Imagine thinkig the bushmaster is a better cannon than anything else just based on pen, if you had played it at least once you’d know what a piece of garbage it is.
Maybe if you compare it to Challengers only.
4 Likes
All your enemies use advanced missiles which are immune to jammer so its useless
Not true, actually. It’s works very well, if you hit it with a HE it overpressures the PUMA. It doesn’t auto deploy the smoke which it should do though.
2 Likes
Thats the thing for all aps we have in game. Shtora 1 doesnt auto deploy smokes too. Currently all we have is jammer which as I said before doesnt work at those brs because all modern saclos missiles are immune to that.
With how buggy MAWs are for jets, I’m glad that Gaijin hasn’t modeled the automatic smoke deployment for ground vehicles.
At least they should make the feature optional in the settings.
3 Likes
I can 100% see friendly LRF triggering the smoke deployment lmao
2 Likes
They should remove smoke from US and German players all together.
1 Like
Initially I thought people wanted Terminator to be at the same battle rating as Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon and similar vehicles, it got. People now complain that the Terminator (a tank support vehicle) is at the same battle rating as Namer 30, Namer Tsrikhon and similar vehicles (all IFVs) is so frustrating in my opinion, which doesn’t matter.
Namer Tsrikhon, Namer 30, and all other similars at this battle rating range which I’ll refer to IFVs in this post should not be compared to the Terminator, different vehicles, different platforms, different purposes, as for example, in a real life best scenario a Terminator is more likely to sustain a direct hit from an main battle tank because it uses a unchanged main battle tank platform than a Schützenpanzer PUMA that uses a unique, specifically-made IFV platform, in War Thunder this shouldn’t be different, it’s obvious that War Thunder doesn’t have troop transport, large maps to benefit everyone equally of how they play the map and numerous other aspects to make this more reliable.
I have no doubt that Terminator will have its battle rating increased alongside with a intentional buff if this ever happen sonely because of these complains, and in my opinion is not because only of these complains but at some point ignorance of how to defeat the vehicle itself, I’ve faced Terminator myself during recent matches, and I’ve applied the same logic to any other Eastern design main battle tank: lower frontal glacis, this with an HSTV-L which if I might be able to record soon these moments when, obviously nothing is flowers and sunshine, I’ve made mistakes of shooting the explosive reactive armor on the side and causes no penetration. Nonsense apart;
Topic reply
Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon are urban-based IFVs considering the scenarios which it will operate and is operating in the Israeli Defence Forces, if I’m not wrong everything else is dealt by fast infantry vehicles or the air force, which in War Thunder this shouldn’t be different, all 30 mm autocannons are marginally underperforming due to the post-pen damage that can and is only compensated by firerate, which 30 mm 2A42 and similars take this advantage. Sincerly comparing mobility, in my opinion is futile when comes to discussing battle rating of two or more vehicles when these values doesn’t have a big difference apart.
As I’ve mentioned before these IFVs including Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon shouldn’t be directly compared to the Terminator considering their operational differences, which is reflected in War Thunder; armor being the key point you won’t see an IFV in the same position, reliably being able to sustain direct enemy fire without any major drawbacks. Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon also do have top tier level of armor, it’s not the same values as Terminator but still is regardless, given recent issues with active protection systems, it is clearly not working as intended marketed by their manufacturers this is something that everyone should agree, hopefully.
Their firepower is obviously different, using different cannons and all that stuff. As I’ve mentioned before, again, 30 mm autocannon is, at my perspective, underperforming by a lot because of the post-penetration damage, I wish War Thunder were truly realistic instead of this middle-not-middle term of arcade-ish with more steps, in that case 30 mm autocannon damage would be even worse, but as War Thunder is not a realistic game, is not a simulator but just a game to have “fun”, 30 mm autocannon damage should be improved in my opinion. Depression values are pretty much valid, Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon can reliably engage targets at close range whereas Terminator don’t because of technical limitations: the cannons are placed high above the platform, yet the depression angles still limited to -5°, people have to work around this issue, is not something Gaijin could change even if, in a theorical case everyone was saying Terminator is underperforming.
This won’t change so soon, I’d wanted a ground forces decompression which is needed firstly to address some vehicles performances, including the Terminator if I was going to meat ride the Russian bias is real folk, but, obviously the Terminator regardless of my opinion on the subject, different vehicles, different purposes, in my opinion this comparison is not fair, if for example the Kurganets-25, which I believe can have similar Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon armor values (considering the potential inaccuracy in both vehicles), then I would agree on the most, both being infantry fighting vehicles.
Decompression is the initially solution, on the long term this would be bug fixing for the game as a whole, reported cases for the Namer 30, Namer Tsrikhon and Merkava platform as a whole. Namer 30 and Namer Tsrikhon are very unlikely to have its battle rating decreased, and looking how Gaijin handled the situation, Terminator is likely to sit at battle rating 11.3 for longer.
1 Like
If they model it similar to maws I can’t wait for my tank to yeet all of my smoke grenades because some random jet popped a flare (that the game identified as a missile) like 5km away.
I agree, or at least just lock them behind a general small iq test for every nation.
1 Like
I think there is nothing that makes me more angry in this game than getting cucked by friendly smoke.
1 Like
SPAA fires a missile to intercept a drone at the start of the match
No one can see anything for next 20 seconds
1 Like
And yet the LDIRCM on helis works, perfectly, even against missiles that should be immune to it.
1 Like
Yes please, that would be hilarious.
Just buff the Bushmaster already, so it actually deals post pen damage.
What, you don’t like having your engine out but your gun fine, just waiting for the guy to peek again and some brainlet drives up and smokes you so the enemy gets a free shot?
1 Like
It’s not even only on the Namer, playing Bushmasters on every vehicle is just incredibly frustrating.
And if the enemy is decent he knows, he can just push you and you cant do anything to him.
It’s like playing with a prop gun.
Same goes for all the vehicles with the PUMA gun.
Namer uses the MK-44 right? that lists Burst fire as a standard fire mode, unlike the MK-30:
Spoiler
You will notice that the MK-30s brochure list burst as an optional extra, while the MK-44 lists it with the standard single and auto modes. Unfortunately it doesn’t list a ROF for the burst
Also interestingly the the MK-44 can fire the Rarden ammo, so APHE-I may be an option:
Spoiler
“I want every Spike i shot to kill a target” Not even normal ATGMs do this since they changed their behaviour on top of the inconsistent damage. Learn your role with each vehicle and be grateful an IFV is able to disable a MBT at all. Its a game, disabled tanks repair in the field and continue as normal, thats why your missile destroying the gun, tracks, engine or some crew does not count as a kill and a penetration isnt a reason to abandon a tank.
Enlisted is right here, too, if you want to experience that. Or ArmA, where disabling a tank with an ATGM means the crew has to bail out.