The Tornado is equipped with the AIM9L missile, which gives it an advantage in air combat. The Tornado is fast enough to dictate the engagement conditions, even against the Su-39 with the R27R1 missile.
Can you start the game with an airplane?
Can you use SPAA in ARB to research it? Your point doesnt matter you can play it if you want to at any point with spawning even low tier light tanks and scouting if necesary
we already established Aim 9l are only slightly better then r60ms , it doesnt matter in the big matter.
Secondly no the R27R1 or ER would not allow the tornado to dictate the engagement conditions in most of the times the tornado will just die
Based on this, I can infer that you are either inexperienced or bias.
SPAA/SAMs are versatile units that can perform multiple roles in the battlefield. They can capture strategic points quickly, engage enemy tanks effectively, and shoot down hostile aircraft and helicopters. SPAA/SAMs provide valuable support to your team from the beginning of the game.
Neither i just see balance in the game when there is one
Ah yes go capture points with a Flakrakrad, ito or even pantsyr that will surely work, the only one of those with capabilities to hunt tanks is pantsyr of those top tier spaa, their main goal is to hunt aerial threats well said we should be able to research them in ARB as a result.
Like i said Su 39 main mode is GRB, for this mode additional missles are not needed , it gets covered by friendly SPAAs
@x_Shini Hey, can we focus on the main issue here? It’s getting out off topic as usually.
Flakrakrad is a versatile vehicle that can deal with both light tanks and helicopters. I use it frequently to counter these threats, especially the helicopters that spawn at the start of the game. I wonder why the developers allow that. I often see Pantsyr players who use it aggressively like a light tank.
Right now its too soon to provide any meaningful statement on its performance. The aircraft is indeed doing satisfactory in ground RB. Naturally attackers are going to be weaker in some cases in Aviation modes.
If / when we have some more news on the topic, we will for sure share it.
4 Likes
@x_Shini_ I am aware that SPAAs/SAMs primarily serve as anti-air, and planes do have a role in GRB. However, if your main intention is to play as a plane, it would be more appropriate to play in the own mode.
A10 & Su25K. They have the same capability as the Su-39 in air-to-air combat, but the Su-39 has a higher battle rating of 1.3.
IRCCM does matter, you can always show your behind to avoid IR missle which are 70% of all missles and vikhers can be used head on as well. But that doesnt even matter balanced around GRB , air to air combat does not matter
But i am gonna stop now answering you, it doesnt do anything
@x_Shini_ IRCCM. It’s a system that helps missiles avoid being fooled by flares or other decoys. It’s not a sci-fi shield that can stop everything. It only works from behind and it’s not guaranteed to defeat every missile. It isn’t something of great importance, much like the R27.
But not the same A2G weapons. Thus the difference in BR. Harrier Gr7 and Sea Harrier Frs1 are near identical in A2A but have a difference of 1.0 BR
At least there is some data regarding sales and performance, so it’s only a matter of time before the Su-39 becomes a worthwhile addition to ARB.
Kurnass is a beast of a machine. It can deliver bombs and rockets to any target, making it the best choice for close air support on 11.3 (BR).
- Kurnass 2000: has six AGM65D missiles with thermal vision and fire & forget capability, a thermal targeting pod, four AIM9L missiles, and various bombs, both dumb and smart. Can fly faster than sound.
The Su-39, with a battle rating of 11.3, demonstrates its capabilities as a proficient close air support aircraft. Nevertheless, when compared to the Su-25K at its designated battle rating, the Su-39 currently falls short in terms of effectiveness in ARB
That was not my take-away from Smins post. My interpretarion was that it was indeed added for its role as an attacker and their first and foremost priority will be its performance within that role over that of ARB. I forsee an increase in R-60 count as that appears to me more as a loadout bug rather than a matter of balance. But beyond that, youll need to wait a while. Dont expect the su-39 to ever do “well” with arb without a lot of skill and effort. Nor would i expect the Tornado Gr1 to ever be good in a dogfight, despite having AAM
@x_Shini_
“Right now its too soon to provide any meaningful statement on its performance”.
It means that they have not enought information of performance
“Naturally attackers are going to be weaker in some cases in Aviation modes.”
The Su-39 attacker aircraft, lacking afterburners, was unable to eliminate its primary weakness. Consequently, even with the addition of R27 missiles, it would still be comparatively weaker as a fighter jet when compared to the MiG-23.
And vastly superior to any and all other attackers/bombers, as none have BVR currently
Appreciate your response. My only concern is that in air RB it more or less has the same fighting capabilities as a regular Su-25(with the exception of the IRCM that helps against Fox 2’s) but now encounters jets with far superior flight prefromance. Obviously it is very capable as a ground attacker, which is why alot of us feel it would be better for it to receive better air to air options as to allow it to stay at its current BR. Regardless I hope to hear further clarifications about the situation from the devs if possible.
While there are no dedicated attackers to my knowledge that have BVR capabilities, we do have several multi role fighters that can bring some decent or even very nice guided air to ground ordinance, while also having the option to bring BVR missles into air RB, sometimes even bringing both air to ground and BVR missles in the same loadout. All the Su-39 would do is simply act as a very sluggish fighter jet if give some of its BVR loadouts.
From all the research I’ve done on the Su-39, it could only ever mount 2 R-60’s/R-73’s and never had the option to mount more of these missles. Maybeeee it also possessed the possibility to mount R-27T’s on the same pylons as where it would mount the radar guided variants but that remains unclear to me, and wouldn’t surprise me if it couldn’t since the Su-27 is much the same with many of its pylons only working for the R-27R’s. In this sense if we wanted to buff its air to air capabilities it would either have to be giving it R-73’s or giving it at the very least R-27R’S, so long as we are trying to maintain historical accuracy here.
The Devs do seem to be aware of the potential missles this plane carried, now it’s just a matter of how they view the prefromance of the Su-39 in air RB and if they think it’s acceptable or not.