Russian Bias in 2026?

Machinery of War Discussion
2959

Don’t think so, but it is just my opinion.

I also didn’t talk about the fact that due to the low firerate of the bushmaster, all anti air belts of the puma/namer/kf are basically useless (not talking about the proxy HE of the Jaguar and equivalent here), even with IRST on.

The only good thing I can give NATO IFVs credit for are the unhumanized turrets for several of their IFVs. It can help in situations where you only show your turret behind a hill.

But as the BMPT/72 now have the same ability, I don’t think the unhumanized turret ability as an only NATO ability anymore. Also, it kinda looses its strenght as soon as you get hit in the turret, because all your ammunition just disappears (unlike the BMPT, for some reason).

Also, russian IFVs have a low profile instead, and it is ALSO an advantage in some cases. So we can’t really say NATO has an advantage Russia does not have, because it just has the same “”“opposite”“” kind of advantage.

So yeah, to sum up, Russia has again the bias, unfortunetely.

1 Like
2960

barely an advantage since NATO IFVs have an autocannon and a seperate launcher for their ATGMs as well.

BMDs can use their HE and ATGM shells midfight while moving, while NATO IFVs like the Bradley just cannot. It makes a big difference, russian IFVs can literraly shoot both their autocannon and main cannon during a close ranged fight

Again, the bushmaster is slow and unaccurate compared to russian autocannons. So there is that

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.

Bradley is also slow

Some wheeled NATO IFVs are extremely slow offroad. I prefer having wheels than tracks though, so it can be considered an advantage over russian tracked ifvs. But some nato wheeled ifvs are just slower

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)

Talking about sight atgms, not FnFs

And FnF missiles are completely broken as I stated, so there is that

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.

Not all nato ifvs, but the ones have a launcher are of course at a disadvantage, compared to atgm russian ifvs

Bradley, the sweedish one, the 2 british ones and maybe some others (can’t remember), they’re basically the main IFVs used at their respective BRs. They’re important IFVs for NATO

2961

And here comes the goal post moving I was expecting, honestly suprised it took this long.

1 Like
2962

What ?

At their respective BRs, BMDs and BMP-2Ms can shoot on the move, while Bradleys and Strf 9040 BILL just cannot, for example

It gives the advantage to Russia at short/very short, maybe even medium range fights. How is that “goal post moving” lol

1 Like
2963

I see where youre coming from and you might have a point at lower BRs but the top of the line 11.0/11.3 Nato IVFs are 100% better than everything the russians have besides the BMPT

1 Like
2964

Depends. At short/very short range, I rather have a very fast fire rate autocannon, than a bushmaster, or even the cannon of the ebrc jaguar

Very hard to destroy a cannon with a low fire rate autocannon. You need that at short range. Sometimes, you need to destroy vital parts of the ennemy tank very quickly at short range, and it’s better to use a rapid fire rate autocannon than a ebrc jaguar autocannon, for example

Also, when you go very fast and aim at a target far from you, the russian autocannons are very accurate (laser accurate even), so it’s very easy to hit them. With a bushmaster or even ebrc jaguar autocannon, you have to counterbalance your own speed while shooting, take in consideration where you shoot (if you go right and shoot left, gotta counterbalance your speed. If you shoot right and go right, gotta counterbalance it as well. Also, gotta take in consideration the own shell’s speed as well). All that because NATO autocannons are just slower, compared to russian autocannons. Cannot count how many times I instantly killed a target with the VBCI 1 autocannon… while it would have taken me like 4-5 seconds with a bushmaster

Plus, when I fire 4 FnF missiles at 1 singular target, and that 3 of them don’t even hit the target… I rather have a manual atgm, like the russian ones

1 Like
2965

Skill diffed.

2966

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
2967

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
2968

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

2969

Sure there are situations where a BMP can be better but that hardly means that its better overall

2970

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.

2971

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

2972

Tell that to my F&F ATGM’s thats consistently hitting enemy tanks machine guns.

1 Like
2973

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

2974

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.

2975

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+

2976

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

2977

Yes.

2978

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.