Buc S1’s BR being determined by its “excellent” performance in ARB and that its superior to the Canberra. Which is why its 8.7 with no AAMs or guns at all.
(though he has never actually played the Buc S1 and is going solely by stat cards)
1 Like
I think this pretty much missed the point on the Tornados. They were fairly obviously balanced by their performance in GRB. The only difference is the guided munitions. This should definitely increase their br for GRB, so rightly did for their overall RB BR before, but with split BRs this difference is made negligible in ARB. Even further, due to the weaker engines the Tornado GR1 in the British tree is flatly worse in ARB than the 11.0 Tonkas, despite being at the higher br of 11.3.
This exact scenario should be the type of thing that split BRs resolve, yet has been entirely missed. They should all be the same BR in ARB, at least theoretically, and the premium and event IDSs at 11.0 not going up implies they are balanced there, so why can’t the others join them at 11.0 given they have identical (worse for the GR1) performance?
This is somewhat less about the Tornados in isolation, but more indicative of this entire change not being entirely thought out with rules being applied inconsistently.
It would equally be nice to see more attackers (The ones that aren’t stuck with all aspect missiles far outstripping their airframe’s performance) to go down in ARB. That was also an expectation of this change.
The all aspect throwers at 10.0/10.3 are pretty stuck as they were balanced by giving them these missiles under the old doctrine. I personally think the bullet must just be bitten and these need to be moved up in ARB still, but I will bow to the statistics on that one. These are just stuck between a rock and a hard place based on old balancing decisions to try to get them closer to their ground performance in air.
3 Likes
I hate how I could have guessed that from mate’s history.
Buc s1 is abysmal, Buc s2 isn’t much better.
1 Like
From what I’ve seen, they usually make it to a base if they aren’t uptiered.
Buc S2 in theory should be 8.3. I dont think "number of potential base kills " is a good way to balance any aircraft. But even just 9.0 would be a huge buff. Would mean it no longer faces F-5Cs and such
Canberra or Buc S1s?
Goes for the B as well, it could do with being dropped down from where it is. Not same extent as base S2, but across the board buccaneers are just hopeless if the other side is remotely intelligent.
Canberras.
Buc S2B is hard because it does have the 9Ls, without those, even just 9Gs, it would be hard to argue for an ARB rating above 9.3/9.7
But Yeah, Buc S1 and Buc S2 really dont need to be so high anymore
Yes in air RB.
Bucc S1 is a better Canberra.
Bucc S2 is a gunless Su-25.
Bucc S2B gets AIM-9Ls to go along with its platform.
Effectively a slightly better A-6E TRAM but 2 less AIM-9Ls.
80 matches, over 80 bases destroyed, 26 deaths, and somehow 3 air frags.
Bucc S2 is a monster.
Claiming Bucc S2 should be 8.3 is nonsense, utter disinformation against one of Britain’s best bombers, and one of the best bombers in the game.
Bucc S2 is as good as Su-25 in ground battles, and in air battles it’s better than all bombers 9.0 and below, and some at 9.3.
Oh look, no gun, far slower.
Thought so yeah, Its the airspawn, Buc S1 has the weaker engines and so terrible acceleration. Buc S1 should get airspawn as well ideally
“<Insert British Plane Here> doesn’t need to be so high anymore”
Applies to 90% of the tree past spitfires.
1 Like
8.3 based upon the fact its max A2A loadout is 2x Aim-9Bs and the Sea Vixen, which has equal flight performance to the Buc in my opinion, has 4x Red Tops at 8.7. But i did clearly state it should be 9.0 as its DOA vs the 10.3 premiums it always sees
Canberra Mk6 ALSO at 8.3 has a gun. Canberra Mk6 is one of Britains best dogfighters iirc at that BR
Canberra also have airspawn, which puts them leagues ahead of Buc S1
1 Like
Jesus christ, this proves even more ya are bias against america. In what world does having fire and forget missles that dont do jack shit to tanks more dangerous than a jet whose armor is more than the maus for some reason, and doesn’t go up against the most overpowered spaas in the game. The Su-25 missiles are beyond over power, literally hits the ground 500 ft from a heavily armor mbt and just one shots it. Mean while, AGM-65s penns the top of any tank and does nothing.
In gaijins eyes, one requires no skill the other does. :D and we all know which is which
1 Like
It’s a slower AIM-9D that has an uncaged seeker before launch. AIM-9Bs don’t pull 18G. Range and guidance time sits in between those two.
What? There’s no bias against America.
A-10A Late is going to a correct BR of 10.7.
F-111A, being vastly superior to the Su-25, is staying 10.3, only 0.3 higher than the Su-25.
F-4C being equivalent to the Su-25 is staying 10.0.
Su-25 isn’t the only thing with ZUNI type rockets or bombs with CCIP.
Other Phantoms are moving down.
A-4Es are going to 9.3 where they belong.
Nothing against USA is present.
@Morvran
Bombers aren’t fighters, they cannot be compared.
Bombers being effective at their BR are about survival rate and ground target/base destruction rate.
Of which the Bucc S2 does well despite the compression at around that BR.
Subsonics can’t kill it cause they’re too slow, Harriers can barely kill it, and supersonics are hit and miss. Some will give it just a challenge [F-100 and Mig-19] others will hurt it… normally they’re 10.3
Wait a minute… isn’t that outside the pantsir-S1s range of ~18km… oooooooooh I can already hear the Russian mains crying despite having 30km range Su-25 for weeks hahaha
Meanwhile XP-50 and Wyvern laugh as swarms of them completely dominate any match they get into.
Anywai, gaijin put the all aspect missile carrier up to 10.7 min, nothing below, not even the frogfoot.