Russian Teams Steamrolling NATO - Top Tier is Broken Again?

[TomsGons]

Top tier is currently is screwed in general, it’s the epitome of about 15 different issues with different ingame features (some implemented for good reasons but never updated and some straight up mismodelled).

Russian (and Chinese) CAS currently seems to benefit from them heavily since they use HE munitions rather HEAT which are much more reliable at killing tanks (since IR guidance on anti-tank munitions is modelled horribly, meaning that munitions which can overpressure are much better, and HEAT overpressures worse than regular HE). Russian top tier tanks themselves are far from being broken when strv122’s and leo2a7’s exist, since they’re slow, have mediocre reloads at best and aren’t too difficult to kill.

Gaijin has to fix a ton of issues to fix top tier, to list a few: aa spam/aa missile spam, cas missile spam, IR guidance on anti-tank munitions, revising overpressure, decompression to 13.0, complete heli balancing and research rework (helis for the most part are either dogwater or quite overpowered with few ones in between, also heli research jumps from ~160k rp to ~360k rp after the second heli in the techtree)

[AlvisWisla]

@UNN_Daedalos

LMUR loadout is reduced from 8 to 4 on Mi28MN

Artificial loadout restrictions should never happen.
Also that would just reduce the Mi-28NM’s BR.

[МИГ-25ПД]

@Nounejm

Damn, bro, I did not know you get touched so much by words, don’t cry, but also, do you really expect a TANK to have 37mm of FRONTAL armor?

All right then, Mr. Smart Man, tell me how much armor it should have. Because of every single damn picture and video and the inside of the tank, I saw that plate was pretty fucking thin. So I don’t know why you want a 38 mm plate to be 700 mm?

@Nounejm

Well duh, I never said there isn’t, so, let me sum it up for you (it looks like you aren’t good at understanding), Why do LMURs get perfect implementation FROM THE RELEASE, while PARS, JAGM, Spike, etc. were implemented like dogshit?

And please tell me, where did you get this idea that the LMUR was implemented properly? Because I can number at least two of the things that LMUR has that we don’t have in War Thunder. And if you think being an asshole will make your argument correct or whatever, it really won’t; it’s just showing how intelligent you are, so please try to be civil.

[Alpharius11348]

you mean real loadout restrictions? there has never been any evidence for LMUR being compatable with the inner pylons

[МИГ-25ПД]

@UNN_Daedalos

LMUR loadout is reduced from 8 to 4 on Mi28MN

Why? I believe that 8 LMURs are not as bad as 16 JAGMs, which not even top tier SAMs can properly fight or shoot down all the munition and the helicopter itself without being overwhelmed by a singular helicopter. It is not of my opinion that LMURs are bad, just that yes they are strong, but there’s only 8 of them, as opposed to 16 of slightly less (but still-) potent missiles.

[tripod2008]

@AlvisWisla

Artificial loadout restrictions should never happen.

They absolutely do. For which many potential precedents can be pointed to;

The Inner wing station’s stores options (not just STD-1760 smart stores ) for the F-16C, -D & I?

F-16C missing inner wing pylon smart weapon carriage

---

See contents of "Table 2.2 " in the following excerpt

Or the Sealed AIM-54C to restore capabilities to the F-14A & -14B’s to reduce loadout restrictions imposed by now needing coolant It’s not like the AIM-54C would prove a Sufficient increase in performance over the -54A to warrant an increase the BR of the F-14A either, only restore capability that was removed, instead of corrected.

Or the Premium Early A-10A’s other pair of “conspicuously” missing Sidewinders for the LAU-105 rails without reason other than it doesn’t get them.

A-10A Thunderbolt II: The ‘Warthog’ Arrives in War Thunder!

---

"“The difference between the aircraft is only in the armament - the early A-10A carries a maximum of two AIM-9L missiles, while the later one is capable of carrying four. AGM-65D missiles are also available for the late version of the A-10A only, while the premium version operates with AGM-65BMaverick missiles.”

[UNN_Daedalos]

inner pylons aren’t compatible, as others pointed out multiple times already

@МИГ-25ПД

Why? I believe that 8 LMURs are not as bad as 16 JAGMs, which not even top tier SAMs can properly fight or shoot down all the munition and the helicopter itself without being overwhelmed by a singular helicopter. It is not of my opinion that LMURs are bad, just that yes they are strong, but there’s only 8 of them, as opposed to 16 of slightly less (but still-) potent missiles.

that would be fixed if multipath and rotor return was modelled anyway

besides, if playing MICA has taught me anything, it’s that when it comes to missiles, quality is usually more important than quantity. Considering how HEAT is modelled compared to SAPHE, and considering the lofting angle, one can still be considered a casino machine while the other is far more reliable at one shoting stuff. I will also remind you that Strv122 and Merkava, formerly immune to this missile, had their roof armored nerfed right after it was introduced. Interesting timing, shall we say.

[AlvisWisla]

Out of those, only A-10A is an example.

F-14 and F-16 were not intentional design decisions. They were implemented with what Gaijin thought was correct information. Later turning out to be incorrect.

Only A-10A was implemented knowing their implementation was incorrect.

@Alpharius11348
Photographs have been provided multiple times.
And unless proven otherwise, photographs are a source.

Stop applying double standards and choose consistent rules for evidence instead.
Either oppose all photographs or accept all photographs, stop cherry picking.

@UNN_Daedalos

inner pylons aren’t compatible, as others pointed out multiple times already

Conjecture is not evidence.
No one has supplied an Mi-28NM manual because doing so is a rule violation.

Photographs are evidence, official documentation is evidence.

After all, the primary reason why F-111C and F-111F have access to 6x AIM-9Ls in-game is not because they’re listed in the manual, but because there are photographs of those missiles on the relevant store positions.

So yeah, if photographic evidence isn’t valid to you as a rule, just say so.
That way I don’t have to point out hypocrisy in posts and instead just dismiss the posts that claim photographic evidence isn’t a valid source material.

Or concede that photographic evidence is a valid source material.

Cause y’all aren’t attacking Mi-28NM. Mi-28NM going to 4 LMURs will only drop its BR [not my opinion].
Y’all are attacking F-15C GE’s MRMLs, BOL pods on various aircraft, PGMs on some aircraft, etc. Aircraft that have weapon systems primarily because photographic evidence exists.

Stop loving photographic evidence when it fits your biases, and love it as a concept in general.

[Alpharius11348]

@AlvisWisla

Photographs have been provided multiple times.
And unless proven otherwise, photographs are a source.

they have not
there havent been any real photographs of Mi28 with LMUR on the inner pylons

[luque13]

We dont balance payloads, so while you think JAGM is better for SAMS (It’s not, you need 2-3 to destroy most vehicles)

The fact remains we are yet to see any evidence Mi-28 can carry 8 LMURS.

[racimazzedine]

Lmur or ah64. Both are op and need huge nerf.

Reduction of number of lmur you need to expect down br too

[IHаteCAS]

@luque13

We dont balance payloads, so while you think JAGM is better for SAMS (It’s not, you need 2-3 to destroy most vehicles)

It is better though? The sheer amount of 179s a 64E can shoot off make it impossible for any SPAA to intercept all of them. Most of the time, 179 1-taps SPAA too.

[racimazzedine]

oh man i gotta love having 16x F&F missile, let me launch 70 missile in one game please and put 10 missile in one sam so he lose all his ammo and be useless piece of …

[luque13]

And so for the cost of your Heli spawn you bullied a single SAM…

[IHаteCAS]

He actually got 18 kills with those, its a video from an older reddit post :)

[ゴトランド]

That sound like you issue bro </3

[racimazzedine]

Its was a video from a guy where he told that the heli launched 70 missiles and got 19 kills and a nuke .

You cant do it with a lmur. Nerfing mi28nm will also nerf other heli with reduction from 16 to 8 missile .

No double standar here

[AlvisWisla]

Adding rotor wash to radar simulation would fix practically everything in regards to helicopter lethality.

[racimazzedine]

This and making the sp cost from 500 to 900 or even 1k.

Best solution is for gaijin to implement sp cost on each number of missiles.

Taking 1 fnf and 6 fnf missile should not cost the same

[Nounejm]

@МИГ-25ПД

All right then, Mr. Smart Man, tell me how much armor it should have. Because of every single damn picture and video and the inside of the tank, I saw that plate was pretty fucking thin. So I don’t know why you want a 38 mm plate to be 700 mm?

Let’s not go crazy with numbers. You can look at Community Bug Reporting System for so many bug reports, I’m too lazy to search through them.

You also forgot to answer my second question but, ok.

@МИГ-25ПД

And please tell me, where did you get this idea that the LMUR was implemented properly? Because I can number at least two of the things that LMUR has that we don’t have in War Thunder.

At least 2? I can name 50 about each NATO F&F missile. You also forgot to answer this second question too!

@МИГ-25ПД

And if you think being an asshole will make your argument correct or whatever, it really won’t; it’s just showing how intelligent you are, so please try to be civil.

I’m not saying it will make them magicly true, but, I feel like I’m talking to a brick wall with a Hammer and sickle painted on it.

@racimazzedine

oh man i gotta love having 16x F&F missile, let me launch 70 missile in one game please and put 10 missile in one sam so he lose all his ammo and be useless piece of shit

Would you be so kind to give me the Missile Shot / Kill ratio?

I counted 74 missiles shot.