I mostly want spaa to be as effective at top as they are at less than 5.0.
Most miss that the main points of the Pantsir are the guns+missile combo, the op detection arc and that it doesn’t trigger any RWR warning. Also the TWS mode allows you to easily spot incoming green brackets in third person view.
Other SPAAs have this dead zone where they can’t detect air threats. Other SPAAs have no guns, so they’re vulnerable on the ground and from close range air attacks. Other SPAAs just have this old radar screen, where its easy to miss incoming threats.
1 Like
And who will get benefit from the most yep, its Russia (again surprise?) unless ARM in the game then whatever reason Russia shouldn’t the only one who sit comfortably (not on my watch)
1 Like
It would be Israel, China, Soviets.
And of these, I forgot which benefit 100% and which required sub-trees: Germany, Italy, France, and Sweden.
I have to look at Thailand for Japan options.
well, you said it aren’t they have enough already? let other have that luxury too not a god damn USSR they have enough
CAS is currently uncontested from SPAA in ground battles outside of China’s TOR-M1 IF players get within 12km of it.
Japan & USSR sit at bottom barrel for CAS currently too, and even F-16AJ is more powerful than Pantsir.
I don’t care what USSR lack (which is not) They have enough already, I don’t care how unplayable Pantsir really are,(which is not) and I don’t care you can defeat it or not because I can too but there is no SPAA in the game with the same ability of pantsir overall it better than most of SPAA in the game and should be enough for Russian advantage over other not give them more advantage
1 Like
TOR-M1 has superior capability to Pantsir and TOR-M1 is superior to all other SPAA.
Pantsir is just an ITO-90 with automatic missile guidance, and can kill further static targets.
& ITO-90 will get its automatic missile guidance in the future.
Pantsir is not and has never been the best SPAA, it was released as the worst SPAA, then others had their missile physics corrected like Pantsir.
& only TOR-M1 retained a solid position after all the physics corrections.
And all of these I don’t care how suffering pantsir are they should have enough with 2S6 like the other if they can’t handle CAS like other so what? that skills issue for Russian mains.
2S6 is equivalent to Roland 1 with a longer range, that’s it. Every 11.X SPAA is drastically superior to 2S6.
I sadly cannot test VT-1 personally.
so what? can’t Russia have some disadvantage on their line up?
No one can have disadvantages when CAS is this OP.
Russia’s best anti-air in ground battles is the Su-27, which is FAR more powerful than Pantsir.
you can tell that to Italy and Israel that do they have some luxury like Russia have?
like anyone that ofc fighter are always the best SPAA it also how it work irl too
1 Like
And Italy & Israel will get more stuff.
However, Italy does have AV-8B+, and Israel has F-15A as well as Barak II for anti-air duties, since all but China needs to use aircraft to kill CAS anyway.
The TOR-M1 is not better than the Pantsir, do you want me to pull up my quote from less than a day ago? The Pantsir when it was added was by far the best SPAA and it is still the best SPAA (plus Gaijin nerfed all missile AA’s right before the Pantsir came out).
Also the Pantsir actually gets a gun, so it’s better for closer engagements as well.
TOR-M1 is superior to Pantsir.
Missiles need G-load, and 30 peak Gs isn’t enough for modern CAS.
Also if you’re close enough for the gun you’re doing CAS wrong.
In what scenario is 30G not enough? Like actually. In air battles 30G is supposedly enough, so how does stationary launch vehicle warrant more G but a flying/moving plane isn’t?
The guns are for close engagements like with helicopters. The TOR-M1 is just a sitting duck to them if they get close.
30 PEAK Gs, average Gs is closer to 24 for Pantsir.
Average Gs for TOR-M1 is 32G.
The 9M331 and 95Ya6 (going off of the datamine) have almost the same PID values ([0.0126, 0.0, 0.0014] for 9M331 and [0.0121, 0.0, 0.0001]) so it is not the flight controller that is making the 9M331 (significantly) better. Two other values that influence missile performance are crossDistToReqCrossVelMult and velDiffToReqAccelMult, where the Pantsir’s values are lower (so the flight controller is active more often and therefore more accurate).
The TOR-M1 does have a higher reqCrossVelRationMax of 0.85 (compared to the Pantsir’s 0.65), but I am unsure on what they mean by “Ration,” so I wouldn’t be able to tell you if that is an advantage for the TOR-M1. The only other value that benefits the TOR-M1 is the reqAccelMax within accelControl and it receiving a second value for the accelControlIntgLim within accelControl (which I am interpreting to be meaning the PID controller for the 9M331 has integral windup, which is a good thing but can’t be sure how good without the equation).
Without finding the file where the equation for their combined crossDistToReqCrossVelMult, reqCrossVelRationMax, velDiffToReqAccelMult, and accelControl is stored what you’re saying is conjecture.
Anyways I’ve spent far too much time trying to look up these files, but overall the Pantsir does seem to have an edge in terms of how active the flight controller is whereas the TOR-M1 has a higher G limit (but we can’t know what how much these factors matter without the equation).
Yes, a straight target. You turn on spawn and you can’t get hit, which leads you to close the distance & meme over Pantsirs for the entire match watching them rage at not hitting you.
It’s not defensive, cause I’m not maneuvering when going mach 1 slightly perpendicular to the Pantsir.
Defensive means you maneuver.
VT-1 has better paper stats, and should be fixed in practice since a few months ago but I haven’t been able to check.