally have began to change and model it in, seeing as the auto loader takes up the lower half as it too.
I am not saying it isn’t lofting, i am saying it isn’t lofting how it’s manuals say it should, It still is lofting quite clearly.
Just not correctly.
That I’d have to agree with you on, last I checked it also was only 35 which had em. though the su30 in game is a mix as far as I’ve seen.
same as the EF2000
Hmm reckon the folks I seen chatting about it must of been at it.
Aye I went through the list of what Flame has shared and said.
Aye realised that man.
While Flankers were underperforming and are now almost accurate (still lacking low speed performance and still overperforming at high speeds) and are a very good dogfighters now, the MiG-29, at least from my research, is actually slightly overperforming or is dead on with the charts.
I haven’t seen SEP lines chart for it irl, nor the lift boundary, only one limited to 24 degrees of AOA and sustained turn rate line. At 24 degrees of AOA it matches the chart dead on, while it’s slightly overperforming in sustained turn rate.
MiG-29 is a victim of everything else overperforming. Planes like F-15C or Su-27 are accurate or almost as good as they should be, while F-16s, F-18s and all deltacanards are overperforming.
Also I’ve heard all planes overperform at supersonic speeds by like 2x.
The problem is that deltacanards are unlikely to get nerfed and they are overperfoming the most, so nerfing other planes like F-16s or F-18s would just hurt the game. Nerfing should begin from Rafale down.
The bug reports you linked provide no evidence to their claims, that’s why all of them have been rejected. One that often reappears is about engine thrust, because in the manual it has 8300 kgf of thrust, not 6820 kgf, but it’s the thrust of an uninstalled engine. In the plane engines have what’s called a channel loss, because airflow is restricted by the intake, and it’s usually 15-20%, which checks out for the MiG-29.
1 Like
Same for me, the only thing i found was a reddit post comparing the 3 on the dev
Firstly i genuinely appreciate you actually putting up the sources, youre literally the first person to do so from what ive seen. But tbh the bug reports look not that great and Gaijin doesnt have the best track record when it comes to modeling flight models
Eh not really everyone with manual loading already had its reload times balanced against the previous reload time and now they just implemented the new ones without any balance changes so its gonna be interesting how that turns out
The autoloader model is ok its just extremely infuriating that the ammo belt part between the autoloader and the belt part in the turret is specifically modeled as external despite being very clearly internal literally next to the crew. Its just a bit questionable.
Im almost sure that there is no manual that specifically mentions lofing for the LMUR, the thread i linked only has videos from the conflict that shall not be named and no documents mentioning lofting compared to the plethora of AGMs that have accepted reports, linked first hand documents and video proof and still do not loft.
The EFT is still pretty much the same plane, SU30SM and SU35 not so much.