SAMs are too OP

Machinery of War Discussion
,
1
Do you agree that SAMs are OP?
  • Yes
  • No
  • At certain B.Rs
0 voters

Intro:

Does anyone else feel like SAMs completely ruin the experience of playing CAS?

I can barely stay in the air for a minute in something like the Su-7 before half the enemy team is spamming missiles at me. In one match, I spawned in a MiG-29 and literally two seconds after spawning an Osa was already on its way toward me. Just today I was flying a MiG-29 and got shot down by an IRIS-T less than a minute after taking off from my base…and I was hugging the trees. Maybe it’s just me, but I find this absolutely ridiculous.

Of course, some of you will immediately start screeching, “Use BR-appropriate weapons.” First off, can someone please point out where I’m supposed to find stand-off weapons on an Su-7 or a MiG-21?

Second, even if I’m flying something like an Su-24 or MiG-27 that does have stand-off options, why make it such a headache to use dumb bombs or unguided rockets? What if I want to try out the new gun pods on the Su-24 in ground RB? “Well, don’t use those.” Okay, then why were they added at all? Why give fighter jets ground-attack options if the only outcome is being instantly missile-spammed the moment you try to use them?

image

I’m not sure how it applies to other nations, but for Soviet jets, the most commonly used weapons, both historically and realistically, were dumb bombs and unguided rockets.

My solutions:

Proposal 1: Disable user (mouse) correction on applicable missile launchers. Guidance and target solutions should be computed autonomously by the system, via optical or radar tracking, mirroring real-world operation and preventing player intervention.

Proposal 2: Reduce the G-pull and overall effectiveness of certain missiles, as many currently perform in ways that are exaggerated and unrealistic. Historically, during both Vietnam and the Yom Kippur War, missile launchers were notoriously inefficient. If systems like the Pantsir or Osa were truly as effective as they are represented in-game, we wouldn’t be seeing so much drone footage of their destruction in conflicts such as Syria, Libya, and Karabakh etc.

Proposal 3: Place restrictions on the number of anti-air units that can spawn simultaneously. This would help prevent matches from being oversaturated with SAMs and create a more balanced environment for both air and ground players.

Proposal 4: Add proper SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) capabilities to jets historically equipped for the role, and implement ECM (Electronic Countermeasure) options where applicable. These systems would reduce missile lock and tracking efficiency, offering a more realistic and balanced counter to advanced SAMs.

Do you agree with these solutions?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Maybe
0 voters

I said what I have to say, now have at it.

3

hmm i wonder who you might be refering to.

4

Hello

5

6

The only BR where this is an imbalance is top tier and only really because the strongest of the SAMs should be 13.0 (Pantisr and IRIS-T SLM) and not 12.0 and the rest somewhere between 12.0 and 12.7.

Below top tier. its fine. Sure, certainly some buffs here or there for CAS I want, but also a few buffs I want for SPAA. So overall its fairly even

There is also a distinct lack of necessary equipment. So I would agree with proposal 4. But Propsoal 1-3 are totally unnecessary

1 Like
7

The only OP SAM is the IRIST. Very deadly german SAM

8

I mentioned this in our previous convo that was most likely a reason for you to make this post.

If you want to play your aircrafts with historical loadouts, more power to you.

but this is a game first and foremost.

if you dont want to use BR-appropriate loadouts, thats up to you, but you cant force this point of view on other players.

9

Polls are there for a reason.

For a game that claims to be “realistic” and “historically accurate,” none of this really seems to support that. But fine, agree to disagree.

The only reason I even jumped into this argument is because, as a player, it’s genuinely frustrating. I make one pass in an Su-7, glance back, and suddenly I’ve got two missiles and a Gepard coming after me.

I honestly don’t know what sparked the whole “CAS is a problem” thing, because I’ve personally never experienced it that way. Maybe I’m an anomaly, but again, agree to disagree.

10

If this game was truely realistic and historically accurate to the most accurate degree, half the Soviet and German tanks would break down and have lacking armour. There’d be Era-based matchmaking/BRs, etc. The vehicles are realistic and historically accurate. Everything else is just a game.

11

fair enough.

If you ever respawned instead of uninstalling the game after you got destroyed, you are not hardcore realism player anyway :P unless we IRL get instant reincarnation that im not aware of.

I feel you would need to present more data for us to pass any judgemnent. What missiles? Stingers? These arent exactly hard to defeat. Gepard? like using its guns? He needs LoS to do that. So why does he have LoS after your CAS run?

12

Certain BRs its blatantly obvious, the Kh-38MT/MLs are the biggest offender. The Yak-9s are overpowered, some jets straight up outrange early AAs. At most BRs, its not a big problem, just a bit annoying.

13

I agree that in the Su-7 it’s somewhat manageable. But the higher you go, the more ridiculous it becomes.

As I mentioned, I genuinely tried to do CAS with the MiG-29, I really did, but my survival rate was worse than in the Su-7. Most of the time I can barely take out a single target before getting swarmed. Maybe it’s a skill issue, but still…

14

Could be a skissue. Though I’ve found super close bombing runs to be super good at top tier, as the missiles are unable to get a lock and then track since you’re barely in their view.

15

The 12.7 one?

16

Ye, the first one. My MiG-27 CAS was ok sometime ago, but still difficult.

17

In my opinion, realism in this game is a spectrum, one that can be adjusted either in the right direction or the wrong direction.

18

Pantsir needs to remain 12.0 or all CAS moves up with it.
It’s chronically average against 12.0 CAS, especially F-111s at 11.7.
ADATS should be ~11.3.

SLM should move up to 12.3 and if it’s still memeing on 11.3 CAS played by the best CAS players then it can move up to 12.7.
Until then, it can stay where it is.

19

Every new spaa is bad against CAS except the SLM

20

Im kinda lost as to where to even begin.

The “it was historical” argument kinda falls flat due to several reasons.

As I mentioned previously, this is a game, its balanced around being a game. Even if you insist that the most pure realism must be aimed for, as long as you respawned, even once, after getting destroyed, you already broke that realism. You dont get to reincarnate IRL.

If you climbed the TT from rank 1 to rank 8, you already broke the realism. The sovier reserve bi-plane, I-15WR, was introduced in 1934 if wiki is to be believed. MiG-29 was introduced into service in 1983-ish. Thats almost 50 years. If you were at age where you were fit for service as pilot of I-15WR, you wouldnt be at age to be fit for service as pilot of MiG-29.

If you switched from tank to plane in single battle, you already broke the realism. You dont get to swtich your service branch and training from tanker to pilot in span of single battle.

If you ever hopped into new vehicle without spending several weeks, if not months, training for it in training centre, you already broke the realism.

Clearly, this is a game first and foremost, and extreme realism you strive for wouldnt make sense.

So only remaining argument is game balance.

21

Just tested CLAWS with my friend guess what happened guys? 120C7 got defeated by 1 chaff xD!!1!!!1