Even if the gap doesnt stay this large, this is the highest major nation WR we’ve seen yet, atleast at top tier. Which is quite impressive.
Brimstone already slams every AA with ease as long as you arent a boat, 18 FnF ones would be OP as hell. 6 FnF would be fine though.
1 Like
The Skyranger 30 can field the FIM-92K, Mistral-3, Skyknight and DefendAir, the Overwatch uses Starstreaks and LMM’s - all of which are in the same range category as the TKB (5~10 km).
There is a question mark above the Stryker M-SHORAD however, as it uses the Red Wasp - we don’t know exactly how much range it has, but it does reportedly have significantly more range than the most modern Stinger, which would put it anywhere from 12~20 km.
The way I look at it is this; the SM-SV would have the best missiles, but Skyranger 30 would have the best gun and the Overwatch would have the best all-around utility, with the M-SHORAD being an in-between.
Sure, you could argue that Russia would still have the best SPAA, but NATO would have several competent contemporaries and wouldn’t be left high-and-dry - something I would argue is the actual problem.
Already is the best counter to the SM-SV lol
Nah, need full strength Brimstone 2/3s.
Not the reskinned Hellfires weve got currently
1 Like
Honestly, we don’t
1 Like
There is 0 excuse as to why the Typhoon (and probably the GR4 as well at this point) dont have at least SAL Brimstone 2s or 3s. Should also get a spammable GNSS weapon too, like GNSS+SAL Spear-3s.
But tbh, at this point, with LOAL in-game already, and that was the main thing they didnt want to add in regard to MMW… Its time for proper Brimstones, just balance them via proper SP costs
1 Like
Does Italy get Skyranger? I’ve only seen Skynex so far on a truck chassis. I think they should also add less powerful multiplatforms like Skyguard-Aspide, MEI and Hungarian KUB.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/o3iqnz/gaijin_we_did_it_t_guys_russia_no_longer_suffers/
Totally just forgetting about the era of 70%+ Russian win rates with the BVM hitting the still unbeaten 83% WR.
There’s a reason thunderskill isnt used anymore. Its data is inaccurate because of their sampling.
So, the highest documented top tier WR for a major nation belongs to the USA.
No its because people did not like what it was saying, same with the WT data project.
Lol not even there, but of course I take it you are going to cherry pick the low end global stats for the new SEP even though other tanks exceed it’s WR when compared at similar battle count.
EG we go back to December of 2025 and the BMPT sports a WR of 67.5% with almost the same amount of games played as the V3, which currently resides at 60.2%. But knowing you, you will say “The BMPT is not top tier” perfect, how about the Leopard 2A6NL back in February of last year, it put up a very nice 61.5% WR.
A true shame that statshark cant go back prior to 2024 when the primary era of BS occurred, shame that we have to rely on historical data that people like yourself refuse to acknowledge.
the best shorad isnt russian. the reason sm sv is better than everything is completely artificial.
1 Like
You’re aware of the fact that it only tracks its users right?
Im looking at the overall chart, not the individual tanks actually.
I specified top tier for a reason…
Notice how I said “major nation”.
Ok.
To follow up, there is no reason to intercept 10 billion munitions if the lauching aircraft is dead before launching. Just so happen this is is made impossible by how these missiles are gimped in every way, the bukm3 suffers partially too because of this(i say partially because of course they didnt utterly butcher the kinematics like they did with other sams).
I think the most egregious and funny examples currently are the Sampt and the type 03 chu sam, these systems are so butchered its hilarious.
they flare themselves, the aim9x is unreliable as hell
pantsir shouldnt be added to germany, every other sam should be fixed so that pantsir sm sv isnt artificially the best in the game, not to mention there should be some investigating in the 95ya6m and its energy retention.
1 Like
Notice how I said Italy through Hungary. The Skyranger 30 turret was ordered by Hungary on the KF41 Lynx platform. It’s the only top-of-the-line gun/missile SPAA option Italy has until Leonardo and MBDA finish that VSHORAD turret with their new Fulgur missile.
It wouldn’t be better than the Otomatic tho, or would it? I’m pretty sure it is only going to have Mistral missiles, if Rheinmetall finally decides to deliver it.
Indeed and it does not harm it’s validity in any way for historical data as it is the only data that exists.
Does not matter as the the vehicles you are comparing have vastly different timeframes of aggregated data, if we go back to the point where the BVM had the same amount of matches played it sits at the aforementioned 83% win rate you so despise.
Comparing a vehicle with 700k matches played to one with 78 MILLION matches played as a example of the superiority of one is supremely daft.
Exactly as expected, oh how cute.
Nope, you don’t get to compare vehicles with literal exponent difference level matches played unless I get to cherry pick the stats I want to flog you with too.
except it does?
Problem is that thunderskill dataset is not representative of the actual player population.
Thunderskill relied on users actively uploading their data, meaning it only had information on a subset of players who used the service and uploaded their stats. That creates a much smaller dataset, but more importantly, it creates a potential selection bias.
For example, if Thunderskill has data from 10 players who played a lot of tank A, but only 2 players who played tank B, tank A could end up with vastly more recorded battles in the Thunderskill dataset. That does not neccesarily mean that tank A was actually played more often globally. It only means that it was played more often among the players whose data happened to be available to Thunderskill.
The same issue applies when using Thunderskill to infer things such as vehicle win rates. Even if the win rate is calculated correctly from the data Thunderskill collected, that doesn’t automatically make it representative of the global win rate.
Exhibit A: BVM games played
According to thunderskill, BVM participated in 5979 battles.
quite the contrast to statshark 1.4 mil.
not to mention the 4.78% difference in winrate.
Exhibit B: global ground winrate heatmap
Thunderskill claims that for the last month, global winrate heatmap looks like this:
Whereas statshark shows this:
So, you wanna look me directly into my eyes and tell me japan, china and sweden have 100% winrate in battles over 12.0? (i pressume, since we have 12.7 ground currently?)
Exhibit C: global air winrate heatmap
if thunderskill charts were accurate, then we have to conclude no one played chine, italy, japan, sweden, us or ussr in air battles at BR of 14.3 and up (i pressume, since we have 14.7 now)
Your argument has some major flaws bucko.
1 Like