Mi-24D (USSR Premium) BR 8.7 - This Feels Like a Scam

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
12

A few things to clarify here, because some of this mixes theory with how the Mi-24D actually plays in practice.

First, Nobody is arguing that “premium = better than tech tree” in this topic. The issue is post-purchase loss of functionality. The Mi-24D (USSR) previously had ballistic assistance for rockets and gun pods. That was removed without BR, survivability, or role compensation.

Whether similar tech-tree variants exist doesn’t change the fact that a paid vehicle was mechanically downgraded.

Second, calling the Mi-24D an “ATGM platform” at 8.7 is where the comparison “breaks down”.
Yes, it technically has ATGMs, but they are short-range, manually guided, and force sustained line-of-sight exposure. At 8.7, that means radar SPAA, proximity shells, and jets with enough speed to delete you before a second missile is guided in. Speed doesn’t help much when the engagement envelope itself is hostile.

The turret and flares don’t really solve this either

The turret is defensive only against very specific threats and requires close proximity.
Flares help against IR missiles, not radar SPAA or gun-based AA, which is the dominant threat at this BR.

As for comparisons to 8.3 helicopters like Mi-8, IAR-316, or SA.313/316, those vehicles being worse does not justify keeping another helicopter overtiered. Balance shouldn’t be anchored to the weakest examples in the bracket, especially when the Mi-24D is forced into the same close-range exposure profile without the aiming tools it originally had.

The core problem remains unchanged
At 8.7, the Mi-24D now has high exposure, low first-pass lethality, and no stand-off capability, Which is exactly what the ballistic computer previously compensated for. Removing it broke that equation.

This isn’t about wanting the helicopter to be overpowered. It’s about restoring internal consistency. Either by giving back the tools it was balanced around, or by adjusting its BR or role accordingly.

5 Likes
13

2s38 no regular vehicle to compare.
Terminator, tech tree version is actually better compared to BMPT-72
Ud is least better compared to T72 on same BR, but also, there is turms on 10.3 also, what benefits also nicely compared to tech tree variant.

14

Please stay cool @AntoSA

1 Like
15

Are u sure :D Compare better, my friend?

Compare them more carefully and in more detail, and you will see that there are many significant advantages that help and clearly distinguish it in a much more positive, premium-oriented way.

16

5 vs 3 crew.
Better era on tech tree.
Timed HE shell on tech tree.
So please tell me why that premium would be better. If premium bonuses are not included.

17

That’s a different discussion. This thread is about a vehicle losing a balancing feature Post-Purchase with no BR or role adjustment, not about how other premiums compare to tech tree vehicles.

18

They aren’t any different from other ATGMs on that tier as “manually guided” have actually the same semiautomatic guidance in the game as TOW for example. What radar SPAA do you mean? Roland or Chaparral, if you have issues with these, it will be very hard for you to play any other higher br helicopters.

Nobody forces you to buy the thing and nobody guarantees you that the vehicle will stay the same or you will get any compensation for changes.

19

It doesn’t seem to be that bad, it seems to be performing on-par and/or middle of the pack with other helicopters of the same BR:

image
image2013×575 295 KB

I haven’t played it myself so i can’t really speak on it’s performance more than the statistics.

Because you are not buying capabilities. You are buying the instant access and the faster RP/SL gain.
Premiums are ment to speed up the other vehicle unlocks, not be better vehicles than their tech tree equivalents. This isn’t pay to win.

Making it rare makes it a collectors item, not a better vehicle. Premiums aren’t ment to be better vehicles. That is not the point of them.

You can’t buy performance.

Speed up the vehicle unlocks in the main tree.

20

Just look on what and who i replied, and then say this again

21

you faster than me lol

22

Here I agree with you. I can say 100% that statistics are not always indicative, because everything is averaged and individual skill matters. One player can perform well, another can perform badly.

Lately, I spend most of my time playing helicopters, with only a little bit of fixed-wing aviation. Based on that experience, I can honestly say this is one of the worst helicopters I have ever played.

My main gameplay right now is to quickly earn points just to respawn in a helicopter. If this helicopter were good, I would never have started this post in the first place.

I also own the premium RAH-66, and I am generally satisfied with it — it’s a good helicopter. But that’s a completely different topic for discussion.

Everything written below is something I already know, and it does not apply to me at all. So all of that is just blah-blah-blah and completely off topic.

23

The point is not that the Mi‑24D’s ATGMs are uniquely bad, it is that its overall toolset at 8.7 got downgraded after sale. The helicopter was advertised and played for a long time with CCIP/ballistic assist for rockets and gunpods; that functionality was removed while keeping the same BR and role, which significantly changed how it performs in the same matchmaker full of Roland or Chaparral and fast jets.​

Radar SPAA and proximity‑fused shells are part of 8.7, but CCIP let you at least take more precise standoff shots instead of exposing a huge Hind frame to line‑of‑sight for both the ATGM and the follow‑up rockets. Without that, the risk profile went up while the rating stayed the same, which is why asking for either the ballistic computer back or a lower BR.​​

And sure, Gaijin legally can change premiums at any time, but from a player‑trust and game‑design standpoint, heavy post‑purchase nerfs with no BR or role adjustment feel bad and probably make people less willing to buy future premiums. A small BR drop or restoring some of the removed functionality would go a long way toward keeping this vehicle in line with similar 8.7 machines and with what buyers originally paid for.​

1 Like
24

So after all of this, what do you think the chances are that I will ever buy another premium or bundle from them in the future - helicopter, aircraft, or tank?

Zero?

Or would it have to be something exceptionally good for me to even consider buying again?

Honestly, I strongly doubt that I will ever purchase anything else from them. I don’t know how things are for long-time veterans, but from my side, there will definitely be no big purchases anytime soon.

25

Your general stats say otherwise. while it’s in the bottom half, it is in the top part of the bottom half. You do have several helicopters you have played a lot more in but are performing worse in.

26

That’s fair, and it’s ultimately a personal decision.

The broader point being discussed here isn’t whether any individual will or won’t buy premiums again, but whether removing a key gameplay feature from a premium vehicle without adjusting its BR or role is good balance practice.

That’s a separate issue from individual purchasing choices, and it’s the part that affects everyone who plays or considers buying premium vehicles in the future.

27

@AntoSA This is the moment where the discussion is being officially steered away from balance and into player stats, which is a dead end if you take the bait. The correct move is to de-personalize and re-anchor on design, without arguing with a Game Master about numbers.

2 Likes
28

Well, what can I say — discussing statistics with a player whose stats are far worse, who has several levels less helicopter experience, and who doesn’t even play the helicopter being discussed in this post makes no sense.

After checking his statistics, I was honestly surprised. He has almost no helicopters researched at all — he’s clearly a pure ground-only player. In that case, there’s really nothing more for me to say. Everything is obvious.

29
Small sidenote, click to reveal

I’m also a bit confused, when did you purchase the vehicle? because from what i can see the CCRP was already removed by the time you first started playing the vehicle (though i’m not sure about this and i might be looking at things wrong),

You’re still free to complain about the CCRP removal of course. But this argument:

Doesn’t in that case make much sense.

Fair point.

Also fair point.

I’m just trying to point out the inconsistencies in your statements. If you say that it’s the worst you have played when it statistically doesn’t seem to be the case, feels odd. Saying it feels over tiered, when other helicopters at the same BR performs roughly equal, feels odd.

I don’t need to have much experience in an area or with a specific thing to be able to see the inconsistencies in statements.

That does not however in any way invalidate your complaints nor your experience in the vehicle.
I just personally feel like the complaints might come from a different base than what it on the surface looks like.

Spoiler

This text will be hidden

30

It always had a ballistic computer . As far as I remember, it was always there .

Then I bought it — and only after that I found out that the ballistic computer had been removed. I was honestly shocked.

But at that point, I had already paid. I bought it without realizing that it no longer had a ballistic computer. I thought, okay, fine, let’s try it without one.

It turned out to be much worse than I expected .

So yes, this helicopter was nerfed hard. And in return, nothing was given. No ballistic no alternative, no compensation.

I honestly can’t even imagine how people feel who bought it before me, when it was still in its pre-nerf state, and then watched it get downgraded like this.

31

Seems it was removed in march 2025 (10 months ago).

The A version also had it’s CCIP removed simultaneously.

So this is more of a case of not researching your purchase beforehand then. I still understand that disappointment though.

You are free to argue for some change in BR and if you have sources you can argue for other additions to make up for the CCIP removal. But given the average performance of the helicopters of that BR the vehicle on it’s own seems reasonably placed. What could be argued however is that a couple of them could be lowered in BR as a whole due to how many of them at that BR are performing. Singling out just one of them doesn’t really make sense to me personally.