“X happens more frequently with russia”
“b-b-but it happens to other nations too so it’s all the same!!!”
this strawman needs its own name at this point
numbers (datamines) don’t mean shit… they can easily modify them on the backend/server side at the last minute and you’d never know. that would explain why they don’t accept datamines in bug reports and why there is so much inconsistency between test drive/custom battle/hit simulation/normal battles
again works differently in real battles
i dont keep track but i’ve easily made more than 25 reports and at least 20 were obviously chinese (name/avatar), and like i said, RU-SWE-CN with multiple russian premiums. cheaters want the most meta/sealclub experience possible, and of course that’s russia with the broken MBTs/helis/lights/pantsir/kh38
Kinematics: Rafale is superior it can turn harder, accelerate faster and is only marginally slower than the Flanker (depends if the Flanker is carrying a War thunder load or a realistic one) and if it gets close then it’s really more luck than aircraft performance Flankers TVC offers some advantages. Both have full hmd systems and R-74M and MICA IR are great WVR missiles
RCS: Rafale is superior it is significantly smaller with S ducts and RAM coating.
Radar: is more moot with DL and EAWACS but Irbis and RBE2 are similar with different roles. Irbis has higher detection ranges but more power gives off greater emissions.
Data fusion: Rafale again has the MAWS, IRST, RWR and Radar all synchronised to give the pilot the information they need. I’m yet to see this kind of fusion on a Flanker happy to be proven wrong.
IRST: Rafales is superior
EW/Jamming Rafales: SPECTRA is considered the benchmark that and SAABs EAJB. Khibiny is strong and Russian ECCM/EW is very good we just don’t know how good it is at jamming modern ARHM and AESA Radars.
Missiles: Meteor against R-37M…R-37M has greater range but inferior G pull for hitting an aware defensive aircraft. Meteor is again considered one of the best BVRAAMs. R-77M isn’t in service yet but would certainly help the Su-35 in these kind of enagagments. But then France would also have MICA NG.
Passive missiles: MICA IR is also an upgrade over R-73M or R-74M R-27ET is getting a little long in the tooth now.
Defensive suites: MAWS again Rafale the protection system is considered one of the best with near 360 degree coverage. We do know Su-35S operates a MAWS system we do not know the coverage.
We could throw training in but to me that’s nonsense and the VVS and VKS are at this time one of the most capable, combat tested airforces in the world.
Damn can you give something a bit more than arrogance ? Like seriously give something more than “I don’t like this argument” just a little bit of something countering mine
Based on your kinematics assessment it will depended on the tactics and situation which the the Su35 pilot will have to utilize when engaging the Rafael. There is no clear advantage in that statement.
RCS yes the Rafael has lower radar signature but lower AOLs than Su35. Sure radar signature makes a difference but the Su 35 has more powerful radar so that advantage is not as great as it appears on paper.
As you already stated the R-37m has greater range, as we have already seen in the case of the PL-15 missile it is not that easy to doge it, there other IRL situations that do confirm this statement.
There is no evidence of MICA IR being superior to R-74M those are just statements.
MAWS might be considered as the best protection system but again just a statement. SU 35 has plasma stealth capability, how effective is it in irl not sure. There are instance of SU 35 being brought down , a few due to friendly fire and the rest by well hidden ground based SAMs.
At the end of the day looking at the engines of the SU 35 its long range missile capability already proven in IRL it has the advantage vs the Rafael not the other way around. Rafael has the advantage of being part of a much larger alliance.
Kinematics cannot be argued the Rafale can supercruise and will turn harder at higher speeds allowing greater defensive flexibility. Su-35S is faster but it takes longer to get to that speed and it uses a lot of fuel. It cannot sit in burner but the Rafale can maintain it’s speed without burner and then accelerate when it needs to.
R-37M is a great missile but it is also being used against a nation with largely outdated airframes. You are not going to surpise a current Gen 4+ aircraft with an R-37M shot. The PL-15 missile kill, well what do we put that down to. One Indian pilots, not French did they have SPECTRA on? Did they ignore or were they unable to deconflict warnings from various systems ground control etc. One thing we do know is a Chinese EAWACS aircraft was operating was it providing DL for the J-10s?
R-37M is closer to a PL-17.
MICA IR is an IIR missile and while R-73M and 74M are supposed to be we don’t really know.
China have moved away from the R-73 style missile and are using an IRIS-T look a like with the PL-10.
Again how relevant are IIR missiles in BVR?
MAWS and having more information is always good, and that is something that NATO excel at having Sensor fusion is a massive advantage. MAWS/SPECTRA not only detects the threat, but it tells you what missile has been employed and how to defeat it along with counter measure deployment. The Pilot can then focus on flying the aircraft and shooting down the target. We also do not know how effective the EW side of RB-E2 is, can it hinder or jam IRBIS? And like wise can IRBIS jam RB-E2 we dont know.
So what we did do is use the information we have and come up with a reasonable conclusion that the Su-35S is inferior to the Rafale and Typhoon. Now if we swap the Rafale for an F-15EX then the Su-35S becomes far more capable.
They wouldn’t maintain their current b.r, isn’t that the whole point of the system? With proper decompression I’d argue they would have the possibility to make even stronger lineups not Adjacent to top tier and even then they still will have top tier worthy tanks that are not added yet
This is not a strawman. This literally happens to every tank. Not only to ru tanks.
“more frequently” - yeah, and what do you have to back it up? Your feelings?
Please, i think i’ve made a mistake assuming you don’t have ill will in this discussion.
All of the statements we both made are valid to an extent, there are engines in Russia with super cruise capability exceeding the Rafaels super cruise limit to which the SU35 will have access to. As you already mentioned pilot skills matter a lot, what is even more important is geography and from where one gets to deploy the aircraft from. The Rafael can shoot the Su-35 down dont get me wrong. Overall the airframe and engines that Su-35 will have access to as well as future long range missiles make it more potent than the Rafael. AOL for example plays a huge role in terms of WVR, that is where the Su35 excels in.
I do believe that are more potent missiles that the R-37M like Izd. 180 (K-77M) for example that will be utilized in the future.
The outcome between Rafael and SU-35 engagements are not as one sided as saying (Rafel is superior than any Su 4+ generation fighter). I am not certain that Rafael or Eurofighters will win against F-15 EX in real life vs AESA radar plus AIM-260 missile and upgraded aim 9X. Lots of Europeans make these statements based on some training air engagements in which in some instances Rafael’s and Eurofighters came out as winners. But that is not IRL scenarios.
Otherwise enjoy the Rfael in game it is certainly a beautiful looking plane and capable in IRL.
Strv 122’s were already present in the game for years by that point, giving Germany the Leopard 2A7V was essentially just giving them a Strv 122 equivalent.
Not really how I’d see it.
The Leopard 1 demolished the T-54 and T-10M.
So as a response NATO got the Chieftain Mk.3 which demolished the T-62.
So as a response NATO got the Kpz/MBT-70 which demolished the T-64A.
So as a response NATO got the M1 Abrams which demolished the T-64B.
So as a response NATO got the IPM1 which demolished the T-80B.
So as a response NATO got the Leopard 2A5 which demolished the T-80U.
So as a response NATO got the Leopard 2A6 which demolished the T-90A/T-72B3.
So as a response Russia finally got the T-80BVM.
So as a response NATO got the Leopard 2A7 which demolished the T-90M.
Gaijin quite consistantly failed to provide Russia proper counterparts to the NATO MBT’s they implemented, this went on and on for years and years.
Oh boy, here I go defending NATO again against disinformation. As a “Japan main” no less [I have all 10 tech trees completed in air, 6 in ground, and the final ones above 7.7 in ground.]
1- Damage models are universal standards, thus if it’s rigged that means all tanks are.
VIDAR and Centauro are Russian now because their spalling is identical to T-80BVM and always have been identical?
All tanks in War Thunder are Russian because their engines and fuel tanks absorb spalling and rounds?
2- I’d like to see proof “western sources” are wrong about K1, K5, and Relikt then. K1 is the worst ERA in War Thunder currently.
3- Physically impossible for gun stabs to over-perform. Tank biathlon footage proves they’re rather accurate.
4- Autoloaders don’t explode, which are mostly on non-Soviet tanks. Ammo explodes, which it always does since the bug fix years back.
5- T series barrel resistance is 7 rounds of default belt ammo out of BMP-2.
Abrams barrel resistance is 7 rounds of same ammo. It’s identical.
6- Don’t shoot the driver’s port? I’ve never aimed for it myself in any match. Especially when there are far larger weakspots on the turret and hull.
7- Anything small, which Abrams and T series aren’t small enough IMO.
8- T-90M has the smallest weakspots of the Soviet tech tree tanks, and that’s still larger weakspots than Leopard 2A5+.
T-80BVM and Abrams turret weakspots are physically the same size, even if Abrams non-weakspot turret area is physically larger.
T-44-100 not having a roof for months. Datamines saw that and everything.
Are you going to claim Merkava Mk4 LIC is Russian because its turret armor was duplicated?
Pantsir has never dominated in War Thunder. Easily the most avoidable post-12km SPAA.
RU helicopters dominated for exactly a few months around Spring 2020 before people caught on and they were nerfed into the ground.
Your precious Ka-52 has been getting clapped by ADATS and Crotale for half a decade now.
S-13s were removed from your precious Ka-50, and made a hilariously high SP requirement on Ka-52.
F-18A came in at an OP BR. The last time a Soviet aircraft did was the Mig-23MLD.
AGS and PT-76-57 both came in at stupidly low BRs because Gaijin didn’t know what their BRs should’ve been to begin with and players quickly found out how OP they both were, and both were quickly changed in BR.
Reality is far more nuanced than your conspiracy theories, Mr Jones.
And do not mistake my criticisms of Soviet/Russian equipment as anything other than.
If you think I am overly-criticizing such equipment, you are more than welcome to believe so and say so. Just do not accuse the criticism of being anything other than criticism.
And please do not invent fan-fiction about me; use that time for film or games instead.
I’m a tism American that loves machinery and uses way too much time investigating things that interest me.
See as you said as a response…Not NATO got this thing first and dominated.
T-54 and Leopard 1 were very well matched
T-62 was great as the first tank at it’s BR with a dart Cheiftain was added much later.
T-64A was also very good with great fire power and decent armour it was slow though
T-64B was one of the best tanks in the game.
This is when it changed though and that is. Because Western designers changed how they were going to design tanks.
Russian tank design and ethos hasnt changed since the T-72
M1 is superior to the T-72B 89 it would have faced
as is Leopard 2 and Cr2
Since then the game has just been an arms race.
Leopard 2A5 vs T-80U, the T-72B3 and T-90A the T-90M
We have to say strictly speaking the failing isn’t Gaijin it is the Russian Mod.
T-90M Obr 23 will not solve the reverse speed issues
T-80BVM Obr 23 Will just be a T-80BVM with extra armour and different thermals.
T-14 was Russias chance and that isn’t going into service anytime soon.
So to compensate for that Gaijin just downgrades NATO rounds and armour while buffing Russian heavy ERA to maintain some form of “balance”
APFSDS rounds are currently correct within margin of error.
Gaijin has not and will never sway from the Lanz Odermatt formula, because fairness matters more than balancing like World of Tanks.
Soviet ERA has never been buffed [K1 was corrected AKA nerfed at some point], and NATO armor has only ever been modeled based on known information. Armor has never been nerfed based on no documentation either.
Well, you don’t seem to be bright enough to realise i was obviously talking about ground battles. But the XP-50 no longer gets airspawns, the XP-55 isn’t that great, the A-10 is just as busted as the Su-25s and i avoid high tier air because it’s just a boring missile fest.
you think the M8LAC is broken?
M22 is not broken at all, it’s armament sucks and it can be .50.
M4 105 isn’t broken, all it has is a high HEAT pen. the post pen damage is garbage, the ballistics terrible and the reload long. it’s only strong in a downtier.
the M4A1 is below average in strength. it’s armour is awful, it’s mobility sub-par and it’s armament mediocre.
T-18e2 is super rare, not a premium and isn’t that strong. it’s biggest strength is that people don’t know what it is.
the t14 is great in a downtier, but it’s armament is awful and it has it’s big hull MG weakspot for anyone that knows what they’re doing and doesn’t get fucked by desync.
the t55e1 is bad, it can be killed by and MG, it’s gun handling and firing ark are shit and the gun itself isn’t that special at 4.3.
the t-29 has a long reload and will face tiger 2s every match, which are far better than it and a lower BR.
the T26e5 is great in a downtier, it’s weakspots are poorly defined. but it’s armament is really bad, it can’t pen tiger 2s from the front despite being the same BR. honestly, the E1-1 is better.
the T114 isn’t good. it has no armour, it’s not fast and it has poor gun handling and it’s only good round is HEAT which sucks.
the MBT70 is german, not american. along with the XM803, their rounds aren’t great, thier armour can be a bit trolly but isn’t great overall. really the main strength is it’s acceleration, but their top speed isn’t great.
The M1A1s aren’t anything special, the armour is still way worse than it should be. mostly they’re just a bit faster than their contemporaries with less protection.
Not sure what you’re talking about with the “P49/39” perhaps a wrong name.
the XP-55 is kind of niche onnly really being able to powerfight and without ordenance and is also rare.
the XP-50 is pretty average now without it’s airspawn.
IMO the F4Us are below average fighters and CAS compared to their contemporaries. they handle like ass, .50s are pretty shitty armaments. the only really good one is the AU-1, which gets cannons and loads of bombs.
the A-1H, like the AM-1 and AD series are decent cas, but are slow and handle poorly. you’re much better off taking out an F8F, which is far strong than any of your attempt at pointing out broken vehicles.
the F-89’s have insane climb, but their handling isn’t great. the rocket one can be a bit of a meme. it’s main claim to fame was being the same BR as the Su-11 but being much worse before they upped the Su-11.
The F86’s are not op at all. their handling isn’t anything special, their armament sucks, either being .50s or 20mm with almost no ammo. they’re very mediocre. the CL-13 B Mk.6 is the best version, but still suffers from the shit armament.
I don’t get what you’re trying to do. you start out like you’re presenting a list of OP vehicles, but none of the vehicles you list are OP.
Oh wow, how clever of you. Yes, i do well, that has no bearinng on how incredibly biased gaijin are to USSR vehicles or how horrendous they are at balancing. i haven’t really used the t-34-57 for years, it used to be my daily grind for a long time, br changes fucked the lineup and i got bored with it moved on to other nations as i had also finished the USSR tree.
NATO armour relies on composites (NERA) and NERAs value is less than rubber in game.
Tanks that use NERA arrays often have the worst armour M1 as an example it’s composites are poorly modelled you can go through the turret face.
CR2 add on blocks for OES and TES and front plate do not offer the minimum protection values they were designed to.
Ariete ROMOR is the exact same.