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.
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.
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.
We aren’t going to agree on anything. I have made concessions about several things I mentioned but you continue to staunchly nit pick and defend even the most heinous examples I mentioned such as the Pantsir being acceptable because in some ancient time in the past, the M247 was OP. Lol
M247 was and still is OP with other nations not receiving anything similar in like half a decade. But yeah, Pantsir is the main issue here and a proof of bias.
You still haven’t told me what’s so heinous about M4 being at 9.3 ? Do you even have some arguments that aren’t hearsay ?
M247 is 9.3 dude. It’s better than any of the other early point defense spaa’s but it is also an entire BR higher than any of them. Veak 40 was the same thing at a lower BR until it got nerfed into the ground. PGZ ahead shells are at 8.3 and are tracerless so quite literally an equivalent yet at an entire BR lower than the M247. The begleitpanzer is 9.3 with even more powerful proxy shells just without radar guidance. The Chinese Zsu 57 has proxy shells at 8.0 and is incredibly potent at shooting down aircraft.
You are literally straight up making up stuff at this point but please, keep lying to protect your precious Russia. I am starting to realize this isn’t about “maliciously coming after one nation” but rather about you desperately defending your favorite nation.
Also, since you keep harping on the M4. If you had read my initial post oh so very long ago, you would realize that I was talking about the fact that Russia has 4 spaa from 7.3 to 9.3 culminating in a great combo of gun and manpad spaa with the M4 while other nations equivalents are at a higher BR or just don’t exist at all. This doesn’t mean the M4 is OP, it just shows favoritism with other nations’ equivalents being over BR’ed or not existing at all.
It’s quite hilarious how you can stand there and actually defend things like the Pantsir and then say that you are “just against maliciously favoring one nation”. That is just too rich.
Since you couldn’t take the hint last time, you are a pointless person to argue with so have a nice life.
why is it still a topic russian/ soviet bias??
ussr does not have the best vehicles in pretty much every category.
I dont find any air plane which is by far the best in its br.
And for ground they only have probably the best Air to ground loadout and spaa at toptier. anything else is just good or meh
If Pantsir is imbalanced then Su-34 isn’t OP.
Your posts’ can’t have two contrary views be correct at the same time. That is the issue people have with those claiming Pantsir is OP as their post is implying CAS [including Kh-38 carriers] isn’t OP.
Ka-50 is a higher BR than and equal to its NATO counterparts.
I get that people really want two opposite things to be true at the same time when it comes to Pantsir and CAS, but that’s just not the case.
I am proof that you can have someone whose only deaths to Pantsir were me flying straight at it knowing it was there, and no deaths during CAS runs nor fighter duty.
By all means say Kh-38 is OP, that is a fact. Please, everyone, stop claiming Pantsir is OP or even great when it’s only great against GBU carriers like Tornado, F-14B, Mirage 2000D-R1, etc.
Saying Pantsir is OP undermines the work we want Gaijin to do.
War Thunder NEEDS Python 5 SPYDER equivalent SPAA, NOT Pantsir equivalent SPAA. And lying to ourselves that Pantsir is good when it isn’t only indicates to Gaijin that CAS isn’t as OP as it is.
For top tier, we have 4 helis, 8 different platform tanks (17 tanks total) that have yet to be modeled.
Helis without detailed modules make them extremely fragile than helicopters that do have them.
Tanks with turret baskets are extremely fragile frontally and to the side. It is unfair for other tanks to not have them.
There’s absolutely no reason why it needs to be extremely detailed as it provides little value to the game hence why I said it’s a waste of time. Having low poly modules will be easier to implement and easier to maintain overtime.
Remember, detailed modules isn’t for balancing, it’s to improve realism and have a new standard when new vehicles come out.
Top BR? Leclerc, Merkava, Ariete, Type 10, Challenger 2…
That’s 5, and they’re likely being worked on.
The rest have autoloaders/baskets modeled. And an autoloader being destroyed is worse than horizontal traverse.
My memories are strong for closed ground battles Panther getting its turret ring destroyed and me proceeding to get 3 frags before repairing, and more recently one of my many MBTs getting 2 frags with a locked turret.
Autoloader gone is worse cause that’s 1 shot.
It took them an entire patch to implement it only on 2 tanks. As I said before, low poly modules should’ve been the way to go so that existing vehicles can be brought up to the new standard quickly
Yes, and T-series would be low-priority because they have autoloaders modeled.
And getting an autoloader damaged is a far worse situation than a basket getting damaged.
Gaijin nerfed it’s only competition which makes me think.
HE-VT is a better shell.
It also has much worse traverse angles, speed, fire rate and shell count. Lack of radar is a big deal on it’s own.
No radar, slow fire rate and awful gun handling.
None of those hold a candle to M247 and you know it. Why are we still waiting for counterparts ?
This is what you wrote. This directly implies that either M4 is undertiered or Gepard is overtiered.
USSR having 9.3 equivalent to the Gepard 1A2 is disgusting
Gepard isn’t overtiered as it’s better than M4. It’s impressive you still don’t understand this.
I’m not defending it, I’m just calling out your weird fixation on a single nation while pointing fingers at mostly decent vehicles.
You starting to defend M247 just proved you aren’t here for so called balance, but to whine about bias in a slightly different way.
Nothing weird from a guy playing mostly one nation.