War Thunder is full of things which were tested, but not adopted. Some are included in WT, most are not part of the game. There is no fixed rule, but It looks like Gajin only adpots these things if they’re required for balancing or gameplay reasons.
But still there has to be some proof.
(Except its a russian unit :) )
The last Bit is hella accurate
SAAB-105G
GRB
8.3 → 8.7
Very good flight performance in regards to climb, and manoeuvrability. Combined with it having CCIP, it easily is able to get multiple ground kills with its bombs, and at the same time, being near untouchable. It is also able to equip 30mm ADEN gun pod that works as a very effective armament against both air and ground.
The closest comparison it have, is the Buccaneer S.1, which sits at 8.7. The Buccaneer compared to the SAAB-105G, while it have a higher top speed, it has a lot worse manoeuvrability, and it doesn’t have access to any armaments to defend itself from air threats.
Iranian F-14 Units in Combat Tom Cooper and Farzad Bishop
come with proper sources then we can talk
STA-A1 and A2 are fine, their main advantage are the optics and reverse speed. They are not your standard brawler tanks so you need to play them in their own way, preferable at long ranges where you can shine with your HEAT-FS, which can penetrate any enemy.
I would say that they are even better than Typ 61 and STA-A3 just because they have better optics, much better reverse speed and are a little bit smaller…
I am doing perfectly in them, even better compared to the Typ 61… so they are fine or even maybe undertiered.
Sure let me find an outdated catalogue or a dodgy Russian website.
As I said there are no photos and we have no sources from Iran. What we do have is a recurring theme that these systems were tested and could be integrated.
You wan’t to talk crap show me a Yak -141 with an R-27ER hell even a Radar equipped would be a start.
Except R27 wasn’t compatible with radar as far as I know.
Hey Gaijin, the Su-25SM3 sitting at 11.7 is a straight downgrade from the 11.3 Su-25/39, can you please reduce its BR in AIR RB?
Reason: It’s AAM loadout is a downgrade. It does not have IRCM. And it see 12.3 and 12.7 almost every game making it unplayable. At the end of the day it’s still an Su-25 airframe.
The IRCM in Su-25T/Su-25TM isn’t reason for comparison when most of the missiles you face do have IRCCM, but it’s truly a questionable battle rating for the Su-25SM3.
Proved possible they could have made it work, they have source code and they used the missile on the MiG 29 actively.
R-73 is simple although it would lack the HMD and that was probably the reason they decided to leave it for the MiG 29s with the Fakour and BVR being the F-14s purpose.
IRCCM missiles are just as affected by IRCM as anything else. At least Magic IIs and Aim-9Ms are
You mean 4 worse all-aspects with half the range and 2/3rds of the G pull. They behave more like less maneuverable R-60Ms and you can find SIX of those in 11.0 supersonic attackers and fighters.
It isn’t. A J-7D at 10.7 is far stronger than this will ever be, simply because it can actually threaten players who aren’t flying directly at it.
Correction: nobody is gonna use it for bombing because it CANNOT do it effectively, and so must be rated on its Air to Air combat abilities, which are bad.
Anyway we’ve already cluttered this thread enough, so I won’t continue. Let’s agree to disagree, and if you have a chance do try out the Alpha Jet TH.
Perhaps they indeed are, but the odds of face (or not) a enemy and point the IRCM perfectly to the missile are very low. It’s a feature but rarely is capable of being used.
The few times I played, very few, air battles with the Su-39 none of them I evaded a missile using the IRCM but just dodging around, the mix of flares and chaffs helps a lot this flying Chrysler Pacifica.
Hmm Xm800T uptier - You know if you really want to screw this thing you should lower it’s BR to where it faces vehicles that are more resistant to 20mm guns like German and Russian heavy tanks as armour just gets thinner the higher the BR it goes.
Please no… recharge ? Do you mean reload ? :) We do not need to reduce the reloading times…
All I’m gonna say is, if you think facing A-10s or Su-25s in a 9.3 is bad, the Alpha Jet TH will be something else.
Churchill VII & Churchill Crocodile
GRB
4.7 → 4.3
(Yes, one vehicle per suggestion, but this is the same vehicle, except one has a gimmick of flamethrower and trailer )
While it seems to have the some of the best armor for its BR, at the same time, it can easily be killed by shooting the forehead of the turret, or by shooting through the front of its tracks, where ammo is right behind it. Its cannon cannot do anything at its own BR other than really to track the enemies and maybe kill light tanks. You cannot shoot at weak spots, since it is using solid shot, so the most you will do is only maybe damage the enemy crew member behind the weakspot.
As an example of how weak the forehead of the turret of the Chuchill VII is, this is so little of how much higher up you need to be than the Churchill VII to being able to penetrate the turret with the KV-1 (ZiS-5). During the whole fight, the Churchill, could do no damage to my tank, because the cannon is that weak. Do remember, that the KV-1S, at 4.3, has the same cannon as the KV-1 (ZiS-5).
At the same time, outside of these common tanks from the big 3, there is also HE slingers, such as the M44.
The main point of this reasoning, is that its armour might look good on paper, in practice, it is not very good, because it have a massive forehead that is very easy to go through. It is not able to fight back, because its cannon cannot penetrate anything, and if it does, it does no damage at all.
Meanwhile in SB I find them really annoying to face in things like the FGR2 where 9Gs obviously aren’t usable
+1 AGS need m900
