“Russian teams steamrolling nato at top tier”
3 Likes
Afaik su30 arms can lock wide array of bands (all actual threats). Just 2 arm and 4 kh29/kh38 is optimal loadout. But I guess using brain and spending 10-15 mins on browsing radar bands and building good loadout for each enemy country combination is too much for average player.
1 Like
there will be less issues if they do it like arcade, make it a mirror match.
why can’t we make the same arguement with the…
…why we accept one, but not the other… again you make the same thing you blame Gaijin for.
All of those “rules and standards” are bend countless times in the past dacade.
1 Like
Because there is no source that the mi28nm can carry more than 4 LMURs? That’s the entire argument. If anyone brought up a source showing that the 28NM can carry LMURs on the relevant pylons or that LMURs are backwards compatible like the JAGMs then there wouldn’t be an issue.
Not really. Besides the evident ww2 fakes Gaijin has been quite consistent when it comes to technical compatibility and the standards for general additions.
The “source” for only 4 LMUR
The “source” for the 8 LMUR
I put both in quotes, becouse to me they’re both equaly unofficial (not a primary source as they ask in the bug reports).
They are unofficial which is why the actual source for the 4 is the loadout chart. Russian Teams Steamrolling NATO - Top Tier is Broken Again? - #6351 by Saprano_2132
And all the photo and video evidence that only shows the LMUR launchers on the outer wing pylons but never on the inner wing ones.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/HhQ4oXQHCAY7
Thats pretty much the main gripe, there simply is no evidence whatsoever that it can carry LMURs on the inside pylon.
Don’t think so.
You’re asking for documentation about, for example, 8 LMURs but are perfectly fine with export 64Es having LDIRCM while it’s proven they don’t have any.
What do you mean “dont think so” I literally explained to you the 2 types of problems non technical artificial nerfs create compared to buffs based on technical compatibility.
Because theres documentation proving that 64Es can mount LDIRCM emitters but none that the MI28NM can mount more than 4 LMURs? The export 64Es are not special variants which is precisely the point of technical compatibility.
And that matters because ?
Both are getting stuff they don’t have at the end of the day.
One is a buff based on rules that Gaijin uses consistently over the entire game and every tech tree and the other is a buff that goes directly against the rules we have. More importantly: 64Es getting LDIRCM via technical compatibility has a framework that limits what Gaijin can do. The MI28NM getting 8 LMURs doesnt. If the Mi28NM gets additional LMURs without source then where is the limit? Can Eurofighters now get 3 double AMRAAM launchers on every wing just because? Can we give the F15GE the 20 GBU 53 loadout from the F15E? Can we give the Ah129D 16 Spikes because it would be less unfair?
Both things end up the same, artificially buffing a certain vehicles. Having “rules” doesn’t change any of that.
The limited framework being buffing up barebones export vehicles to the full spec just because.
Export 64Es don’t have LDIRCM and most likely JAGMs, but they’re given that so they can compete at top tier.
You’re still limited with pylons and mounts, which is why we have 8 and not 16/24/32 LMURs.
Sure ?
It’s the same thing at the end of the day.
One gets more Spikes it doesn’t have, while the other gets LDIRCM and missiles it doesn’t have.
1 Like
why do you at all think that is going to counter my point? if I don’t like it being on russia why would I think its ok on the thai plane? Hell I’ll do you one better I think they should stop adding thai vehicles to japan and fix the Japanese vehicles.
They end up the same if youre just looking at gameplay impact but for the love of god try to have a bit of horizon once in your life.
Not just because. Theyre getting it, because they can use it irl. Just like every prototype and not in service vehicle we have gets weapons and equipment it can use.
See my Eurofighter and F15 example. Theyre limited by pylons as well but would it make sense? No.
You cant possibly be this oblivious after an exchange this long. One has objective verifiable hard evidence limited by real life capabilities and sources and the other one doesnt have any of this and is completely made up. They arent the same for the reasons i tried to explain to you multiple times now but if youre incapable of looking beyond your limited scope about gameplay impact then maybe you shoud go play WoT.
Point is to show that there is no national bias when it comes to making stuff up. Only money bias. Hence why f5c keeps its 9e, flares, ir signature and str.
What’s there left to look at ?
Realism aspect is long gone, so don’t try to pull that card out.
But they shouldn’t be able to use them as they don’t have them. it’s like Arietes using DM53.
They got pampered with artificial buffs for balance and that’s fine.
I have very limited knowledge of those, but if they’re limited by pylons and mounts as well then that’s not a problem.
You see, another rule was created with limiting factors.
Nah, you’re just obsessed with that single Gaijin rule to the point of you believing all those changes are fine.
Yes, there’s objective verifiable hard evidence export 64Es didn’t ship with LDIRCM, but they still use it in the game. Not to mention JAGMs not being procured.
I know I’d surely take 129D with 16 Spikes than Dutch 64E with fake systems and missiles.
Until you show me a Dutch 64E carrying JAGMs with LDIRCM, it’s completely made up.
Yes they are but you’re just too invested in this RU hate thing to ever accept it.
Yes, have fun driving around in a Dutch helicopter with capabilities not even real life Dutch army pilots have access to lmao.
I guess realism is the problem until it isn’t.
Yeah okay dude ive tried long enough to hammer in that there are big differences between buffs based on technical compatibility and buffs that are completely made up Russian Bias in 2026? - #6932 by H_ngma here. But youre either simply not capable or too stubborn to get that and instead still hammer on your purely gameplay impact based view.
I literally explained how theyre not the same and i even told you that russia getting the buffs is not the problem, its the type of buff and the problems they create outside of gameplay impact.
One is grounded in real, objective sources and real life capabilities, the other one is completely devoid of any realism whatsoever. There is a very clear difference in terms of realism between the 2 but i guess if 20 comments werent enough to explain that point to you then one more wont do either.
Oh and there actually isnt btw. We only know that they either ordered new 64Es or are upgrading their fleet to E standard. We know borderline nothing about the actual details and equipment they were shipped with.
2 Likes
There is though? You think making one point just completely makes all the other points invalid. Especially when the point you are currently referring is a bit more of an example in my favor. The Russian kh-38MT slingers were introduced to the game in a point and time in which nobody had the ability to solidly counter them with only the pantsir being able to somewhat stop them (even the otomatic couldnt counter the munitions because both the tracking on the munition and the ability of the VT round to actually det off the round was broken)
They then added more powerful variants of jets that got equipped with even larger amounts of the missiles while also denying other countries munitions of equivalency, it took quite a while before we got vehicles for the majority of countries that could even start to counter these munitions(many of which still struggle with this today excluding russia of course)
Meanwhile the Thai su-30 wasn’t added until there was good spaa coverage and even then the only reason we got the missiles was because the community threw a fit over it and called gajin out on the statement they had made about “vehicles getting things because they are technically capable with it and not whether or not they had it”. Which is personally to me a poor standard to have.
But overall gajin didn’t just give Japan a jet with these missiles the community had to make a massive fight over it and this jet and the munitions it was given was only considered after the game had the correct things in place to somewhat challenge it, unlike the russian additions of it. But once again none of these jets should have the weapon as it isnt fun for gameplay and can’t really even be proven to exist.
Example of bad balancing which somewhat got solved over time with new aa and jet fighters as well. If you bring up past, lets also look bit further in past, when 5 bullpups on fury were erasing anything and nobody besides usa had smth like that.
Yes and currently both su30s are in this condition which means devs didnt leave it as-is because of bias towards one nation. Oh also japs got su30 with kh38mt while soviets still cant get any good tank with gun depression, reverse and reload speeds.
Was it? I only remember gaijin throwing it in suddenly and massive soviet cope on forums and under dev streams.
Kh29 has loal this patch no? Kh38mt has reason to exist anymore