i mean vietnam still use both saber and mig 15 even today so what makes it impossible?
2 Likes
He tests it right here. It is Dev Server things could change though.
Spoiler
interesting so it is quite useless against irst. at least against highest and longest range soviet spaa radar,
1 Like
with 10km tunguska radar the f117 need to at least get as close as 5.5km. i guess it is safe to say that it resisted to irst by 45%
Just because it’s possible, doesn’t mean it’s a realistic matchmaking. Realistic matchmaking is based around entry into service. There’s a reason why and you know why it’s the most sensible approach.
I never said anything like that. It’s your wishful thinking.
Yeah which is why the 10.0 GRB might be fine for it. Doesn’t make it less of a niche aircraft.
No it’s not. Gaijin has made this clear before.
The key word there is acting like.
it will definitely see tunguska but not pantsyr since it had no air defence weapon that just make this thing slightly lower br orion or predator
I would much rather see F-117’s massacred at 13.7, than to even just see them in a damn Me 262.
40s jets vs 80s jets is just something that should not ever happen. It’s literally a stealth plane vs 1st gen jets, you hardly can get more ridiculous than that. There is nothing more advanced than stealth, that would also be easily recognizable. The nest step is stealth vs props and the last step is stealth vs biplanes.
There are other alternatives. You just choose to ignore them and conform to the Gaijin’s laziness. You delude yourself that it’s the only way it can be balanced.
An F-117 will not be balanced even at 1.0, because the game modes don’t accommodate bombers and CAS planes. It has no offensive armament in game modes, where the only thing that matters is killing other planes.
This is just a botched job. It’s neither balanced, nor realistic or sensible.
1 Like
Gaijin may have made it clear, but it doesn’t make it any less false. Gaijin could’ve as well made clear that the earth is flat, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s round.
They “dealt with” realistic matchmaking requests, because they are too lazy to do it. It would require new game modes, new missions, new win conditions, new maps and human input and research. They prefer leaving the whole balance aspect up to kd/win rate statistics and excel sheets.
1 Like
It’s their game if they want to balance realistic in this matter tough shit. Gaijin has made it clear they balance off numbers not service entry.
4 Likes
I promise you, you do not want “realistic” (you mean historically accurate) matchmaking done by year of introduction.
There will be several cases where some vehicles will be completely unplayable because 90% of the opponents will be overpowered in comparison or a vehicle will become so gruesomely overpowered that any other nation won’t want to play the match if that vehicle is in it.
You personally might want a historical matchmaker, but it would with VERY high likelihood just straight kill the game for nations in different BR’s.
If anything then maybe some special game mode with historical matching in BR ranges where it’s possible to balance.
7 Likes
Isn’t ground Sim essentially historical matching? Not to a T. But for the most part.
Oh, i don’t play sim so i’m not sure but i don’t think so?
Fair enough I don’t see them being popular.
I didn’t say that service entry should be the only balancing factor. I said it should be taken into consideration. If they put 40s jets and 80s jets together in 1 battle, they clear don’t give a shit about realism at all.
Gaijin makes it a black and white matter, as if anything in between is impossible, because it’s just an excuse. They are simply too lazy to make both a balanced and sensibly realistic matchmaking.
They are too lazy to make it even just balanced, since they balance purely off of statistics, which is an obviously flawed technique if you think about it for more than 2 seconds. Right now balance is a number 1 priority and it’s still not balanced, when things like A-10C happen.
2 Likes
I don’t see you saying only a factor.
They currently have 60s jets fighting 2000s so what’s the difference?
It’s Subsonic fighters fighting a subsonic bomber. nothing else. Hell they don’t even have radar so the stealth is moot.
baffling that a stealth aircraft doesn’t have RWR
I said that basing realistic matchmaking around service entry is the most sensible approach to the concept of realism in the context of matchmaking.
1 Like
You are using “realism” wrong. As long as the 40’s planes still flew in some capacity during the 80’s then they could have faced each other.
Realistic means that it is by the laws of physics possible, it doesn’t mean “historically correct/accurate”.
Again, i don’t even think its possible. Many vehicles have been introduced that far outclassed the capabilities of contemporaries for years before a equivalent was developed by a different country.
1 Like