Google does not quite correctly translate what you wrote, could you write a sentence very simply, Google is really confused)
Not really new to me but I can confirm thats just true.
And it doesnt have to be different forums, it works with game servers and nations as well, USA mains will complain about Germans and Soviet, etc, by switching servers you notice certain minor nations with some of major nations performing much worse than on other servers and people complaining about it.
Если нужен перевод сообщение в ДМ напиши)
1 Like
Chi-To is a vastly superior tank just 0.3 BR higher.
And Pz4s exist at 3.3 with similar pen.
Yes, but the Pz4 is quite slow, the Japanese premium tank accelerates much better, and surprisingly, I quite often repelled T-34, Sherman and Pz shells with my armor with simple alternating presses of A and D
1 Like
There are examples of Soviet’s getting un-explained advantages.
Mig-23ML’s closest TT equivalents are aircraft like the Mig-23MLA and Mig-23MLD.
In SB the Mig-23ML has a BR of 11.0 and the Mig-23MLA and Mig-23MLD have a BR of 11.3.
Why does the Mig-23ML have a lower BR? Equivlanet 11.3 premiums for other nations are at 11.3. Even if their TT equivalents are lower (like the FGR2 being 10.7 and the F4J(UK) being 11.3)
Then you have the R-27ER. Do I really need to say anymore.
T-80BVM is insane to fight.
Ka-50 and Ka-52 are just crazy strong helis.
Su-39 has ground radar, a feature still missing from many, many other aircraft, like the A-6, Tornados, etc.
Spall liners have been missing for years and conveienetly added to the game the same update the soviets get their first spall liner equipped tank
and then the really really big one…
Stingers and Mistraals were nerfed based upon IGLA data with the statement of “we dont know how the stinger or Mistraal can be better than the IGLA therefore we assume its not”
There is a crazy trend for things… just favouring the soviet TT and whilst yes, the US also gets some advnatages at times, the other 8 nations in this game are often left picking at the scraps. Whether soviet bias exists or not is a complex question (but certainly evidence for some stuff)
But the Major nation bias is insane and the soviets are 1 of 2 major nations and that is a fact.
8 Likes
It’s a problem, but you can join us in suggestion category, and this topic.
Next patch and beyond wishlist(Everything except Tech Trees) - Game Discussion / General Discussion - War Thunder — official forum
You can meet people who like strange vehicles and machinery. But avoid some popular topic, people will complain there.
All Mig-23MLs should be 11.0 in sim TBH.
R-23ER is AIM-7F/M response. If AIM-7F was never added to WT then R-27R would be enough, but AIM-7F was.
That and R-60Ms at 12.0 are hot garbo.
T-80BVM has rather bad turret armor, so… lol
Ka-50 & 52 are easy to kill in ground RB, they use to be OP with heli PVP though.
War Thunder is the first game to add spall liners so there was no competition pushing War Thunder to add them.
Iglas are inferior to Stingers and Mistrals in War Thunder, so that disproves your claim.
And no, there’s no “major nation” bias.
Sweden has the best ground tree in the game.
France and Britain have the best CAS in-game.
Best helicopter goes to Rooivalk for Britain which is no longer for sale.
2nd place goes to the SPIKE launchers.
CAS remains OP & undefeatable by SPAA.
1 Like
Then many many other aircraft need to move down as well. Like the Tornado F3 at 11.7 is just insulting.
L27A1 can’t pen, at all. I’ve had more than a few shells just “non-pen” that armour.
Due to the crap damage models for helis and the fact that Ka-50/52 can fly when massively damaged, Then I disagree. They also have some of the best AGMs in the game.
Just conveinent timing, that’s all.
But in stingers case, we have multiple sources all but confirming 20-22G average G, not hte current 13G. They have been nerfed to nearly half their IRL performance based upon data for an entirely different missile.
Then why does US and USSR get multiple new vehicles every single update and several minor nations are lucky if they even get 1. Come 8 US aircraft last year compared to Britains 2. (and USSR wasnt far behind with what, 6/7)
In what universe? Probably the strongest CAS at the moment are the F-16C, F-14B, Su-39, Su-25T and Mig-29SMT. The Tornado GR1 is so badly gimped it probably needs a BR reduction until it gets MASSIVE buffs (like BOL, completed FM, ECM, CBUs, etc etc)
Haha, yeah, no I have it, I will take G-Lynx or Apache over it any day of the week.
Only 2 nations have viable top tier SPAA and thats Soviets and China. Several nations technically dont even have a top tier SPAA, with Britain and US only having ADATS which is classed as an ATGM launcher
I don’t play simulator mode and don’t know what’s going on there. Yes, we have R-27er and R-73, but today, just recently, I saw how the R-73 left after only one heat trap (the channel is called Fallfire if you are interested). But with the arrival of the R-27er, nothing has changed, do you know why? Because everyone has a fire warning system, and sometimes you need to look at this circle with an airplane in the center, there is really Vital Information there. About the T-80BVM, just shoot it in the turret and break the breech of the gun, and it’s even easier to shoot a little lower and decapitate the driver’s mechanic and hit the ammunition, or shoot at the front track of the tank, and what we call the “great front roller” and the shell will happen will pierce right through the tank and again explode the ammunition. And the strv 122B+ does not penetrate the tower from a distance of more than 900 meters, the leopard 2a7 brings a one-shot to the strv 122b+, and Gaijin themselves recognize leopards as the best tanks in the game in every Tank Biathlon. The Ka-52 is also easily shot down by anti-aircraft guns and tankers who like to shoot upward, I do not deny that the Ka-52 is a strong aircraft, but it does not last long on the battlefield, especially if the enemy has an anti-aircraft gun. The Su 39 is good, but an anti-aircraft gun for 70 revival points nullifies all its weapons, and the A-6 Tram has been reduced in the distance of its GBU release, do you know why? Because the K/D of players on this plane was incredibly high, even with Pantsir-S on the map. Not only Soviet tanks, but also NATO tanks received anti-fragmentation lining, and nothing has changed, there are simply fewer fragments. And I again ask you to re-read my original text, in which I ask you to go to the Russian-language forum and read what they write there, and then go to the channel of Russian-speaking bloggers and find out in many of their videos what they think about Soviet and Western tanks (spoiler, they love to play on leopards). And you are right about the titular nations and their exaltation, but we ourselves are to blame, most people play in the first three nations, why introduce Japanese equipment if about 11% of all players play it?
Simulator flight performance matters less.
F-1C for example is already 11.0 in sim, a superior aircraft to Mig-23ML & MLD for sim.
F-14A & Tornado F3 are superior to both in sim.
L27A1 lolpen’s BVM’s turret as so does L23A1.
Best helicopter AGM’s in War Thunder go to Mokopa on Rooivalk: 10km range, 1350mm pen.
Vikhrs are just faster longer range TOW-2s.
Mig-29SMT is worse than Tornado IDS just cause of how much power thermal pods give over F-16AJ & Mig-29SMT.
Su-25T is also far worse than F-16AJ as CAS.
Cause USSR made more vehicles than all other countries in the world.
USA in 2nd.
Everything else needs to wait for the correct BRs to exist [12.3 in the case of Sweden] or Sub-tree vehicle [South Africa for UK].
No countries have a useful TOP SPAA BTW. ITO-90M & TOR-M1 are the best, but they’re the best of the worse cause people just stand-off at top BR.
1 Like
Unfortunately, even with this information, notching and chaffing, i’ve had plenty of R-27ERs go straight for me. and some aircraft like the Tornado IDS dont even have Chaff, so it makes it even harder to evade in uptiers.
In any kind of BVR fight, R-27ER just wins without fail. and having spent the better part of the last year in the Tornado F3. an aircraft that can only BVR, being DOA vs Mig-29s just sucked.
The Challenger 2 lacks of the AP to do much of this , you have to aim for a tiny little crack in the armour, if you miss, you are likely to do nothing. Ive had more than a few direct hits on the ammo wrack that resulted in basically no damage even if a shell manages to pen.
Not all nations have an SPAA for 70 points, Britain currently has an 8.3 SPAA and then an 11.7 ATGM launcher with the full SP cost associated with it.
Because the game had limitations that meant they were hugely inaccurate, those have now been fixed and the distance has now been set to an accurate IRL level.
The A-6 trams performance had absolutely nothing to do with it
yes, but many have struggled for the past 2+ years without them. Like the Challenger 2 which is still missing half of its armour. It could have done with Spall liners literally 2+ years ago.
Or perhaps more people play those nations because they get regular content updates and the other nations have long been nelgected with large gaps and underperforming vehicles that make them simply unfun to play. Its a self fulffilling cycle. The more time they invest into teh US/USSR tech trees, the better they are and thus the more that will play them.
2 Likes
Except that does not explain why so many vehicles have not been added that could have been. Every nation has dozens of aircraft that have not been added. Just because US and USSR produce a lot, doesnt mean that other nations produced none. Take Britain for example. Straight of the top of my head,:
No late Jaguar
No late Buc
No Gnat
No Late Hunters
No Hawk
and thats not even touching on commonwealth aircraft like the several highly unique and inetesting options Canada could offer.
Just because 2 nations produced a lot of vehicles IRL doesnt mean that the other 8 should be abdandoned for 6 month intervals
2 Likes
About the R-27er, I can only suggest watching streamers who often play in the top tier and learning from them. The Mig 29, especially the SMT version, is immediately considered dead after losing its missiles, because maneuverability is terrible and speed is lost as quickly as money in a candy store. There is no need to give an example of a tank that has a strong turret, poor speed and good reloading, everyone recognizes Challengers as the worst tanks in the game (if this is your favorite tank, I deeply sympathize and do not want to offend you) and the only thing that saves it is that when it gets to the battle the big Some of the opponents have already died. You don’t have to aim at the driver’s mechanic, you can shoot at the treasury or just show behind the hill only your turret, which the T-80bvm won’t penetrate from 700 meters, and considering that in the game a person is better than an automatic loader, you will have many chances to shoot, you can even the bottom plate of the tank, I drove it (t80bvm), getting there is a one-shot. I don’t know why they treat the British this way (I’m talking about the prices of anti-aircraft guns), but I can suggest just driving along the side streets for two minutes, which is approximately how long the Ka-52 is still alive before meeting the missile. As far as I know, after the introduction of the T-90M with anti-fragmentation lining, a couple of days later anti-fragmentation lining was added to NATO tanks, what two years are you talking about? I don’t understand what half-armor you are talking about, but the turret of Challenger 2 is strong and very difficult to penetrate from a long distance, and all top-tier tanks shoot from a very long distance. For example, on the map of Greater Tunisia, which was previously only in simulator mode, shooting takes place up to 3 kilometers. The Gaijins talk a lot about their historicity, and it is not their fault that only a few countries have the resources to constantly develop their technology.
Do they have data about the late Jaguar and others? Can they be found in the public domain? If so, take advantage of democracy and arrange a vote for the introduction of this technology and add these documents.
I can’t believe we’re sitting here trying to prove whose tank is worse
Yep and the worse bit about, there are litterally dozens of bug reports in and have been for more than a year. No action has been taken. We;ve finally had some basic bugs like the turning fixed, but only after a premium version was added.
There isnt a single componet on the CR2s that hasnt been nerfed (heck. the 7.62mm MGs on the roof could be 12.7mm HMGs with 0 effort)
I’ve been penned plenty of times in the past in the turret, no idea if spall liners have helped much.
The Challenger 2 has been in the game for more than 2 years and has underperformed the entire time. Spall liners could have been added at any point in those 2 years. Instead they were added after the T-90M was added.
Have a read through the bug reports yourself:
even basic things like roof armour is missing from the Challenger 2s,
Unfortunately they are systematically deleting all long range maps. All of my recent matches have been in CQB focused matches with no option for any form of long ranged combat. I reckon within 6 months, There will be no long ranged maps, only CQB.
Again, I’d check out this thread:
Literally dozens of aircraft that could be added. and many could have been added at any point. The point is, just because US and USSR developed a lot of aircraft that were in the current 11.3-12.7 range. Doesnt mean that the other TTs couldnt get stuff in the BR1-11.3 range. So many iconic aircraft just… never added.
Yes, should have all they need.
Can all be added with relative ease, especially as they are modified versions of aircraft we already have, so not even fresh models
Its just this:
As a Brit, I complain about the current state of the Challenger 2, even with plenty of bug reports proving stuff is wrong and the response is always the same: “Aim better”
But the same apparently doesnt hold true for those in T-80s/T-90s when fighting Leopards or Challenger 2s.
We are hopefully getting a dev-post for the Challenger 2 in the future, but this:
Spoiler
could be the reality of the situation
3 Likes
We have late Buc, Hunter, & Jag. The l
Hawk, Gnat, & other trainers weren’t focused on before last year so give that time.
Of course trainers aren’t gonna be any higher than 10.3 most of the time.
Challenger 2 also may underperform mechanically, but performance in-matches has been about the same as other tanks I’ve played.
We have the Buccanneer S2B with Aim-9Ls and Martels?
We have the Jaguar GR3A with upgraded engine, HMD and Aim-9Ls/ASRAAM?
We have a Hunter with better loadouts like the Hunter T8? or one with CMs like the Hunter FGA74BS?
The point is, the response i’ve always seen for why Britain hasnt gotten anything is: “they dont have anything to add”. But that isnt true. Hawk, Gnat, etc, could all have been added. Its irrelevant that they are only now going back and adding some trainers (maybe) with a BR range from 9.3-11.0. They could have come a while ago without much issue
2 Likes
Let’s be honest here, you don’t want a 10.0+ Buccaneer.
And Jag GR3 is indeed the other late Jag, GR1A is also one of the late Jags.
Britain’s been focused for top air and ground.
Now that Britain’s top air is secured they can focus on more nuanced things.
I would, at about 10.3 that would still be fun, especially in gamemodes like SB. Would have comparible performance to something like the A-10s, A6E, Su-25, etc
Jaguar Gr1 is literally the first Jaguar in service with the RAF. Gr1A (and technically the GR1B) we have is just an upgraded version of it. But I would not describe either as “late” versions of the Jaguar.
And that has taken well over a year. Whilst yes, options have been limited on what they could have added. Not denying that fact. (though Gripen C could have come in September instead of 3 months after 12.3s were added) But the Tornados could have at least been finished.