Nothing is important and everything can be worked around.
1 Like
Hellfire is actually quite fast. Try AKD-9/10 or L-UMTAS before crying.
1 Like
Just like M247 for so many years.
Same as others needing to fight AGM-65Ds in their 9.7 vehicles.
You have a point about 80UD but others are more than fine.
Complaining about those when they aren’t even the best 8.7s is weird.
1A2 is definitely better than M4 and fully deserve to be higher.
3 Likes
Almost everyone of your arguments is “yeah you’re right about the imbalance, but other nations have been like that at some point”.
Agreeing that the Pantsir is imbalanced but then justifying it by saying M247 was as well at some point is just idiotic. If something is imbalanced, for any nation, then it should be addressed.
Agreeing that the Ka 50 is poorly placed for what it fights but then saying it’s ok because AGM-65Ds are also poorly placed is stupid. Ok, lets move up the A10 and the Ka 50 then if we can agree on that. While we’re at it, let’s move up the A4E early because that thing is OP for 9.3.
T80 UD is the worst offender for sure but T72 TURMS is perfectly capable as well. I use the 9.3 T72 A for Germany and if you play it smart by not pushing out like an idiot then it is playing the game on easy mode. An upgraded variant with gen 3 thermals, better armor, and over performing ERA could definitely be 10.7 to relieve pressure from 9.3 like the decompression was actually supposed to.
I don’t care if the T55’s aren’t the best 8.7’s they struggle much less with 9.7’s than 7.7’s struggle with them. A vehicle should be balanced around the vehicle’s that will have to fight it not vice versa. It would struggle less fighting 10.0’s than 7.7’s currently struggle fighting it. And while we’re at it since you don’t like me only pointing out Russia, let’s move up the AMX 30 as well.
Sidam mistral has a better chance of getting a kill with it’s missile at 9.3 than the stinger’s do at 9.7. The igla’s have the downside of being caged but they definitely perform better than stingers in my experience. The type 93 has optic lock which allows it to engage helicopters from ranges a stinger could only dream of and it is only 9.3. If you don’t like the tank killing capabilities of the gepard then honestly skill issue because if a gepard kills your mbt then you already made a serious mistake at some point.
One area of imbalance in the game does not justify imbalance in another area of the game. That is just a weak argument and makes you seem like you are trying to protect the vehicles you enjoy using.
1 Like
No, A10 is balanced where it is.
T-55 are fine where they are, no need to ruin balance
EDIT: AAAA, i misunderstood it. Lmao, no, Turms is already bad and is struggling at 10.3
1 Like
Then mention those others as well, otherwise your post looks like it’s maliciously aimed at one nation in particular, which is something I don’t like.
We need decompression and this isn’t the way to do it.
I don’t see how a T-72A with thermals and ERA should be at the same BR as 2A4 or M1.
SIDAM Mistral is at 9.7 which it shouldn’t be honestly. Platform itself is garbage and Mistrals are the only decent thing about it.
You haven’t played a single game with that missile, so how do you know that from your experience ?
It’s definitely something you need to take into consideration when looking at a vehicle’s overall efficiency.
2 Likes
I appreciate you being one of the more sensible people on the forums, good points.
1 Like
This is a thread talking about Russia so I was sharing my opinions on Russian vehicles. You can’t realistically expect every thread to encompass all of the imbalances in the game “to be fair”. I would hope that “if” Gaijin ever listened to these imbalances then they would address every nation’s questionably placed vehicles instead of just one but that won’t happen anyway.
I was saying how I think the T72 A that I have personally played for Germany is the easiest vehicle to spawn in and have a balance of armor, speed, and insanely good firepower for 9.3. It could easily be moved up to 9.7. With that in mind, a completely upgraded version of that tank, the TURMS, should be able to perform perfectly fine at 10.7 where it still has vastly better thermals than it’s competitors, better or equal firepower, and average top speed but bad reverse. Even if the TURMS is OK at 10.3, it would provide actual relief on the 9.3 lineups as the decompression was supposed to provide if it was moved up to 10.7 where all the other MBT’s are.
I was thinking of the SANTAL which is 9.3 with Mistrals which perform way better than stingers. I guess my point about this is that almost every nation has missile spaa’s at 9.3 while the awful stinger launching Ozelot and Gepard 1A2 are at a completely useless br of 9.7 without a lineup at all. If you want an spaa for 9.3 Germany then you are stuck using the 8.3 Gepard fighting standoff weapons you can’t do anything about.
Do I know everything there is to know about the IGLAS exact performance in a match? No, because I don’t have any Iglas. Have I played around that BR with enough nations and hundreds of hours spent fighting them to know how trivial stingers are to dodge comparatively? Yes. I have plenty of experience fighting and knowledge reading about iglas in the game to have an opinion on them.
The tank killing capabilities of the gepard made it 8.3. Are you really telling me that adding one of if not the worst MANPADS in the game to that SPAA justifies raising it more than an entire BR when it’s competitors mostly sit at 9.3? What about the ozelot? It has zero tank killing capabilities yet sits at a higher (useless for any lineup) BR than it’s contemporaries.
False. There is one thing the TURMS stands out for, and that is its FCS (Thermals and Sights). That is it. It has no armor, no mobility, no reverse, a horrid reload, poor gun handling, among other faults. You push a base T-72A with a good FCS up to 10.3 and its already a midmobile, even worse so if it goes up to 10.7. The TURMS is arguably the weakest 10.3 MBT in the game, every 9.3 can just UFP it as they can a T-72A, as Kontakt 1 does not provide KE protection.
1 Like
Fair enough, I haven’t played the vehicle so I’ll take your word for it. My main point initially was talking about the T80 UD but we got focused talking about the TURMS because it is 10.3 as well.
1 Like
I’ll agree the T-80UD is kinda disgusting for 10.3.
1 Like
do you realize that the iglas are just as easy to doge, arguably easier than the stingers due to the lower overload and the lack of a proximity fuze?
the opinion of the iglas are quite often based on the old iglas performance before it lost the proximiy fuze.
They lost the proximity fuse? And are the HN-6 or whatever that the PGZ at 9.3 the same as iglas?
Yes they both lost it, the mayor difference between the HN-6 and the igla is that the hn6 is uncaged and while the igla is caged but it has that 0.5s of the thrust vectoring at launch, at range they are pretty much the same.
No.
Leave it be. Don’t try to ruin a good vehicle, it is balanced properly
No. It already struggles at 10.3. If anything, we should be considering to put it lower, maybe take away 3bm42 and put it lower, but bringing it higher is just insane
3 Likes
My experience with them is referencing the fact that doing a slight barrel roll when stingers are ripple fired at you in the head on makes it easy to indefinitely dodge them. Mistrals will get you most often by the 2nd or 3rd missile because they pull better than the stingers. Iglas perform more similarly to the stingers in that scenario but they hit me slightly more often than the stingers do in that situation mainly because there will most likely be at least 3 vehicles ripple firing iglas at you.
Where iglas, and HN-6, have consistently performed way better than stingers is when I am flying away or perpendicular to the launcher and I pull a full turn once the missile is about 2 km away they will 90% of the time be able to keep up with the turn and hit me whereas stingers never ever keep up in a full turn at that distance.
Then similar vehicles should move up as well.
TURMS would have below average mobility and top speed at 10.7.
Indeed, but saying M4 should move up to 9.7 because of it makes absolutely no sense.
Move this average vehicle up because I don’t want you to have something I don’t.
Then you’d know that 9M39 has barely any advantages over Stingers.
Yes, M4 is at 9.3 while Shilka is at 8.0.
SIDAM Mistral is at 9.7 while SIDAM is at 8.3.
1 Like
From what I’ve heard the SIDAM is pretty ass (the 8.3 one)
Ok, let’s do it.
I’ve already discussed the TURMS with another commenter as there were quite a lot of people replying to my post.
Where exactly did I say that the M4 should move up in BR??? I didn’t. In fact, you mentioned that the SIDAM Mistral is 9.7 so that should move down to 9.3 as well. It is ridiculous for some nations to have the capabilities of an IR seeker spaa at 9.3 while others have to rely on 8.3 point defense SPAA. Move down at least the Ozelot to 9.3 as it is just a Gepard 1A2 without a gun.
I believe you really think I am coming for your Russian lineups to get them up-tiered to oblivion. I am not. I am merely pointing out the discrepancies in capability Russia has to other nations at most every BR.
So what are you suggesting ?
Then suggest adding some more AAs in that area ?
What discrepancies ?
It’s definitely not the only nation with 9.3 SAM.
1 Like