It’s not like there’s a lack of good comparison points. Check the thread about the AASM, probably still below a hundred replies. Don’t remember people whipping themselves into a frenzy over HVARs acting like bombs, the AH-1Z going up against ground targets that had no AA weaponry with the range to even theorerically fight back (and no lead marker) or the extremely fair and balanced FJ-4B VMF 232 which later got the A-4E added on top.
2 Likes
I’m being pretty polite and off-topic is just that, other things don’t really matter. Just scroll up a bit, you’ll find people arguing about M1s turret ring and 5s reload, while others discuss the maximum wing sweep angle of the F-111A lol.
This thread had more than enough off-topic and spam to get closed, it’s actually mods’ good will to still keep it open.
@Ghost_of_TelAviv
There’s a clear trend with those, as their standard changes based upon who they speak to/about.
It’s not a problem until it is.
That and the StormBreaker would be cool.
they dont really have to make anything up for the stormbreaker
You still haven’t told me why did you change your perspective on balancing and suddenly started looking at the big picture when I brought up all-aspect missiles ?
They sure do look like something overpowered when compared to shitty rear-aspect ones that can be dodged by not flying straight.
To answer your question, SM3 and SU-34 need something to stand out at their BRs.
And no, they cannot drop in BR.
like saying"F-15 Raptor"
3 Likes
i sure do love my EF2000 Peashooter
2 Likes
why not? its almost as if BR if for balancing if they lose the MT they can go down in BR or are you scared that if they lose their crutch they might not go down in br? or maybe then the comparisons of the Su34 to the Tornado Gr.4 will be more accurate
Ok
Because they were obviously added to fill the lineup at a current BR ?
@maguumo
I do remember times when G-LYNX was super low (something like 10.0) and was mauling everything on the ground. Your best counter for that AA wise was like a basic IR SAM that couldn’t reach past 3km of range. Sounds like an amazing counter to a helicopter with Hellfires and thermals.
that isnt a very solid argument, there are plenty of things originally added to fill line ups that have moved down or up in BR, look at the falcon was originally Britain’s 7.7 SPAA now sits 8.3 leaving 7.7 with no SPAA
or look at the repairer it came in at 10.0 clearly for the 10.3 line up now its 9.7 where britain has one other tank long story short the Su25SM3 and Su34 can go down in br and if it really matters that much just run them anyway, it will be a bit harder to get kills but if your a good pilot you should be fine
Looks inside the Kh-38MT thread
The rusmains are still delusionaly believing the missile is balanced and that Russia must have it otherwise they suffer.
At this point just add the MMw Brimstone and make them taste their own medicine geez (reminder they always defend things like these when they pretty much alone get to have them, but once others receive them too, it’s suddenly crying about unfairness).
13 Likes
you know there was Saclos SPAA at that BR when the G-lynx was add right? from checking both Rolland 1 and Tunguska were out and at the same BR it was hardly beyond SPAA range, do I think the G-lynx was strong back then? yeah it was but hardly OP the way you describe it
I didn’t. If you read my prior post, I said
Kh-38MT needs to be removed entirely and replaced because there’s no really good way on balancing it.
It’s way too strong where giving a “poor” platform is not enough. a “poor” platform is not going to change the fact that you can launch 4 agms that are nearly impossible to counter.
“But muh A-10C”, Yeah, you can move it up in BR if it’s causing problems. Can you move the SM3 if it’s causing problems? No you cannot. It’s already at top tier. Moving it up is not gonna change anything…
While we’re at it lets give the A-10C 16mmv JAGM-F because it doesn’t stand out at it’s BR.
That’s not an excuse nor reason give it to kh38s. The Kh59 will be a good replacement. It’ll still be good but not overpowered. And there’s nothing wrong with having the SM3 or Su34 lower.
You must be against any changes that raises a vehicle’s BR because it’ll ruin a lineup.
Man, you really are grasping for straws.
4 Likes
Ironically back then it was a very mid (even subpar) helicopter. Top BR was iirc ~10.7, meaning the G-Lynx would always see something with SACLOS guidance. It’s only “OP” nowdays cus it can get downtiers to where it sees MANPAD SPAA’s instead and it outranges them.
Made good because of decompression.
1 Like
max BR was 10.3 from what I remember and it came out at 9.7 so yeah pretty much only saw top tier not to mention it was primely ran with the challenger 1 which was 10.0 or 10.3
LMAO, I wish.
Here’s what the CM had to say about it.
However having nonexistent IR FNF mach 2.2 AGMs are on par for balance lol.
6 Likes
What rusmains will also never tell you about btw, is that back then Tunguska’s radar would see targets through the ground. You could NOT hide from it. Russia had a literal 360 degree coverage from helicopters, and it also took them a while to fix that.
:D
9 Likes
Typical Russian main as always yeah i agreed
If they wanted them lower they would’ve introduced them with a worse weapon from the start.
Did Falcon get any of it’s vehicle-defining features or the BR increase was purely decompression/player stats related ?
Rapier came in bugged and that obviously resulted in it having bad stats, so of course it’d get it’s BR lowered. I don’t think it lost any of it’s initially planned weaponry.
Plenty of nations had nothing to counter it and G-LYNX was by far the strongest helicopter at that BR.