Let's Talk About The State Of US

Yeah the guys an actual cretin to try to claim that guided bombs at that br are inferior to laser guided weapons they’re definitely worse than the complete invulnerability you get from Mavericks but not by much when the A6E can reliably bomb from standoff same as the Super entendard with the only vehicle within that range that can reliably deal with them is the strela

3 Likes

It’s perfectly valid to point out that the US tech tree gets shafted more often than not. It’s supposedly a “Big Three Nation” but gets outshined by Germany and the USSR by a large margin and is often outshone by minor nations.

The US’ top tier MBTs are only noticeably better than the Arietes and Merkavas; its SPAA are the worst in class - tied with Italy, Britain, and Israel; its light tanks are massively overtiered (especially the HSTV-L); and the only noticeably good top tier jet in either air or ground is the F-16C (and hopefully the F-15C), with the F-15A being a major letdown.

The US should get new actually competitive MBTs, an actual top tier SPAA, the HSTV-L should be lowered to 10.3 to be at least somewhat close to its contemporary (the 2S38), and the F-16C and/or F-15A should get a 40km AGM just like the Su-25SM3.

Other nations should also have their issues fixed too - give Italy, Britain, and Israel usable SPAAs, and do whatever armor or mobility fixes on the Arietes, Merkavas, and Challengers - but that doesn’t mean the US shouldn’t also get its glaring issues fixed.

3 Likes

Yep, I agree. (mostly, I dont think the US really got that shafted last year in air, they got really good additions literally every single update)

Im just hoping a bit of a top tier decompression for ground that was hinted at in the last BR changes actually comes. I think a lot of the issues for the US and other nations could be fixed by moving several vehicles up to 12.3 ish.

(its also the only way that some of the aircraft BRs from the Split BRs make any sense)

lol

touched a nerve

Avoiding the question, cool.

And you have a 20 degree cone that the bomb has to arrive in for it to acquire a lock meaning if you are dropping the bomb against anything but a stationary target beyond the acquisition range your target can easily drive out of the range at which it can acquire, and if you are engaging stationary targets you can use normal bombs with CCIP and get the same result but with vastly superior airframes being available.

Take it or leave it, its either a good example of performance or its not, you cant pick and choose.

Unpowered weapon with an actual maximum acquisition range vs a powered weapon with the only limitation being launch parameters it is really not that hard to see what is superior, and ad hominem attacks to cap it all off such a well formed and intelligent argument, bravo!

Hmmm yes, keep thinking this, it will make the lives of SPAAG gunner’s far easier.

The easiest vehicle to deal with the strela is a harrier or other rocket CCIP equipped plane with Zunis or another large caliber rocket because reaction times are a thing, that and I would love to see the A6E try and spend a good cunk of the match trying to climb up above 20000 feet to avoid the strela, like asking a A-10 to just side climb, while I dont think I’ve seen a single Étendard in a match in years at this point, do they even exist?

Edit for the folks below :

Color me not surprised, explains why I’ve flat out not seen one for this long.

Only against stationary strelas that are willingly choosing to just sit idle in their spawn and in that case you can do the same with any unguided bomb and CCIP, or as stated, engage them the safe way by being a terrain hugging rocket F-4C which, if flown right is physically impossible to intercept by missile SPAAG unless they have walls.

You will barely find any super etendard to begin with,they dont have a line up… even less now that they are 10.3

The a6e is very good at taking out the strella. You dont even need to be 6km alt to do it. You can lob the bomb from outside of their range and turn away to guide it in while remaining outside their range.

no its just the that tank stats are fundamentally irrelevant when talking about an aircraft its the same as someone arguing about a T-80 and then replying with something retarded like “hurr you have bad stats in IJN Furutaka”

Now fight (or kiss)

You’ve never played or seen any of these vehicles in a real game
The abrams has far better mobility than most of the toptier tanks its competing against and with the looming T-80 acceleration nerf it will be the 2nd most mobile toptier tank series behind the Ariete the abrams also has its artificial buff in the form of its 5s reload and along with M829A2 being one of the best toptier shells its firepower is significantly better than most of the toptiers combine that with good turret armour and great survivability when it comes to hull shots its probably the third best tank only behind the leopard and STRV and yes it is better than the T-90M which itself is worse than the T-80BVM

The F-15A is fine if you cant do well in it you just suck plain and simple its at the same br as the F-15J (literally just an F-15C so its worse) which ive played and that things great as soon as you get the booster upgrade and 9M/AAM3

1 Like

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Can’t do anything bro, we can only blame USA who doesn’t know how to build strong tanks that are viable in wt gameplay, I mean too bad about the Obrom’s turret ring situation doesn’t matter if you put vibranium plates everywhere at the turret cheek or even entire hull the enemies still going to hit that weak ass neck.

Summer sales are approaching bro ain’t you going to get yourself a Leopard or two? and move on until USA releases a new mbt that doesn’t inherit the turret ring shit gene, after you migrate to Germany/Sweden then you going to find yourself one smiling madafaka bullying these pawn-brams.

Idk about great survivability, almost every shot that isn’t at my turret cheeks or at a wild angle pens. And the 5s reload isn’t artificial, US tankers have done it even faster. Won’t argue about mobility though, on the AIM, A2, and SEP v1 it’s great but the SEPv2 is a little watered down bc of extra weight. As for the F-15A, the wing rip issues really did damage it’s reputation but it’s better now. RN the worst thing about the US f15A is the worse missiles than other f15 in game at same BR.

I see another US main has joined the thread and is asking for the HSTV-L to drop to 10.3. Next he will probably say that the 2S38 is superior to it in every way.

US mains really do just want to horrendously overpowered at any given BR. The amount of insane BR placements I’ve seen them throw out boggles the mind.

At least when the HSTV-L totally gets moved to 10.3 on this guys horrible opinion it can join the M1A1 at 10.3 which is obviously similar to a leopard 2A4 according to another US main.

Actually I just noticed the incredibly rational person saying the HSTV-L should go to 10.3 has never even seen a HSTV-L in-game. Highest BR vehicle they own is 7.7. Incredible.

5 Likes

He even using Su-25K because he never used it in real battle, and dont even own the tech tree variant. That`s hilarious

4 Likes

Yeah he’s been thoroughly beat about the head for his horribly uninformed takes. Everybody knows how bad the ATGMs on the 10.0 SU-25 are. That’s why everyone just takes the S-25O rockets since you can launch them from a similar range with CCIP and you don’t need to commit to flying in a straight line to the enemy to guide it with your nose (and get slapped by a SPAA).

Mavericks, laser guided and TV guided bombs at the same BR are all better.

4 Likes