Well the manufacturer seems to think so, but i guess bug report brosky #1 knows better.
Hmm fine
It’s a privilege tho. Most people if they have the money they will choose not to work ever again lol I’ll be traveling 30 times a year and start a TikTok/Douyin to showcase different cultures and local life.
1 Like
Its a bit ridiculous, isnt it? Taking manufacturere brochures from some sources as gospel and then pumping out responses like this.
2 Likes
What?
This is dumb reasoning.
For long rod apfsds, spall is calculated based on residual penetration. This means more residual pen = more spall.
Thanks to this we can easily determine which rounds are the best and which aren’t.
Your argument completely falls flat due to the assumption that Russia only faces NATO and NATO only faces Russia, which isn’t the case.
Thanks to how spall is calculated, we can see that sure, 3BM60 can pen, but any round with more penetration can also pen, while creating more spall.
Which makes the round with more penetration better.
True, but at that point it’s less being unemployed and more just being rich.
I spend about a year being basically unemployed after getting my BSc in middle 2024 and it was awful. Everything just gets boring so quickly.
But you know.
Western is so corrupted and there are so many facturers, that they have to make such a enormous claims, that are most likely made just for propaganda.
And also imagine competition beetween different western countrys military markets , and who gets in there and starts making big bucks. So it is easily seen why that bug report was refused.
Imagine if those claims would not be true, no military would made it puplic , that it cant do this even you sold it to us like that.
PS. There might be lil bit of sarcasm in this post.
I don’t play air like that but I’m almost certain the AESA Euros are among the best if not the best planes right now, no?
i can sort of understand where hes coming from with the tanks russia faces on average they dont have to aim whereas everyone else does
the 122s and 2a7s being an exception
but still not a great argument and i do agree with you more on that front
Honestly good that you added that because i unironically had someone makes these points to me not long ago.
2 Likes
They arguably are better than the SU30SM2, my comment was more aimed at some of the bug report people that seemingly have a problem understanding that sometimes a more expensive piece of equipment made by a more advanced economy could indeed be better and its not a marketing lie.
Top 3 planes are:
- Su-30SM2
- Rafale
- AESA typhoons (Italian being the best)
2 Likes
That is some weird obsession with pen. You should play losat, it got entire 764 mm pen. Or khrizantema with its massive 1200 mm pen.
Similar to my tank shell argument: As long as its ‘good enough’, the missile weighs more than the carrier jet. And R77 is really good. Far better than anemic Aim120, even better than Micas. Russia is on top here.
what?
This still makes no sense
R-77-1 is flat out better than the AIM-120 yeah, but this is nowhere near your tank shell argument
Your tank shell argument is pure copium
3 Likes
When your tank shell has nice base stats, but still fails to penetrate main enemy armor arrays, its simply not as useful as vice verca. Most players just look @ statcards, without considering practical ingame facts. Less pen is better, when main enemies are literally paper…except the top of the line Leopard 2. Everything else is butter to 3bm60, currently. That fact makes 3bm60 the best or lets say most useful ingame shell.
what? No
more penetration is better, due to residual penetration.
You’re making 0 sense
Got it, thanks
Free Pantsir is all anyone needs to say about Russian bias.
The joke that the Pantsir is at the same BR as an ADATS also highlights this.
Pure stupidity from Gaijin.
1 Like
lol