Oh ik, i am very very familiar with the tillmans and i actually managed to redesign one to actually make it plausible by accident
1 Like
They were forced to operate from the mainland because the FAA kept Port Stanely rather thorough surpressed which did limit their range, but too keep the Carriers as safe as possible, the Harriers were also operating at the edge of their endurance and couldnt remain on CAP for all that long either.
So in that respect, both nations had a similar handicap.
That being said, the Argentine air force did have a limited A2A refueling capability that they used to great effect with the Super Etendards and they attacked from unexpected directions more than once.
The biggest deciding factor was a reluctance of the Argentine commanders to allow engagements between the 2 airfroces, more than 400 sorties were aborted because a SHar CAP was in the way and a big part of that was a conception that the SHars were much better than they were, especially when they saw Aim-9Ls attached to the SHars long before the taskforce arrived
Israel had AWACS during that time. E-2s and the Arava 201.
Yes, however a dedicated AWAC is much better and streamlined. In my opinion, it just shows the capability of the F-14 even more.
Yes they did, but the Air force has many more and are generally prioritized more. Especially in combat.
Even then, Brits probably had much better shot at getting close to carrier and being rescued if they ran out of gas than Argentines, it was basically guaranteed death stranded in the Atlantic for them if they stuck around to fight.
SHar lining up shots with AIM-9L or even earlier ones on A-4’s and Super Etendard that immediately had to turn and run, slowing them down and giving Sidewinder a nice rear aspect shots is still good work by the pilots, but wasn’t as risky for Brits to do CAP than Argentines to stick around
One Argentine A-4 pilot was shot down and made it to one of the many islands in that area and survived the war. Suffice to say it wasnt necessarily that big of an issue given most of the combat happened over or around the islands rather than in the middle of the occean. Especially as many of the A-4 and Dagger runs used the Main islands to mask their approach
I don’t mean shot down. I mean if they did stay for extended time to fight the harriers, even if they won, they would still most likely run out of fuel over the ocean on the way back
I’ve fully researched Japan’s tech tree for both ground and air forces. Aviation is fine; it’s fairly straightforward. However, with ground vehicles, I didn’t pay much attention to wins or losses until I got penetrated by what felt like a sea breeze—because calling it armor is a stretch. That’s when I understood the issue. I hadn’t played realistic tank battles for about two months, as I was busy grinding aviation. Recently, I decided to grind Germany’s tech tree from Leopard 2A6 to 2A7. It was hell! I noticed my win rate with Germany is only 36%. I’m not a pro player, but no matter how many kills you get, if you’re playing Germany, you’re likely to lose. Pay-to-win exists in this game, and it’s called the USSR!
Look at how much premium equipment the USSR has compared to other nations. It’s not just the quantity but their purpose. Normally, grinding helicopters takes forever, but the USSR has premium ones with top-tier missiles, three top-tier MBTs, IFVs, and more. What else can you call this? Soviet tanks at top tier are the fastest, their armor is better, and their additional protection often stops top-tier NATO rounds, even though it’s meant to counter HEAT shells.
What about aviation? It’s great, isn’t it, facing an enemy with two top-tier attack aircraft (Su-30 and Su-34) that spawn without penalty and carry missiles you can spam without skill. What does Germany get? Oh right, Brimstone missiles that, for some reason, only lock on via laser (because this is such a “realistic” game). Thanks for not nerfing the Rafale into oblivion with your love for everything Russian! Is it easy to strike with those missiles? Sure, if you’re highly skilled, but Soviet jets don’t need skill. And air defense? It’s nonexistent. I’m surprised you haven’t added the Pantsir S1 as a premium yet—could make another $60.
For New Year’s, I bought a few premium packs, including the T-80U-E1. Playing it made me realize skill isn’t the issue. It’s absurd that with the Leopard, I get 2 wins out of 10 battles, but with the T-80U-E1, I get 8 wins out of 10. In the first minute, USSR players spawn their overpowered aircraft that keep burning random targets. I’m starting to understand why the game’s online population is dropping. At top tier, a 7v7 match is considered crowded—very crowded even. Yet, there are always 100 players in the queue waiting for a battle. Why? Simple—half, if not more, are playing USSR. Fun, right?
It’s baffling how this gets ignored. I don’t understand why they don’t give the EF-2000, say, six missiles instead of 24 Brimstones, but with proper guidance to counter the Su-30 and Su-34. I thought this was just a Germany issue, but no—Britain’s the same, Japan’s the same. France is still holding up, but I bet they’ll nerf it soon too. Just not the USSR.
Please, don’t lecture me about skill! I’m not a pro, and I don’t play tournaments, but the facts remain. Everything they “nerf” for the USSR is just dust, while Germany and Britain are clearly not for casual enjoyment anymore. I’m not even mentioning that German Leopards are the worst in the game. I know USSR tech fans will jump in, claiming they’re the worst nation to play and that they’ve been constantly “nerfed” just to keep their favorite toys intact. But let’s face the truth… In the next update, even with the addition of new air defense systems, nothing will change…
9L vs flareless jets
0 4th gens 😢 (at least f15 had around 8 mig29 kills (albeit worst most downgraded export variants possible without r73 or working radars))
4 Likes
All of them were the same variant?
In fairness, most of the Shars had no CMs either and not a single 9L shot taken couldnt have been achieved with the 9G in the end
3 Likes
It was less suicidal to face the entire surface fleet at San Carlos than to engage in an A2A fight without countermeasures and with limited fuel against the shar/limas.
Besides, the surface fleet had a blind spot in its defenses that could be exploited. Against the Sea Harriers, the cost-benefit of engagement simply wasn’t worth it. I mean, on top of that, we also have to add that the British pilots did a great job too.
3 Likes
And yet T80BVM is only 7th in 12.0 win rates at 55.1%. The top 3 being the French 2A6 at 59.8% (because Rafale), Leo 2A7V at 58.4% and Strv 122B at 57%.
I suggest you log in now, take the Leopard 2A7, and see it for yourself. I’m writing here out of disappointment and, frankly, frustration. This has been going on for a week. I don’t know where or who provides these statistics, but the reality is a bit different.
Yep, try fighting the FRS.1 with a loaded A-4B ingame and see what happens
1 Like
You may consult StatShark - See All Player, Missile, and Vehicle Statistics
Which is far more accurate than the older Thunderskill because they collect all stats instead of only taking those that registered for it.
The numbers tells a better story. Less open to empirical feelings.
1 Like
The cope is strong with this one.
I could go and type a big and detailed reply, but it would just get rightfully flagged to hell for being off topic (which it would be). So I’ll keep it short:
Besides the planes/CAS part I just read a lot of skill issue.
now that we’re getting the last (real) WWII battleships, and also a malvinas map, how long do you think it’ll be before we get some type 42 class frigates? Considering they were recently added to WTM.
@Motherhen357-psn
I mean if you go to Statshark you see France top tier is always higher WR than Russia.
Rafale in GRB is extremely good because of the closer engagement ranges, MICA becomes very powerful. Moreso than even R77-1s.
And then the flight performance of the Rafale is just chef kiss. Add on the 360 degree RWR and you have so much information to play around with.
3 Likes