Yeah sure, there is a skill difference in favor of Russia in 80% of top top tier GRB games
How convenient, russian players are just better aren’t they ?
1 Like
Thats all correct but there is still no world in which a BMP 2M is straight up better than a Jaguar, Puma VJTF or Namer
FnF AGMs are just too good even if theyre gimped
2 Likes
A BMP 2M can spam a Jaguar very very fast and kill it before the Jaguar can even shoot its second/third round, in some situations
I wouldn’t bet on the Jaguar in a short range duel fight. Also, the bmp can easily destroy every modules in the puma or namer’s turret, making them unusable and easily killable. FnF missiles are also useless at short range vs the BMP
But again, those situations most likely happen at short or very short range.
Imo, russian vehicle are just made to push, while nato vehicles are made to defend. And their vehicles are well made to do that
Sure there are situations where a BMP can be better but that hardly means that its better overall
Your claim was, and I quote:
Not a single mention of sight ATGMs, just IFVs and atgms overall.
So it’s truely convenient that you change it to sight atgms as soon as someone pointed out that there are multiple NATO IFVs that can fire on the move.
Imo, Russia should push the points and positions, while NATO nations should defend.
NATO IFVs cannot shoot atgms on the move and have to wait for their launchers to be deployed first → if they push a point, they won’t be able to fight and will die. Russian IFVs can fire atgms on the move and don’t need to deploy launchers.
Russian MBTs have very good armor and tricky weakspots, so they can easily push points in a corner, making a NATO MBT miss its shot, for example. A NATO MBT cannot really push a point, because it has too weak armor to do that.
Russian vehicles are superior to NATO vehicles when they’re pushing a point or a position. NATO vehicles are superior to Russia when they holding a position (for examples over a hill with the unhumanized NATO turrets, TOW-2Bs, fast reverse speed and good gun suppression, …).
But as they are a majority of small maps… Russia has the best chance to quickly cap the points, and once they cap… nothing NATO can do about that, they’re screwed. That’s why Russia most likely loose in very large maps. But as they are more small maps than large maps, Russia wins too much often
Tell that to my F&F ATGM’s thats consistently hitting enemy tanks machine guns.
1 Like
But of course I’m talking about sight ATGMs only lmao
Everybody can notice you can fire FnF missiles on the move, that’s why I was treating the Spikes/MMPs problem in a different part in my list
Btw, I would add something about that : it seems (personnal experience) that if you go very fast in your NATO IFV (75-100km/h), the FnF missile you launch completely misses (it doesn’t correct its trajectory after the launch, it just goes into space or 300 meters behind the target you locked)
So, another problem with NATO IFVs. Can shoot FnF missiles on the move yes, but not at a very fast speed, accuratly
stabilizers generally stop working above 70-75 km/h, so if a Russian IFV were to fire an atgm on the move at such speeds it would likely end similarly.
Well yeah thats kinds of what the doctrines of both sides are, mass assault with cheap armored vehicles vs heavier tanks that sit hull down and pick off enemies with better weapons and FCS.
Id rather have that than needing to keep line of sight on a tank in 11.0+
Or even nothing at all man
Yesterday, there was a 292 behind a hill in maginot line. I had the EBRC Jaguar, locked and fired 2 FnF at it, with commander sight. Both missiles went to space.
I was like “maybe it’s because the commander sight is not very aligned with the launcher”. So I locked and fired a 3rd missile with gunner sight => the missile went into a tree 300 meters behind the target.
The game before, I was in a very long range desert map. I locked and fired a FnF missile at a very far target (maybe 2000 meters), but at like 1000 meters, there was one of its ally that deployed smokes. I think the FnF missile went into the smoke instead of going at the target, 1000 meters behind the said smoke…
They’re like, completely broken lmao
Yes.
You should cover yourself properly before using LOS AGM’s.
F&F has one advantage and one advantage only and that doesn’t work most of the time, still better than nothing I guess.
Id rather have that than needing to keep line of sight on a tank in 11.0+
With certain NATO IFVs, you actually have to “keep line of sight” as well with their FnF missiles, because they have a “flat” launcher which isn’t angled upwards (the ebrc jaguar’s launcher is angled upwards while the Freccia OWS 30’s launcher isn’t for example).
You can’t launch a FnF missile over a hill or a rock with the launchers which aren’t angled upwards, so you basically have to see the ennemy in front of you with your eyes and are as screwed as a russian IFV
In NATO’s case it transcribes to Fire and Fail Assault Gambling Mechanic.
I’d much rather take ATGM that does something (for example overpressure damage) than a bunch of those flying farts.
2 Likes
Getting owned by RU tanks is just that, a skill issue.
1 Like
AP-T isn’t API-T, no HE filler iirc. Only “good” because the SPAA has 4 guns.
Not really, big, loud and easy af to kill (you can mg the missiles)
missiles that need range to pen, if you’re dying to a literal BUS shooting missiles with meh pen from long range than it’s skill issue.
BPA_Jon is one of the best players in the game, and this is a terribly small sample size. Hardly a good representation.
I suggest playing Russian MBTs before commenting further on them.
1 Like
That I agree on, but you stating that I am bad at the game and Abrams not needing a proper armor change is wrong.
1 Like
So many errors in word “hstv-l”