I’ve played a plethora of CAS vehicles, i’m just not very good in them.
I’d say in my limited experience Su-30SM is probably the best top tier fixed wing CAS, but its not like NATO CASCraft are bad. Sufa/Gripen/Typhoon are pretty good from my understanding.
As for helis theyre all on relatively equal footing and desperately need to be balanced.
Same goes your way. Self-hyphosis is a thing, you know.
My opinion is not here to satisfy another random saboteur.
We are never going to agree but I will await the day you try other vehicles. I’ll leave this conversation here for now :)
I do not see how I fit this description.
Ignoring multiple bug reports for each vehicle while asking what’s wrong with them must be one hell of a joke.
Stop repeating the same thing over and over again, just because something performs better than others doesn’t mean they are good or portraied as realistic.
Then you’re wasting our time including yourself.
Most of the time we compare ingame vehicles performance to real life counterparts (including Russian ones) to see how accurate they are modelled, game balance comes second during our most theoretical conversations.
Like I said. I do not care for what they could be, rather what they are. And in their current state, they are good. Not much more I want out of them. If they were all realistic, I wouldn’t really care as long as they are balanced.
That’s why I don’t really participate in “realism” threads. I don’t have much knowledge on these machines IRL. For me, I don’t care how they’re modelled as long as they are balanced adequately.
Nothing productive will come out of this so I will just leave it here.
Then why are you participating in the first place?
Its obvious why we’re debating about this and you simply wasted our time.
@UNN_Daedalos and many of us likes to participate in “realism” which is why we constantly compare ingame vehicles to real life counterparts.
Anyway ıt seems we dont need to further this conversation since we look through very different perspectives in this case.
Truly scream:
“I like how things are in the game right now, you guys don’t know balls about META mechanic created by my beloved DEVs”
“oh hey look you have a couple of vehicles on part or somewhat better in your line up, please don’t mind me having the best heli, best CAS (x2), best SPAA (x2), best IFV (x2)”
War thunder is based around the concept of line up, and you guys are still stuck pointing to one vehicle like it’s going to have any impact in the grand scheme of things.
Exactly.
Rather than looking at big picture they stuck their heads on single pixel and kept digging the same thing.
It doesnt matter how good your tank is when single LMUR or KH38MT carrier can effectively destroy your team, its even worse when you try to do the same thing only to get countered by most broken SPAA system with unrealistic performance.
They also deliberately says “oh I dont participate in CAS part” well guess what? CAS is also part of this game and complete line-up is the ultimate factor that decides which nation is better in the end.
There is a reason why Russians holds the best WR’s starting from 10.0 to up to 13.0.
On the ground NATO gear is among the best in game at top tier.
Russian stuff besides the BMPT barely gets close.
Pantsir SM-SV be like:
.
Also this game isn’t about ground vs ground only which is why Russians still holds the best WR at high tiers.
Was making breakfest and realized I forgot that thing.
Thought I could sneak in and edit the message in time but guess not, so I’ll just take the L for forgetting about it.
2 flaws :
“on the ground” ignores SPAAs and IFVs so we are off to a bad start
“NATO” also doesn’t mean anything, that’s not how the match maker works.
I mostly play France : strong points : Rafale for CAP, decent SAM when it decides to work, rest is just “not great, not terrible”
It’s not like i can switch vehicles mid game to have the best armored MBT (Strv 122 or L2A7), best non russian CAS (spice equipped planes), not to mention the lack of equivalent in any tree for BMPT or SM-SV
Renzo be like:
“If i cherry pick an example from 6 different tech trees as a counterexample to 1 i will always be correct”
This cobbling together of NATO into one argument like we dont have a mixed matchmaker is so insanely stupid and just serves as a coping strategy for rubots.
This right there is my favorite.
Like you mentioned they portray as if every game NATO vs Russia while mm throws bunch of nato members right next to Russians and compensate their only weakness.
So NATO is profiting of Russian bias, thats annoying.
Yeah now imagine current NATO winrates if they werent teamed with russia from time to time.
So Abrams and leopard are bad now
Eurofighter? Rafale? F-18A? Early hornets? Golden eagle?
Not to mention countless other NATO equipment
German top tier ground definitely is terrible
Same for USA, France and Italy
