SU-33 Balance Discussion: BR Adjustment and R-77 Missiles

[kitchkitch26]

Source: Trust me bro

[TuxedoBird]

@_K4vA_

Option 1: Raise SU-33 BR to 13.3 and Add R-77 Missiles

•Ahistorical
•Would be raised to 13.7 because it can carry up to 8 radar missiles (would be 10 if Gaijin gave it the double fuselafe pylons, which are also ahistorical)

@_K4vA_

Option 2: Lower the BR of SU-33 to 12.7

•Nonstarter

These are both god awful suggestions which would break immersion and ruin 11.7 BR and above.

The only things that could help the Su-33 are:

•Decompression
•EW Pods to help defend against SARH/ARH missiles
•Fixing player skill issues

Maybe one day we’ll have a Carrier Group game mode to which this plane would be better suited, but, as for now, it’s fine where it is until more decompression is implemented.

[_K4vA]

I understand your concern, but I don’t need to provide such information publicly to prove my point. The fact that I’ve referred to credible sources and logical reasoning should suffice for a discussion here. Additionally, it’s important to remember that Gaijin often makes adjustments in-game based on internal research and not solely on public forum posts.

I’m simply advocating for a better representation of the Su-33’s potential capabilities within War Thunder. This isn’t about “hearsay” but rather an attempt to enhance realism and balance in the game. Even if hard proof isn’t available for everyone to see here, it doesn’t mean the argument lacks merit. Gaijin has the tools and resources to validate these claims on their own if they see the value in it.

I think it’s essential to focus on the bigger picture: balancing the gameplay while maintaining a connection to the aircraft’s potential real-life evolution.

[_K4vA]

• While you argue this is “ahistorical,” the game frequently prioritizes gameplay balance over strict adherence to history. Gaijin has added capabilities to vehicles that weren’t standard in real life to enhance the game’s diversity and balance. Moreover, even if Su-33 carrying R-77 missiles is uncommon, it remains plausible based on the aircraft’s technological lineage within the Su-27 family. The suggestion to raise its BR to 13.3 is specifically aimed at ensuring that any added capability is properly balanced within the game’s matchmaking system.

• I understand why you consider this a “nonstarter,” but the current matchmaking often places the Su-33 at a disadvantage against opponents armed with ARH missiles. Lowering its BR would at least ensure it competes on more even terms with aircraft like the F-14A or other 12.7 planes.

Regarding your alternative suggestions:

• Decompression is indeed a long-term solution, but it doesn’t address the immediate issue of Su-33 being uptiered into matchups it struggles with.
• EW Pods could help, but these would need to be balanced against other planes receiving similar upgrades.
• Fixing player skill issues is an overly broad statement that doesn’t account for the structural disadvantages Su-33 faces at its current BR.

Finally, while I like the idea of a Carrier Group game mode, that’s a far-off possibility. The suggestions I’m making aim to improve the current state of the game, rather than rely on features that may not come for years.

[WalletWorrier]

Fr, 13.0s need to be going UP not down

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@_K4vA_

1. Regarding the use of R-77 by the Su-33:

• You’re correct that the Su-33 in its original form was not capable of carrying the R-77 due to compatibility issues. However, it’s important to note that the aircraft could have had the potential to carry such missiles in later upgrades, similar to other aircraft in the Su-27 family. While it wasn’t standard practice, the Su-33 could have theoretically gained the capability to carry the R-77 in later versions.

“could have had the potential” means absolutely nothing. The F-16 could have had the potential to carry the AIM-154B because the pylons do indeed exist… But it never has and won’t for the foreseeable future.

It couldn’t have, as it didn’t. No modification was ever sought after to incorporate R-77s into its armament, and it doesn’t look like any attempt will come to fruition seeing as it’s over 2 decades out of date and dying in the funding category.

@_K4vA_

2. Why R-77 makes sense for the Su-33 in War Thunder:

• The R-77 would be a logical addition to the Su-33 because, as part of the Su-27 family, it would have had the technical potential to carry these missiles, especially with later upgrades. Adding the R-77 to the Su-33 in War Thunder would not only increase the realism of the game but also reflect the aircraft’s development in real life, even if it wasn’t widely used.

It doesn’t have the technical potential to carry the missiles, as its radar is incapable of supporting their capabilities. Even the MiG-21 Bison needed the Kopyo-M to be able to fire R-77s, and that was based on the RP-35 and specifically meant to fit into the RP-21’s housing without modification of the aircraft.

THAT is the capability to do something. Not whatever make-believe trash you’re trying to spew.

Nothing at all would be realistic about it, as adding anachronistic weaponry to an aircraft that wasn’t even capable of mounting and launching them is a FAR step from “increasing the realism”.

@_K4vA_

3. Su-33 as a “better” Su-27:

• Regarding the question of the Su-33 being “better” than the base Su-27, adding the R-77 wouldn’t make the Su-33 overpowered. War Thunder already balances aircraft based on their BR, so upgrading the Su-33 with the R-77 would place it in a higher BR category, ensuring it doesn’t dominate compared to other aircraft in the same class.

It is a better Su-27? That isn’t a question.

Nobody’s claiming it would make it overpowered, it simply isn’t needed. The Su-33 never mounted R-77s, and the Su-35 was the first of the series to do such. The Su-35 and Su-37 are both perfect runner-ups to the Su-33, and they don’t need to break the historical capabilities of another aircraft to be introduced to the game.

[Mordillo66]

Why do you think it struggles more than other 13.0 planes?
Your stats on the SU33 fits your overall stats at rank VIII…

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@Mordillo66

Your stats on the SU33 fits your overall stats at rank VIII…

Doesn’t mean they perform the same. I have sometimes comparable stats in vehicles only because I play one like a moron (its blatantly overpowered) and one with extreme caution (its pretty bad)

[Zyranovos]

@_K4vA_

I know there are many players who enjoy flying the SU-33

Landing indicator on the HUD for carrier landing is just;

But no, the plane is fine where it is.

[CleanupOnIL-2]

no like you actually need to prove it had them or could theoretically carry and fire them with the equipment it currently has for gaijin to add it
they’re not gonna do logical reasoning because that’s fundamentally not how gaijin adds weaponry to aircraft
it doesn’t matter about the potential evolution of the plane, it matters what they did with it or had the ability to do with it given the equipment onboard the specific model of aircraft

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@USA PilotsAreBad

the amraam isnt in 8 of the 10 different nations?

1 - USA (pretty obvious)
2 - Germany (F-4F ICE / EF-2k)
3 - UK (Sea Harrier FA.2 / Tornado F.3 / EF-2k)
4 - Japan (F-15J[M] / F-16A-15 OCU / JAS39C)
5 - Italy (EF-2k / AV-8B+ / JAS39C
6 - France (F-16AM-15)
7 - Sweden (JA37DI / JAS39C)
8 - Israel (F-16C-40 / F-15I / F-15I Ra’am)

Brother it takes you 15 seconds to use your eyes.

[TuxedoBird]

@_K4vA_

it remains plausible

Lmao no. It’s not even uncommon; it has never happened. If you truly had “credible sources” for it, you could make a bug report, but you haven’t, therefore you don’t.

@_K4vA_

even terms with aircraft like the F-14A or other 12.7 planes

Say sike rn. The only fighter that can put up a fight against the Flanker at those BRs is the M2KS5, which is already undertiered and MAYBE the F16s, which don’t even get IRCCM missiles.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible. The Su-33 suffers only due to the incompetence of its players.

[Code_649]

@_K4vA_

Option 1: Raise SU-33 BR to 13.3 and Add R-77 Missiles

• If the SU-33 is moved to BR 13.3, it would justify equipping it with R-77 missiles (similar to the SU-34, which is also at 13.3 and has access to R-77s).
• This would bring the SU-33 more in line with other modern aircraft in the same bracket, like the F-16C, J-8F, and also the new additions, Eurofighter and Rafale, which have FOX-3 missiles and comparable performance.
• SU-33 already has good flight performance and maneuverability, and equipping it with R-77 missiles would make it a competitive option in higher-tier matches.

Historically inaccurate, technicalities won’t work here I’m afraid. Also, isn’t the whole point of your post because the Su-33 is being uptiered to 13.7/14.0? R-77 if technically added would just be a temporary band-aid for you until you realise you have less countermeasures than everyone else and then you will be right back here asking for a BR reduction the same week.

@_K4vA_

Option 2: Lower the BR of SU-33 to 12.7

• Alternatively, if the R-77 cannot be added, the SU-33 should be moved to a lower BR, such as 12.7.
• At BR 12.7, the SU-33 would face fewer FOX-3-equipped opponents, giving it a fairer chance to compete in dogfights and missile engagements.
• The SU-33 is already limited in its missile loadout compared to similar aircraft at higher BRs, so reducing its BR would better reflect its current capabilities.

Absolutely not lmao. 8 R-27ER at 12.7 would be target practice for everything 11.7 - 12.7. Also, limited? Be so for real right now. You can carry 6 R-73 and 6 R-27ER (among other missile combinations, btw) on the Su-33 - in what way is this limited? As someone else also pointed out why make a 12-missile slinging Flanker a lower BR than the original one?

In my opinion, the Su-33 is fine where it is at 13.0. There will eventually be further decompression so for the time being it’s a coin toss on whether or not your playing experience will bounce between relative peace and Fox-3-induced hell. The Su-33 is a capable aircraft, sure the countermeasure count sucks but that is historically accurate and you can still do a lot of damage and defend yourself with it at 13.0.

[Ion_Protogen]

@_K4vA_

Lowering its BR would at least ensure it competes on more even terms with aircraft like the F-14A or other 12.7 planes.

Yeah, but then it would be objectively better than most 12.7s.

How is it equal to a Mig-29? Or how is it equal to a Mig-29G at 13.0, when it carries double the missiles on a potentially better platform?

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@Zyranovos

Landing indicator on the HUD for carrier landing is just;

nice custom game feature

[BasherBenDawg8]

My guy, it’s better than the Su-27S at the same BR. It’s perfectly fine where it’s at. It can’t use the R-77 historically and it’s NOT going to go down because of it.

[AllNationEnjoyer]

@BasherBenDawg8

My guy, it’s better than the Su-27S at the same BR

I haven’t really compared them yet.

@BasherBenDawg8

It’s perfectly fine where it’s at.

As in, it can’t go down to 12.7? I agree. It being fine where it’s at though overall? lol absolutely not

[Dianeces]

Is it just me or is the original post giving strong AI-generated vibes?

[CommunistBalls]

@_K4vA_

Alternatively, if the R-77 cannot be added, the SU-33 should be moved to a lower BR, such as 12.7.

You are literally suggesting “Hey! Let’s compress the BRs some more!!” at this point.
No thanks.

If anything, it should be 13.3 since it’s a straight improvement over J-11/Su-27S and MiG-29G.

@_K4vA_

Decompression is indeed a long-term solution, but it doesn’t address the immediate issue of Su-33 being uptiered into matchups it struggles with.

Moving the Su-33 is fixing one plane’s “problem” to create a MAJOR issue for something like 15 other planes. This isn’t going to work, and never has.

[Fanta_3412]

Another p2w player complaining about SU-33