Huh?
I was flying with phantoms against MLD’s in my both F-14B and F-15A during first days, let alone flying with 12.3.
I got bored on first two day so I stopped playing it, unless they changed the event mm after I stopped playing even 13.0 Tomcat was fighting against MLD.
they added 2 different brackets few days after the event started
one bracket was low tier → 11.7
second bracket was 12.3 → 13.0
12.0 planes could go to any bracket in matchmaking
That make sense cause on first couple days it was slaughter for Russia side.
Tomcats and Eagles were dominating the entire lobby, fighting agasint hopeless 11.7
Feel like the MiG-19 is a little slept on honestly, it has an insane energy retention and guns that obliterate the enemy plane in one hit. It’s honestly such a beast except in the full uptier.
Russian bias is a massive issue,
They have the best:
IFV’s
Light tanks
Mbt’s
Helis
CAS
Anti air…
This is just insane and it make alot of the tier unplayable.
Their MBT’s are not the best despite artificial buffs.
As for other claims I agree.
Their armor and even when penned their survival is the best ingame with ammoracks and fuel tanks acting as armor, their gun and gun breach seems to have more “HP” as well.
And survivalbility is everything in warthunder since all game modes forces melee to capture point, and it is insane that you can take a hit see the enemy aim and kill.
Also their 50 cals are very good.
Maybe this is artificiell but it affects game balance and makes them dominate.
Faster in both acceleration and top speed, better? radar.
The downside is half the countermeasures which forces it to be BVR focused.
On another note.
Reading about dogfight capabilities of aircraft for 1v1s was funny to read.
So many posts claiming inferiority is meta.
I’m not a meta chaser, but I am playing 2 of the 3 meta nations at 12.7 this year: USA and Germany. Sweden I don’t have.
IFV’s - Sweden, Italy.
Light tanks - USA, Sweden, China. USSR’s “best” light tank is the Sprut-M which isn’t even top 5.
Mbt’s - USA, Germany, Sweden. China as honorable mention, its MBT lineup is better than Japan and USSR’s.
Helis - USA, Britain, Japan, USSR, China, France.
CAS - Japan, USA, USSR, and France. Add in the heli nations not present as well. Israel as honorable mention due to their planes being as good as the 4 listed, but lacking a good heli for 12.7.
Anti air… - All? Tech trees. No one’s getting consistent frag streaks in Su-30MKM, F-15E/I, etc when SPAA is up.
The Su-30SM has better missiles, a better missile loadout and more countermeasures.
The J-15T has better speed/acceleration, MAW and a longer range HMD.
seems like at best a sidegrade, meaning the J-15T should move down to 14.3 or the Su-30SM/MKM should move up to 14.7 (although I would personally prefer the former option). The J-15T is just another perfect example of Gaijin being disconnected from their game sometimes.
Depends, if you count the BMPT as an IFV then yes.
Nah that one goes to Italy or sweden
Also no, they are a solid 3.8, not great, not terrible.
The MI28NM does have a 0.01 lower KD than the Z10 but higher KpS and more games than all other LDIRCM helis combined so yeah probably true
Cant win against fiction so yeah
Thanks to Gaijin immediately pampering the russia players when one part of the lineup is among the worst ones
I voted
12.7 NATO “giving up” by feeding VBCI kills lol.
I thought 38MT/LMUR slingers would steal all of it in pair with BMPTs.
They did, that’s why Russia capped all the points and pushed both their spawns 2m35sec after the beginning of the game
They were just kills of opportunity, massive spawnkills I should add
NATO side, I rarely see NATO nations spawnkill Russia side at top top tier. And it’s even less likely to spawnkill them 3min after the game begins. Only Russia can do that at top top tier
Depends, if you count the BMPT as an IFV then yes.
- IFVs : russians have IFVs with much higher fire rate, laser accuracy, 2 cannons (1 main for HE/ATGMs, 1 autocannon), much faster than some wheeled NATO IFVs. NATO IFVs in comparaison ? Bushmaster, completely garbage.
AND
- Russian IFVs can launch their ATGMs on the move, while NATO IFVs cannot, for some reason. Also, NATO IFVs need to deploy the ATGM launchers, which takes a very long time ;
AND
BMPT doesn’t loose all its ammunition when its belts are destroyed, while NATO IFVs do, for some reason
= Russia has, again, the bias in the IFV department as well
I agree on the BMPT part but were talking about strictly best IFV not best per BR. The inability to fire on the move goes away on NATO IFVs as soon as youre getting FnF AGMs which russia also doesnt even have so excluding the BMPT Nato for sure has better IFVs, gimped to hell but still better.
The inability to fire on the move goes away on NATO IFVs as soon as youre getting FnF AGMs which russia also doesnt even have
Ok so of course I forgot about that part, which is one of the most important, so I’m gonna comment about the Spikes/MMPs as well :
- Spikes/MMPs are broken (gotta love hitting commander MG 2 times in a row, a cannon then 6 ERAs eating the ATGM) ;
A little story about that : as a french main, I’m used to FnF missiles for ground IFVs. Yesterday, I registered 5 launches when the FnF missiles just went into space/300 meter behinds the actual target. FnF missiles do not only hit non vital parts on a tank, they also, sometimes, completely miss the target (for some reason). A complete useless tool for NATO IFVs.
Also, BMDs and BMPs can easily be brought to top top tier, so the BRs where they’re used is not very important. I still think they have the best IFVs
Of course you do, you will always think that regardless if it’s true or not.
I just exposed several objectives argument in that mater :
- IFVs : russians have IFVs with much higher fire rate, laser accuracy, 2 cannons (1 main for HE/ATGMs, 1 autocannon), much faster than some wheeled NATO IFVs. NATO IFVs in comparaison ? Bushmaster, completely garbage.
- Russian IFVs can launch their ATGMs on the move, while NATO IFVs cannot, for some reason. Also, NATO IFVs need to deploy the ATGM launchers, which takes a very long time ;
BMPT doesn’t loose all its ammunition when its belts are destroyed, while NATO IFVs do, for some reason
- Spikes/MMPs are broken (gotta love hitting commander MG 2 times in a row, a cannon then 6 ERAs eating the ATGM) ;
I do not invent all these things. I would like the Spikes not to be broken / the bushmaster to fire quicker, be more precise than russian autocannons for example. But it is just not the case
There is objectively a russian bias in the IFV department, as well (unless I’m lying about all these facts ?)
I know that Spikes/MMPs and autocannon accuracy are broken but the respective vehicles carrying them are still better than russian IFVs carrying line of sight AGMs and even the 2S38 clearly loses against the Jaguar/Puma VFJ/Namer
The BMPT is the exception to that.
Lying, maybe not. However overexagerating definitely.
barely an advantage since NATO IFVs have an autocannon and a seperate launcher for their ATGMs as well.
Besides the BMD-4 Russian IFVs are pretty in line with the average nato IFV. It’s mainly just the Namers bringing the average down on the NATO side, for obvious reasons.
F&F missiles can be fired on the move.
(hot take but I prefer F&F ATGMs over the Russian ATGMs most of the time, but that might be because I’m biased against ATGMs overall)
between 2-5 NATO IFVs (I could be slightly off, but this is from memory) need to deploy their launchers, so how did you turn this into a disadvantage for all NATO IFVs overall.