Su-39: R77,R27,R73

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
99

Su-39 is a premium ground attack aircraft. Why does it HAVE to be good in ARB. Does it make tanks go boom in GRB? I Assume so, you arent calling for better AGMs. As you pointed out, Tornado Gr1 sucks in ARB at the moment, it has a higher rating than most Mig-23s and is so handicapped (tiny CM count, wrong missiles, missing features, etc) , its actually painful. But that doesnt matter, its job is to drop bombs on bases, not dogfight Migs.

So giving the Su-39 significantly better missiles isnt going to change anything. The only reason I reckon its 11.3 is because its premium and soviet. If it was anything else, it would be 11.7. Again, RB rating is decided by a jets performance in BOTH GRB and ARB. This is why some jets have wierdly high BRs. Looks at Gr7 and giving it better missiles, would just result in a higher BR.

but I guarantee its BR is 100% based upon its GRB performance not ARB perforrmance

At the end of the day, it IS a ground attack aircraft, that was what it was designed to do. It might have had some enhanced A2A capabilities, but it was never designed for an air superiority role, only improved defensive capability.

But what exactly do you want, the ability to take the Su-39 into an ARB match and walk away with multiple kills every single match with little effort? To be able to 1v1 a Tornado F3 or F-16?

If you want to dogfight an F-16 or F-14 or something else top tier. then you should be in the Mig-23 or Mig-29 an actual air superiority fighter. If the Su-39 EVER got the point where it “could” actually take on top tier jets in air to air combat with the kind of ease you seem to be advocating for, then it means it has extremely powerful missiles. Such as what the A-10 and Su-25 are like with all aspect missiles at a BR where most jets dont even have CMs. and I think we can all agree, that sucks.

So no, I dont think giving the Su-39 such powerful missiles that it would allow, what is a slow, subsonic ground attack aircraft, the ability to go toe to toe with top jets. That would just break the game, especially considering its a premium.

So prehaps instead, advocate for seperate BRs for aircraft in GRB and ARB. That way for GRB it can be at 11.3-11.7, what is likely right for its CAS ability, and then 10.7-11 for ARB, I’d guess about right for its A2A ability.

The Harrier Gr7 has an RB rating 11.7 and its closest equivalent is the Sea Harrier FRS1, which has an RB rating of 10.7 which I think this is about right. So its a full BR higher, purely because of CAS power.

So with this division in BR, you’d see many aircraft, not just top tier jets, drop maybe as much as a full BR in ARB, whilst remaining at a fair and reasonable BR in GRB. It is the ONLY solution that would actually work. Because you cannot balance jets by giving them capabilities so far beyond anything else in any match that they dominate, which considering the Su-39 is a 2008 jet, is exactly what would happen if you gave it 2008 missiles. It quite literally would have missiles 20-30 years ahead of anything else in the game.

3 Likes
100

Because this is a video game and we like to balance vehicles, and buffing it’s air to air capabilities wouldn’t affect its performance in its air to ground roles and help make it more competitive overall as a plane.

I’m really trying to understand your logic here but there dosnt seem to be any too grasp into…

This is a vehicle, purpose built to be multi role and have both air to air and air too ground features, it’s currently missing some of its best air to air features and it’s suffering immensely because of that in air to air while it does fine in air to ground. If we give it better air to air capabilities that it had historically then it does better in air RB which is where it’s most useful as a premium, and it’s not like giving it better missles is gonna make it suddenly OP in ground RB.

I’m really not grasping why you want to hold to back? What are you afraid of? That it might actually be an enjoyable vehicle? Like your logic just didn’t hold up because you want it to only be good at ground striking because that’s what it was supposed to do historically but then you also don’t want it too have better air to air missles even tho it historically used them??? Pls make it make sense man. It sounds like you just want this plane to be unusable in Air RB for no good reason.

1 Like
101

Bro how would that break the game??? It’s a fat slow Su-25 that not potentially can carry 2 R-27’s of we give it a modest buff. If you think this suddenly make it’s the equal of a F-16 or Mig-29 then pls explain too me why the F-4S is at a lower BR then the tomcat or F-16 since it still has capable radar and Sparrows.

Giving the Su-39 better missles would just allow it to actually be usable at 11.3 instead of just dead meat. This is a simple balance request and yet your acting like it would end the world.

2 Likes
102

It is a modified Su-25, I cannot find a single reference anywhere to it being a “multi-role” jet. Its not, thats BS. It just has enhanced defensive capability, It was NEVER designed to actually fight other aircraft, just defend itself should it be attacked. Though by all accounts its radar was more intended for its ASMs and other ground attack weapons, but could be used for BVR missiles.

I main britain, there isnt a single top tier jet, that doesnt have some MASSIVE handicap

FGR2/FG1 should have Aim-9L

Tornado F3 should probably be at 11.0 or should have AMRAAM and Aim-9L/i or Aim-9M

Harrier Gr7, should have Sniper pod instead of TIALD pod, far more advanced AGMs, Aim-9Ms, and list of other things like Maws, better RWR, etc etc (and quite frankly, should not be at 11.7 in ARB, especially since the 9L nerfs)

Tornado Gr1, should have Aim-9l/i or Aim-9M, it should have 20x it current CM count, it should have ECM, it should have ground mapping radar

By all accounts, the Su-39 is just a little underpowered, you are flying a sub-sonic, ground attack aircraft, with some of the most reliable IR missiles in the game and you expect it to just be able to go toe to toe with anything? Why? The su-39 by all accounts is a solid CAS aircraft, its loaded with cool features and weapon systems. But its first Soviet jet added in a LONG time that isnt immediately META in every gamemode, and you aren’t happy with that fact.

AGAIN, if its really that broken, then dont advocate for slapping extremely powerful missile onto it, it wont help. Advocate for seperating BRs in ARB and GRB and get its BR dropped down to 10.3-10.7 instead

But lets for moment look at the options

R-27R, wont make much of difference in my opinion, and is the only option that wouldnt immediately break the game.

R-27ER, totally OP missile, anything with R-27ER needs to be at least BR12

R-77, would also be totally OP, and again, instantly move up to Br12. Giving it Fox-3 would make it exactly like what the A-10 and Su-25 are like at 10. They’d just shoot everything down with ease and it would be boring for everyone else (Especially in Downtiers)

R-73, maybe, but I fear it would be too strong, I swear I saw somewhere, or heard something about them testing R-73s, not sure if it was the Mig-29 or Su-39, but they almost immediately removed them from the jet in testing because they were OP, far beyond anything any other nation had. I don’t expect to see R-73s on anything until we also see Aim-9Ms begin to be rolled out onto various jets.

So, if you really believe that a pair of R-27Rs, the ONLY option, that I dont think would see the Su-39 immediately moved up to 12 or so totally break the game that it would suck for everyone else, will so magically transform the Su-39 into a good air superiority fighter, fine, keep arguing for that. But quite frankly its not going to make any difference. It not an air superiority fighter, and quite frankly, there are MANY jets that struggle in ARB for no reason other than they were NOT DESIGNED FOR IT. Tornado F3 for example. Sucks, it was an interceptor, that is what it was deisgned to do, not furball in a WW2 style gun fight. Does that mean we should give the Tornado F3 AMRAAM and ASRAAM just to make up for its lack luster turn performance?

3 Likes
103

its a 2008 jet by all accounts. Fine, lets give it everything you want, but lets give Britain EF Typhoons with AMRAAM and ASRAAM, because historically by 2008 thats what we had. Its only fair.

104

Thats a poor argument. There are so many jets that suck right now at 11.3 and quite frankly I consider dead meat, that could and should 100% get missile upgrades. but none of them will ever see such uppgrades. FGR2 for example, had Aim-9Ls, its stuck with Aim-9Gs and will likely never ever get that upgrade

Its a ground attack aircraft, that is what an Su-25, which is what the Su-39 is a modified version of was designed to do, provide close air support. It was NEVER designed to charge into NATO lines and take on (considering its a 2008 ish jet) EF Typhoons, F-16, F-15s, F-22, Etc, Etc. Defend itself, sure, but only where its escorts failed.

The issue I have, is that the missiles you advocating for might have been historically carried by the Su-39, but its again, an early 2000s jet. Many of those missiles it carried are 10, 20 maybe even 30 years more advanced than any other nation. We have seen time and time again, soviet jets being completely and utterly overtuned. Yak-141 and Mig-29 Carrying R-27ERs for example is a classic case of this. They should NEVER have recieved that missile and the results speak for themselves. The Mig-29 is by far the best A2A jet in the game, and nothing really comes close, especially in a BVR fight. and Im fed up with it again ONLY being soviets that get anything good these days.

Im a britain main, and even our latest jets, barely compete and are such a shadow of what they should be IRL, that its actually kinda insulting.

Tornado Gr1 for example:

Missing, Sky Shadow ECM Pods

Should have 56x Flares, and 1200x Chaff, currently has 56 total CMs

Should have Aim-9L/i or Aim-9M

Should have Ground mapping radar

Should have ALARM

Should have ASMs

Should have advanced bombing aids

By all accounts, the Su-39 is a fine jet. It has the best AGMs in the game, it has IRCM (first of any jet), it has ground mapping radar (first of any jet). It has so many interesting loadouts and equipment, it by all accounts, looks like a solid jet in almost anything, EXCEPT, ARB. If I played soviets and bought this jet, I’d have fun with it in SB. So instead of complaining about what you dont have, enjoy what you do have. Trust me, from someone who plays the most neglected nation in the game right now, a nation that is boarderline unplayable at most BRs due to nerfs, missing features and other… issues. It could be a LOT worse.

(Heck, the Sea Harrier FRS1 added 9 months ago, still has placeholder radar and cockpit and its not likely going to be until maybe July, but I suspect more likely September update that those will be finally fixed)

Again, it has a BR in RB based upon its CAS power, in GRB, and of course its too high in ARB, the same as the Tornado Gr1 and same as the Harrier Gr7. Same as many, many aircraft in this game.

3 Likes
105

@Morvran Personal I think dev no add AIM-9M or AIM-9L/i sidewinder, ALARM early long range anti-radiation missile and carrying 2x BOZ-107 pod (so 56 flares & 1,200 chaff total) on Tornado GR.1 in tech tree until consider Tornado GR.4

But at least Tornado GR.1 might get Sky Shadow ECM Pod & Ground mapping radar

106

I think the CM issue is more game limitations and in another thread, I did see what could be interpretted as hints to a CM overhaul ( which is really needed) but the rest of it I do agree. I suspect we will have to wait till Gr4.

107

Since this plane is capable of carrying better air to air armament, it should be given something a bit more capable, 11.3 seems to be a bit high with only two R-60M.

It’s price tag almost isn’t even justifiable with its current performance.

1 Like
108

Look man, I get that there are other strike jets and even nations as a whole that get the shaft, I’m not denying that or justifying that either, but like I said two wrongs don’t make a right, so that isn’t an argument I wanna hear. I’m trying to argue in good faith here but I keep going in circles because a lot of y’all who are against the Su-39 getting a buff for air combat seem to insist that the plane deserves to suffer for some pointless reason or another that doesn’t make any sense for war thunder, or you try and bring up how other jets suffer, and I’d say if you really feel like those jets suffer then why don’t you go make a post about them instead of making poor arguments on here about why the Su-39 also needs to suffer. Giving the Su-39 missles that will help make it competitive at 11.3 air RB isn’t going to change the way it plays in ground RB and will improve it’s experience in air RB. This is such a simple request and has happened with so many other planes so pls don’t bring some whataboutism into this thread to justify it’s unnecessary suffering in air RB, at this point it sounds like your position is that you want it too be as hard as possible for stile plane players to enjoy their airplanes in air RB for some reason that has no bearing on how war thunder works and I’m getting tired of arguing in circles over the same faulty points y’all keep making to hold this plane back.

2 Likes
109

Tbh I’ll I want are some somewhat better missles for the Su-39 to give it a bit more of an edge in air to air combat, Im not asking for it too be made OP, just something simple perhaps like R-27R’s so it has the ability to reach out and touch some jets if it needs too(still screwed in a dogfight)

2 Likes
110

Tbh I’ll I want are some somewhat better missles for the Su-39 to give it a bit more of an edge in air to air combat, Im not asking for it too be made OP, just something simple perhaps like R-27R’s so it has the ability to reach out and touch some jets if it needs too(still screwed in a dogfight)

Huh? Edge in air to air combat? Its a Strike jet, lol. Fly CAS missions with it. When you’re up to air combat, use a fighter jet. When you wan’t to dive, use a submarine. If you like space flight, spawn the USS Enterprise and if you wan’t ground combat, spawn a tank.

1 Like
111

Typical Russian main they always ask for more even they got are more than enough.
expect strike aircraft to able to fight fighters? heh tons of ground loadout and IRCM still not enough?
well seem they need first spawn nuclear weapons.

3 Likes
112

Please listen to yourself, just because it’s a ground attacker even though it was made with the idea of diversity and compatibility with many air to air missiles doesn’t mean it should be utter sh** in air realistic ITS OWN GAMEMODE. Many content creators provide information on vehicles like premiums so you can decide to purchase it or not but many LITERALLY couldn’t since it was unplayable.

Are we going to forget that the SU-39 was more of a multirole than a core air support and anti ground? But yeah lets ignore that and make trash excuses on why it should be sh**.

1 Like
113

Yeah, its the first jet added to the soviet tree in a long time that isnt OP in every ganemode and they are just bitching about it.

1 Like
114

I’ll write a lengthy paragraph for those who are incapable of simple research. The SU-39 was a development of the SU-25 aircraft which we all know and love, the idea of the SU-25T originally was for anti-tank roles but later in the coming years the SU-25TM program came into light.

The SU-25TM was based on the SU-25T which was also based off the SU-25 trainer variants replacing the co-pilot with more enhanced avionics making it capable of doing night operations unlike the original SU-25s.

As the SU-25TM program continued it was predesignated the SU-39 and was given the capability to carry the Kopyo Radar under the fuselage replacing the Mercury Pod or the FLIR Pod if needed. This also came with other additions like the R-27ER1/R-27ET1, R-73E and the RVV-AE.

Why was it given these types of ordinance? Simple, and this is because (now the Russian Federation) wanted to give the SU-39 the ability to engage air targets instead of it’s mere R-73E being used as a “defensive weapon”.

The issue in War Thunder besides the blatant inability to engage aircraft is the issue of NOT BEING ABLE TO PLAY YOUR OWN GAMEMODE which is something people are still magically confused about even though they’ve played the game for many years now.

All vehicles shouldn’t be forced to play other game modes due to how dog sh** it is. The “its a Attacker though” excuse doesn’t really apply to the SU-39 due to it being made with the idea of diversity, compatibility and lethality to all vehicles it engages.

Don’t compare the SU-39 to any type of aircraft and this is simply because there is no counterpart to it

3 Likes
115

These missiles are all completely OP and are currently ruining the game for everone else as there are no comparison for any other nation. Even at Br12, i do not believe the R-27ER is high enough. If the Su-39. One of the best if not the best ground attacker in the game… THAT IS ALSO PREMIUM AND THUS CAN JUST BE BOUGHT AND FLOWN. Gets the best missiles in the game. Then it would, out necessity have to move up in BR. Because R27ERs at 10.3-11.3 would just be stupid. It would instantly transform the Su-39 into the best aircraft in the game period. For every single gamemode. Soviets have had that. Without fail, for years.

You talk about aircraft not being flyable in their own gamemode of ARB. Well then, i hate to ruin if for you. But thats easily 50% of the british tree right there. Accept it. Not all planes are meant to dogfight. Some, were added purely for CAS for GRB. A-10, Su-25, Su-39, and many others would never have been added without GRB being a thing

1 Like
116

R-27ER1’s wouldn’t break anything, I don’t think I’d be seeing SU-39’s engaging M1A2’s with air to air missiles? It’s either they lower the BR slightly or they give it the R-73E’s or R-27ER1’s.

I’d literally screen share 20 matches of both air realistic and ground realistic for you if you believe this vehicle is “truly good” but I doubt you’ll take my offer.

And if you actually believe the SU-39 is one of the best vehicles already then what should we do? Stay static and do sh** or actually resolve the issue like you cry babies did over the economy.

And lastly I got the entire British ground and air and I’ll tell you this, I’ve had so much fun playing Britain its ridiculous, the Harrier GR.7 is my favourite vehicles alongside the SU-25’s and Challenger 2’s and the Challys are absolute beasts in my opinion.

1 Like
117

Its the only british jet at the moment that isnt beint totally rofl stomped in every gamemode. The Tornados are too little too late and arent really playable

THIS IS WHAT IVE BEEN SAYING!!!

Giving it R-27ER or R-73 or whatever WOULD result in a BR increase. It would have too. You are forgetting downtier. These missiles would be rediculous at 10.3.

Instead. Advocate for seperating the BRs for aircraft in GRB and ARB. That way it CAN be lower in ARB without being a total menace it GRB.

This wouod benefit so many jets. GR7 would likely end up qt 10.7/11 in ARB instead of its current rating of 11.7

118

The issue here is that WE KNOW that Ground and Air BR’s can’t be separated and would take a along time to be implemented so we can’t rely on that, we can’t also lower the BR and we know that War Thunder mentioned that they’ve got the right to implement the R-73E whenever they want without notice so that’s the most likely option.

The SU-39 could go to 11.7 and I don’t have a issue with that and can still easily remain a rank 7. A example of this is the Ka-50 being 11.0 and a tier 6 only (instead of tier 7).