You mistook what I said about the Ka50. Most 10.7 NATO countries furthest range spaa is the Roland system that is at 10.3. You can’t play a lineup at 10.3 though because most NATO mbt’s went up to 10.7. This means 10.7 lineups have to fight Ka50’s at 11.3 in even a partial uptier when the Ka50 out ranges their longest range spaa.
1 Like
I appreciate the clarification to your post.
Seeing any AGM-114 or Vikhr platform in its downtier spells trouble, but yeah Britain, China, and Soviets do have options currently in downtiers to an extent. Looking at G-Lynx being the exception to the rule.
Only advice if you somehow come across Kamov in a full uptier playing 10.7: Buildings, trees, and burning tanks are your friends.
2 Likes
It seems to be a myth, blog posts lacking actual sources. I will delete that.
1 Like
I think we would agree on most “issues” currently present in the game.
Top tier CAS has severely out paced top tier SPAA and even the Pantsir is the bare minimum of what’s needed. Still, the fact that one nation has had the Pantsir (at the same BR) for 2-3 years, I believe, with no competition is unacceptable as far as game balance goes.
Weapon ranges not being taken into account when considering what a vehicle can fight in a downtier is also unacceptable. A Ka 50 having a range 2km greater than your only vehicle capable of killing it isn’t “Oh no! A downtiered heavy tank!” it’s “Well I just died from 10km away but there is literally nothing I can do about it.” The low BR AGM 114 slingers are no more acceptable but 10 km x12 Vikhrs is quite egregious.
This is why I said I don’t believe in “Russian bias” as the conspiracy theory but rather believe Gaijin is just completely incompetent when it comes to balancing capabilities or listening to player feedback. In my personal opinion playing several nations across all BR’s Russia has some of the most capable vehicles at the most favorable BR’s. That’s just due to Gaijin’s unwillingness to improve their game though and instead just release more and more premiums.
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
Which AH64 have fire and forget missiles?
1 Like
The way those h2 missles are being locked and used on those helicopter you might aswell call them fire and forget.
Oh, so that was just a lie
Imagine if US tanks used “Relikt” sheets in the frontal armor of Abrams and the lower part of the tank. There the armor would be 2000 mm from kinetic energy. But unfortunately the US does not have such a miracle technology, so it has to use weak non-magical uranium multilayer armor.
AH-64 launched and forgot? What kind of Apache can do that for the US? And what does it mean to spam missiles? When the Hellfire is the slowest missile in the game.
1 Like
It would change barely nothing aside from the ufp of the abrams as the relikt offers little protection at those angles…
2 Likes
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