Someone please explain to me, why Russia doesn't get their own SPAA? The Tor M1?

Machinery of War Discussion
9

2S6 does not belong at 11.7, it’s inferior to TOR-M1 and ADATS, and ADATS is arguably over-BR’d.

6 Likes
10

But USA has F-16 your whole analogy its wrong.

3 Likes
11

To be fair, it should go to both. Just as the F16s ended up spread amongst a host of users.

It doesn’t seem all that flash, but it seems like fun, so I’d rather it be in the Ruski tree than the Chinese tree, as I’ve no interest in Chinese kit to get a Russian piece of kit. More ways to smite my fellow CAS players is always nice.

1 Like
12

2S6 is not 11.7 material, its 11.3 at highest.
It should be 11.0.

1 Like
13

Does Russia need it? No. Can Gaijin be bothered? Maybe, if there is enough of a cry considering it is just a C+V. Why would u want it? IDK.

14

In addressing why China has the Tor it is not wrong. In addressing the full post it is.

15

The question OP its doing its why there is no Tor on Russia TT. Your whole analogy its terrible. Everyone know that China use it. But its also in active service on Russia. There is no reason for it not to be in the Russia TT. Russia already having a good AA system its also a terrible take. Its up to player what they want to use.

Why USA got F-15 if they already have F-16C?. The latest its already good enough right?.. At that level its your analogy.

16

You clearly don’t understand the point.

I answered this question. Not the whole post.

The Chinese TT needed the Tor and the Chinese operated it, that’s why it’s in the TT.

1 Like
17

Depends how you see it. But I disagree that the 2S6 should be the same BR as ADATS.

2S6

Pros

  • tracking radar
  • can identify and intercept agms/bombs
  • can deal with short range threats
  • smokeless motor
  • irst

Cons

  • mediocre missile
  • inconsistent at medium ranges
  • inconsistent at longer ranges

TOR

This is where I completely disagree with you. The TOR-M1 is by far the easiest spaa to counter. You can put this vehicle at 4.0 and it’ll still suck

The HQ17 is a different story, it’s quite deadly.

Pros

  • slightly longer range missile
  • tracking radar
  • can identify and intercept agms/bombs
  • TV (it’s worse than IRST but I’m not sure by how much)

Cons

  • mediocre missle
  • produces a lot of smoke
  • cannot deal with short range targets
  • inconsistent at medium ranges
  • inconsistent at longer ranges

The smokey motor is what really kills it. You can spot miles away and react accordingly to the missile’s trajectory to miss it

ADATS

Pros

  • Really good missiles
  • Smokeless motor
  • Can deal with short range targets
  • Can deal with medium range targets
  • IRST

Cons

  • No tracking radar
  • Cannot identify (slave sight) and intercept agms/bombs - you have to actively know where missile is in order to intercept it.
  • Inconsistent at longer ranges

What holds the ADATS back is it’s lack of TWS functionality. If it had it, it could very well stand toe to toe with the VT1 slingers.

  • The TOR-M1 should either be the same BR as the 2S6 or lower
  • The HQ17 should be .3 higher than the 2S6
  • The ADATS should be .3 higher than the 2S6 with how it’s currently implemented. If it gets it’s TWS functionality, it should be the same BR as the VT1 slingers
2 Likes
18

What Russia needs are Tor-M2/Tor-E2 and Pantsir-S1M and Pantsir-S2 not an outdated Tor-M1 which can be comparable to the 2S6 which Russia already has

19

It’s horrible anyway, I would gladly trade away the TOR for 625E.

3 Likes
20

Yes, let’s give Russia TWO top tier SPAAs ON TOP OF the three SPAAs in Rank VII (that are not foldered), on top of all the other copy-paste ZSUs that are not foldered, on top of the BTs that are copy pasted and not foldered, on top of the GAZ that are copy pasted and not foldered.

21

that why it should be at 10.7, the 2s6 doesn’t belong at 10.7

22

Trust me. you dont want the tor. its garbage

1 Like
23

Short answer? Because Russian TT have no need for 11.0 SAM while Tunguska 2S6, being lower in BR, can perform on part if not outright better (especially with those <1km and/or low altitude targets) while on higher we have “The mighty and powerful” Panstir-S1

But… personally? Wouldn’t mind having Tor in Soviet TT, provided it folded with Tunguska (as a side-grade, Tor’s missiles are a bit greater in ranger after all and can intercept drones as they spawn) and/or with upgrade package of Tor-M2

24

cringhe

25

the 2s6 is 11.7 material the missile has a 32 g lock and the gun itself can shred planes and tanks. easily.

26

It is 10,7.?

then you just suck at cas if you think 2S6 is 11,7 good. it’s fine at its br for the shit gaijin decompression

it doesn’t lock, it’s very slow, it’s very unstable, its Gload is quite/very low compared to other 11,7 Saclos SAMs.

Adats can too and even has very strong anti tank SAMs which can easly pen or overpressure and rapidfire

27

I really wish they would just move pratically all the spaa down a bit and decompress to 14.0. Sick of untouchable helis in the 9.x bracket, CAS there can also learn to play against rolands and such, its really not that hard to play against them.

28

Skill level of CAS i fought spading the 2s6 was miles behind what I fought in the pantsir, not talking about what the planes are capable of either, half the CAS players at 10.x just fly straight to battlefield like morons and eat saclos missiles.

It really is just a skill issue.