Yep. I am going to make a few bug reports for the Rooivalk. Wish me luck in will get looked at within the next year.
1 Like
I feel bad for you on that one
Yeah. South Africa is hated and treated even worse than Britain, France and Italy combined and on top of that gets a bonus of being in the GB tree, meaning it gets a compound nerf.
But regarding the inaccuracies of the Rooivalk; it has the wrong HMDS (Helmet Mounted Display Sight), should be able to aim weapons and cannon with HMDS, should have a PNVS, should have lots of different rocket warheads besides HEAT and more. It can also fire V3C and A Darter (was cleared to fire both, V3C in the 90s and A Darter 2010s).
Yeah, unfortunately a certain someone was taken from jail and put in power and the development stopped. Same with the development of all the other things.
Gaijin just seems to be more focused on what people play and what makes them money they are a business afterall.
1 Like
I’m not gonna even mention the politics. It will lead me to say so many s|urs that I would go from the power of a omnipotent being to a bum in a sewer prision.
If they buffed the Rooivalk to somewhat being accurate then it would rake in so much money, it wouldn’t even be a joke.
I’m also likely going to buy the RAH 66 because it’s one of my favourite helis and it is a stealth spin plen
1 Like
NEED this fix ASAP. might not be a user myself but just because soviet can only put 96 countermeasures and not develop a launch rail countermeasure dispenser like Sweden does, this does not mean that NATO should suffer from Gimped plane because they develop an effective high-capacity countermeasure solution.
10 Likes
There are several problems with this statement:
At the moment NATO planes dont suffer due to how good the Amraams are (and they are getting the C-5).
The R-77 is a good missile, but perhaps wrongly modelled, and does not really compete with the Amraam from mid ranges and up.
You can relatively easily overcome the R-73 by simply being mindful of the WEZ of R-73. (Keep your distance, its not hard)
Its a bit of a hard-stretch to say that those aircraft suffer.
Also: the BOL pod nerf happened for the same reason multipathing was nerfed - it simply allowed players to next to fully ignore certain game mechanics other players could not afford to ignore.
There is literally no sacrifice for the BOL pods - they are essentially free. Which is realistic/historical but at the same time we are playing a game. Those planes still have that extra. You still have that extra capability through even the nerfed BOL pods.
People tend to forget what the Gripen was like during its glory-phase. And I can tell you, it was not nice.
It will make uptiers, and stock grinds even worse all across the board.
The Aim-120 isn’t that good and the C-5 isn’t much better.
Very easy and convenient to say when you’re slinging the R-73s.
No, it happened because they developed the meta into an IRCCM meta where radar missiles weren’t viable and staying low was easy. Having immunity to IRCCM missiles on top of that for the Gripen (since it’s already a low temp aircraft with a good flare pattern) made the perfect storm.
What is the problem with this?
Except now we’re in a whole different game. ARH missiles, more IRCCM missiles, and flightmodels mattering the least it has in the history of AirRB.
1 Like
The F-16C has 120 cm. The F-15E has 120 cm in a ground loadout. The F/A-18C has 120 cm. With these new spaa, it will take a healthy amount of countermeasures to beat them. Even then, having the slow mav won’t help a lot.
Gaijiob. Gimme my bol pods
2 Likes
I got you bro!
Yeah. I have these. I’ve made a thread on bol pods for us jets
1 Like
Same i’m getting more and i’m almost done with my bug report
1 Like
IRCCM missiles are basically out of date due to the relatively short ranges they have, compared to ARH missiles we have in game.
The R-77 is not good beyond medium ranges. The AMRAAMs are excellent there.
You can essentially ignore IR missiles if you keep your distance, something the NATO aircrafts are much more capable of. Without argument Id say the R-73 is better than the 9M. This is possible due to the better kinematic performance of AMRAAMs. I am still okay with this - ARH missiles are relatively easy to avoid in the average opening scenario.
Now lets say, that the match evolves into where the Russian jets excel: close to mid range. Lets say NATO team couldnt capitalize on the superior long range performance of the AMRAAMs (many times they can’t because the average War Thunder players knowledge of missile ranges, and the practicality of certain long range shots; or for the complete absence of BVR engagement knowledge, basics like F-posting, rathar than fully notching etc.). NATO planes now face a foe that still “sits on” their missiles with arguably most of the AMRAAMs depleted in the opening minute of a match. Now NATO teams fully want to be able to retain superiority even in close to mid ranges, whereas NATO doctrine since the Korean War and the first IR missiles have revolved around pushing the WEZ envelope further and further? Because with the reversal of the nerf of BOL-pods, basically any opposition would easily be neutered?
Just admit it: you want to turn your brain off, and get easy kills.
You also just repeat what I said: the BOL-pods back were nerfed because it basically allowed certain aircraft to achieve near invulnerability. There is no need for that in top-tier again.
I am not saying a clear nope to BOL pod buffs - but they shouldnt be brought back to that level.
Meaningless BS. AMRAAM is low-mid when it comes to performance. AAM-4 beats it in close range, MICA has Thrust Vectoring, R-77-1 got some kind of Russia tax break, Derby, Darter and PL-12 is as dogshit as usual. Keeping distance is a tactic for all IR missiles but you said that to reinforce your weak BS.
Russia can make their own BOL equivalent, more country should adapt BOL to their planes, or you can stop crying and quit being a whiner.
They can add more BOL to planes that actually operate them instead of being stingy fucks , literally al it needed to make it work and make flare spectrally-matched with the plane to make flaring easier with regular flares. Gripen is an exception not a rule. Sees the entire damn harrier as BOL most prominent user albeit this plane has a whole another slew of issue which is the fact that their heat generation is modelled of thrust which makes harrier heat map is gimped to shit. but what do you, a russian main care?
1 Like
You make some good points.
120s in any guise are not auto kills and most 120 carriers carry fewer missiles than the R-77 and R-77-1. They also know you shouldn’t shoot from 40km as it’s a wasted shot
All those simple defensive manoeuvres also work at beating 120s. 120s are ridiculously easy to chaff and notch and for you Russian players just defend for a couple of seconds longer when your RWR declares you are safe.
Games are designed to end up in knife fights and at that point the R-73 and R-77-1/MICA PL8 are superior and you will not defeat these IR missiles with BOL flares (you need to run large flares)
BOL upgrades will allow jets that use them to not have to drop massive bursts of flares and chaff.
stick to GRB buddy.
This is all JAS39s fault btw. They could’ve added the plane without BOL pods and rely on its fixed countermeasures, to add those pods with the arrival of ARH missiles, that way they would’ve never had to nerf them at all.
Anyways, they should be fixed already, but i think Gaijin wants a new generation of ARH/IR missiles to finally get them fixed.
4 Likes
Games are not designed for anything at top tier - if anything it currently heavily leans in favour ARH missiles.
If for you it ends like a knife-fight you probably didnt try to keep your distance, albeit this is a tactic that ia perhaps most easily achieved with F-15s, arguably F-16s.
The other AMRAAM platforms are perhaps more ‘generalists’ than ‘BVR focused’. The Gripen, my go to example is perhaps most similar to the F-16 in A2A loadouts, although iirc it has two less pylons for AMRAAMs.
The Russian planes for me fill the generalist role, but the Su-30 really doesnt have a niche than a big fat missile bus that carries 1 missile for every enemy plane (kind of), and funnily enough thats where it shines - a big loadout.
We could make an argument about 1 or 2 players getting through the furball, then engaging the enemy in a dogfight.
Problem is that none of the Top-Tier jets are really made for pure dogfights - its more of a last resort option that a design goal. Especially considering the target rich environment that is ARB, if there is one thing I have learnt, then its the fact that nothing really survives in it for long (except for the Gripen before the BOL nerf, as it actively thrived in that environment).
The problem is that the community as a whole has not still fully adapted to the new situation - we still try to rush into a furball to feel alive in a furball, whereas in real life you want to avoid a dogfight as much as possible.
Staying clear of threats, awareness of the situation, respecting and actively trying to avoid enemy WEZ is your primary line of defense, not CMs. CMs are last resort. They have a functionality in other cases, but just by themselves they are not enough, nor should they be.
Moreover than that: the massive amounts of CMs shouldnt allow aircraft to straight on ignore game mechanics for a prolonged period of time.
Aim-120A/Bs are actually some of the weaker top tier ARH missiles at the moment and Aim-120C5 is barely even worth mentioning with how its being modeled.
Except they are worthless. An Aircraft like the Tornado F3 / Viggen D shouldnt be suffering as much as it is right now. let alone the Tornado F3 Late / Viggen Di.
If BOL is too remain, Aircraftl ike the Sea Harrier FA2, Tornado F3 Late and Viggen Di should move down to 12.7
2 Likes