Your argument about the ‘free Pantsir’ stealing kills makes no sense. The Buk’s missile is actually 200m/s faster than the Pantsir’s. If the Buk were truly effective, it would be the one reaching the target first and ‘stealing’ the kills from the Pantsir, not the other way around
SP cost is a teammate’s excuse for failure, not a metric of a vehicle’s effectiveness. We are talking about hardware efficiency, not team economy. If you need 3 Buks to kill 1 plane, that system is statistically inferior to a SAMP/T that maintains a positive K/D against the same (or better) targets. Also, if you claim most deaths are from ground vehicles, that applies to BOTH the Buk and the SAMP/T. If the SAMP/T still has a significantly higher median K/D despite facing the same ground threats, it proves the system is more survivable or more capable of clearing the airspace before it gets pushed. Data doesn’t lie—the SAMP/T performs better in the actual combat environment.
Comparing clone statistics and comparing different AA systems are DIFFERENT STATISTICAL TOPICS. You are mixing them up to avoid the facts.
Again: the efficiency of clones is about finding a median. The efficiency of unique AA systems is about hardware performance. These are DIFFERENT TOPICS.
True. I almost never saw French or Italian players placing 2 launchers next to their TADS and die from a single missile, or first spawning their spaa to die from a flanking tank.
At the same time the lobomtomized Russian (and German) players are regurarly doing this.
But ofc the BUK is not effective enough. Their players are so bad that I consider the BUK among the easier targets when I play cas.
people are also ignoring that the BUK is by far the best ARH AA against LDIRCM helicopters, because the launcher radar gives datalink updates often enough for it to still hit them if they dont break line of sight from the launchers
Pretty much an illustration. Yea some people do know what notch is, sure. But the majority doesn’t.
A missile with insane speed that is very hard to multipath, that’s what it is.
It’s far from being the worst multi-vehicle SAM. Things that are worse than it:
1)CLAWS
2)NASAMS 3
3)TYPE 03
4)Tan-SAM Kai
5)HQ-11(pretty much on par, and not multi-vehicle, but worse because well, less missiles and no tracking radar and worse missiles.
6)SPYDER
Nope. Alone the fact that the new one has a AESA Radar makes it much better. And dont forget the Missiles that are much faster,…AHEAD Rounds,…Tracked Chassis,…
I’m really tired from stat card enjoyers. If max speed higher it doesn’t mean missile is faster in any case. Don’t use stat card. It’s useless in current state.
The number of air targets is limited. The free spaa does some kills anyway, and the regular spaa get fewer targets.
It was about spaa in general. And you can’t ignore the cost of the spaa and plane when you talk about spaa vs heli/plane efficiency.
I never stated anywhere that BUK is better than SAMP/T.
The Buks search radar turns way too slow. By the time it gets a full revolution in, the Pantsirs have scanned the sky like a dozen times, effectively reducing engagment times.
By the time the Buk realizes something is there, the Pansirs have already engaged it.
So issue with the BUK is it has more lives, so the KD metric does not work.
BUKs can still fight on without the TADS system BUK needs 3 units destroyed for it to be dead in game.
That means comparatively the BUK will need more than 3 kills per spawn to not have a negative KD
IRIS-T dies when the TADS die and that counts as one death. Because of this CAS players and Heli players will target the TADS to kill the system outright. You cannot do this with BUK.
Gaijins flawed stat gathering is why the BUK looks poor.
and even then its scan rate is about the same as the CLAWS/NASAMS and they have a much weaker radar that is much less likely to detect a target when its scanned
and the BUK can mitigate its bad search radar though proper use of the launcher radars, which also give it very good datalink update rates making it more difficult to evade than other ARH AAs
