That should be changed asap.
We need like forum janitors.
Yeah or make flags ping a moderator instead of hiding the message instantly. And make the moderator know who flagged it, so people who flag too much lose that ability
1 Like
Also a good idea
FRS1 needs to be 11.0 in ASB and needs to get it’s upgraded RWR to regain some parity with the AV-8S (late) But I just can’t see anyway for either to go any lower than that currently with the current compression.
Buc S2B is the only one that could squeeze down to 10.3 at the moment.
Though they could also just fix the harriers
2 Likes
I’ve given up on this idea I figured at least maybe they could be at a Br that lets them be somewhat fun.
I don’t see why the Frs.1 early can’t be 10.3 with the bucc. It’s got worse performance than the bucc on all fronts except it gets guns. Also gets worse weapons and it’s a IR magnet.
1 Like
Its a hard cap I somewhat agree with.
Buc S2Bs have no guns and the 9Ls are technically optional. Im really on fence due to their flat line speed, but I think managable for them to move down. As someone who has tried to play Hutner FGA9, F6 and the Harrier GR1. I do hate fighting all-aspect slingers and the Sea Harriers could be too strong. The solution is decompression though
Decompression would be ideal.
But a lot of planes from 9.3-10.3 have flares making the 9L useless to anything that sees it.
1 Like
But a lot also dont though. Thats kinda the issue. At least something like an A-10 you can generally keep away from in something like a Hunter, but a Sea Harrier? Youd be screwed
2 Likes
The hunter is faster than the harrier and has way better energy retention.
You’d have no issues keeping the sea harrier at bay.
Just barely, it would be annoying in a typical ARB match
It’s like 20 or so knots faster.
In Air rb the harrier would die so fast to the hunter lol.
Then there are variants of the MIG-21 at 10.X that are Mach 2 capable with 6 missiles
its a fighter
Not according to gaijin
It’s got a higher SL spawn cost in Sim than the FA-18
Ridiculous right
On the slap forums the admins would stick a huge “this guy is a moron” if you did it too much with a report counter.
Currently, the squadron version of the Sea Harrier located in the British tech tree sits at a Simulator Mode BR of 11.3.
The “supposedly” inferior version (TT early) is at 10.7, which corresponds to aircrafts of similar performance such as the Hawk 200 and 209, AMX, Su-25s and A-10s.
In realistic battles the Late Sea Harrier sits at a BR of 11.0 which is also too high because the gap of capabilities between it’s tech tree brother is not that big to justify a 2 BR bracket difference (not even one).
As an example: the A-10A Late and Early only differ for the 4 vs 2 AIM-9Ls loadouts and GBU-8s yet their brs are the same because performance wise the gap is not staggering like it is (for example) between the Hawk 200 and 200 RDA.
The same issue of underperformance because of it’s extremely high br also affect the AV-8S in the japanese tech tree.
Given that at the br of 11.3 there are extremely capable planse such as the F-5E and MiG-23s I suggest this plane to be brought on par with the Sea Harrier FRS.1 (Early) to a Simulator mode BR of 10.7.
To further justify the reasoning of this suggestion let’s analyze the Hawk 209 capabilities: it carries x4 AIM-9P-4s (same amount as squadron FRS.1), carries a fully capable Pulse Doppler radar, has a pseudo-EEGS gunsight.
In RB mode this plane can face 12.3 such as the MiG-29, F/A-18 and F-14A, all airframes that clearely outclass the Harrier in every way.
To wrap up, the FRS.1s need a bit of love from the developers because, on a separate note, aside from the extremely high BR, the HUDs are also broken across all Sea Harriers, further reducing their capabilities in Sim mode, I’ll leave a link for the bug report.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/TH8bKvmhyXWo
2 Likes
I would really love to know how they can possibly justify the FRS1 and AV-8S (late) to be 11.3 in ASB. I just cant get my head around it, beacuse at the end of the day, they are both downgrades to the T10 if nothing else.
The issue btw, is that the FRS1e and FRS1 lack EEGS. and the devs have said that they’ll fix the gunsight when they add EEGS, which was like 1-2 years ago now.
It works on the FA2 because it has EEGS
1 Like
The FRS.1 definitely as the radar is useless when it can’t filter ground clutter. Don’t know if the AV-8’s radar can even filter ground clutter (I’m sure it has a radar? Can’t remember though)
Av-8S does not have a radar at all, but does get 4x the CM count. As of the last major update, the FRS1 did get an RWR upgrade, which brings that aspect onto parity with the AV-8S, though it got the wrong RWR, should have gotten the better one from the FA2
does the rwr have target ID?
Yes, but is the /10 from the Buc S2B and not the /19 from the FA2, which would have better coverage and bits
Weirdly, so does the FRS1e, though that should be the analogue RWR the FRS1s had originally.
The RWR is has
The RWR it should have
Edit: could have sworn the /10 had differences from the /19 on the dev server, but maybe they dont anymore
1 Like