osa isn’t even close to toptier
Britain has alternatives, quite a few vehicles never added such as the warrior VERDI-2 but there are many
Read through this thread for suggestions by others
At top tier you always have things like the Supacat HVM that fires ASRAAM
4 Likes
are you really that pissed off that there aren’t enough vehicles on which you can just sit on the respawn?
2 Likes
all the “muh different military doctrine” people in discussions like this annoy me so much. There is plenty of SPAA vehicles and experimentals which can fill the gaps in nations. But no we get another Shilka to fill a gap which doesn’t exist for the USSR, I’m all for more vehicles of all nations being in the game but its unfair that many nation mains cant play certain vehicle types in their lineups unless its extremely under the BR they are playing, id have to play the skink up until 8.0 and the US has to play the M42 until 7.7 its insanity.
The difference in choice for SPAA may be the best argument for russian bias to be honest. Not bias in vehicle modelling but in bias to get a vehicle type nobody else really gets so they have monopoly
4 Likes
Additionally, it is quite hard to use at lower BRs, while also being incredibly easy for planes to kill.
4M4: Has missiles and search radar at 9.3
Machbet: Has much worse missiles (due to Gaijin adding a “pre-targetting” or whatever feature to the 4M4) and search radar at 9.3
M163: Has a search radar, no missiles, not at 9.3.
Gepard 1A2: Has missiles and search radar but the missiles are much, much worse due to the “pre-targeting” stuff on the 4M4, at 9.7
The M163 has a search radar and sits at 7.7, and the 4M2 doesn’t have a search radar and will be lower than 7.7. They could’ve added any 7.0-7.3 SPAA to the US and it would’ve helped fix the massive 3.7 BR gap in their SPAA line, but no the USSR needed to fill a 0.0-0.7 BR gap.
4M2 doesn’t have a search radar, nor will it be higher than the normal Shilka in BR.
Would it not be around 10.7?
Are you mad that people want nations to have access to viable SPAA?
Exactly, which is why I put the “(Serious Question)” in the title since it only really makes sense for Gaijin to ignore these nations so much if they are basing the lack of SPAA off of doctrine, and I hoped there might be a quote or something about it.
3 Likes
id love to see a tracked rapier or another self propelled rapier system in the game as I spent my childhood going to Firepower museum in London (which has since closed because a building corporation strangled them out) and I always loved the thing. I even got to traverse a rapier system one armed forces day at the Royal Artillery barracks when they were still mostly based at Woolwich arsenal
2 Likes
Yeah, it’s such an iconic vehicle, it’s a real shame it’s not been added as of yet. And whilst limited in performance. I think it would be a valuable addition to our TT as a whole. Augmenting the Stormer and ADATS at top tier
1 Like
lolwat? No it doesn’t. Iglas are inferior to Stingers even in Stinger’s incorrect state [as of the date of this post].
The 4M2 also isn’t 9.3, what’s your point?
4M4 doesn’t have “pretargeting” on its Iglas.
Falcon, WZ305, Wiesel with worse gun…
2 Likes
falcon is tank destroyer, while wz has he-vt.
1 Like
He means TVC on launch.
1 Like
It’s just the standard Russian Bias that Gaijin likes to do. Not surprising yet infuriating all the same.
1 Like
Russian bias does not exist, there is only bias towards $$$.
1 Like
That argument doesn’t work here, especially not in regards to a TT vehicle.
1 Like
I forgot what it was called, but it essentially instantly hits the correct launch angle right off the rail. It makes even the 10G Iglas better than the higher-G MANPADs.
You were talking about the 4M4 here, and the M163 is way off of 9.3.
4M2: Will be 7.0-7.3, and not higher than 7.7
Falcon: 8.3
WZ305: 8.0
Wiesel: This at least is somewhat comparable.
Ah, just a troll.
3 Likes
Gaps in SPAA leave nations with severe vulnerabilities that are not felt evenly for every nation. It is not unreasonable to want them to be filled and whilst they are a lower priority to some other forms of vehicles, what are added should be for nations with said gaps first and foremost and then unneeded fillers added second. Such as this new soviet SPAA.
That being said. It should be well within gaijins ability to fill every hole with something (at least partially) easily within a year and yet several have remained for several years.
It is not, it is an SPAA first and foremost. It’s ability to take out tanks is entirely coincidental. It would be like calling a medium tank an SPAA because it has a 50cal on the roof and manages to kill a prop.
6 Likes
they were really damn good for an early ground-to-air missile and deserve representation in game
yeah, apds belt is coincidental. same goes for gepard, gepard with stingers, itpsv 90, chieftain marksman, za-35, type 87, pgz-09, zsu-57-2, leopard 40/70 and others.
analogy is not a proof.
at least because destroying tanks is main thing of falcon.
Yeah, I’d guess they’d sit about 11.0 in game. A little lower than the ADATS as it has a more limited radar capability (though I struggle to understand why the ADATS is 11.7) but higher than the Stormer as it has radar and slightly better range, along with a prox fuse (I assume)
2 Likes
Well you see it sits at the end of the tree therfore its 11.7 regardless of capability. Even know a 11.7 pantsir exist.
Just Gaijin things.
4 Likes