The tracked version is rare but the smaller faster missiles have been used by the lorry version in a certain skirmish.
This post has 3,000 replies, and they’re doing nothing about it.
just like for the 38MT
9 Likes
Welcome to War Thunder.
Make one big thread, say you are monitoring feedback and considering changes, then do absolutely nothing. They put this here to make it seem like they are doing something, and then ignore it and release a $70 premium that has hundreds of bug reports that haven’t been fixed.
The last time anything was done was when their product was in danger back in 2023. The fact they only listen when their revenue is in danger is very telling of who they are.
13 Likes
The difference between the K and the B is literally just that the K gets 100mm penetration and tandem charge. This is quite helpful when trying to penetrate Kontakt-5 ERA but it’s useless against Relikt ERA.
The K still has the crappy flight characteristics as the B, so nothing really changes at top tier other than you now have to face things like Pantsirs and IIR missiles instead of Tunguskas and IRCCM missiles.
1 Like
I really would like less powercreep 😅
This exclusively applied to the Pantsir S-1s because of their older search radars. This is already somewhat reflected in-game with them having a severeley hard time picking up and tracking Brimstones for example.
The problem with “the age of the internet” is that people look at videos, not getting any context for them and just assume “it’s bad.” The problem with this is that when it’s not western equipment being taken out, there is no benifit of the doubt, but when western equipment get brought into the equation, all of a sudden everyone wants to give the benifit of the doubt. That’s my problem. 1 or several “comcial” failures doesn’t represent the system as a whole.
And there’s already a few select videos on youtube showing the Pantsir doing what it cacn do very well actually. The failures in Iraq can definetly be traced back to them wielding S-1s and not S-2s as the S-1 is a much older system compared to the newer ones Russia wields.
2 Likes
Like in the DCS forums, it’s “broken” because it’s not your traditional site that you can just “overwhelm” without much effort, or break into it’s effective engagment range where a traditional SAM would no longer pose a threat, which relates back into people “coping” and trying to find drone footage to prove it’s not good when this can effectively happen to any system. Russia is just the current nation to sit in the spotlight for this.
Currently most of the normal SAMS preform terribly and don’t fit in WarThunders current playstyle and the Pantsir benifits the most out of them all because it’s a medium to short range air defense dedicated system.
The Patriot wouldn’t matter because it would not fit in Ground RB. Too big, has no room to maximixe it’s engagment range, and can be put on maps where there is too much terrain and will be forced into close range engagments it’s not suitable in.
I’d also like to add that if people want to question any Anti-airs interception probability, then why can’t the same be asked for aircraft lobbing Air to ground munitions, what makes aircraft have this perfect scenario where their munitions are almost guaranteed to hit if not spoofed by breaking LOS or smoke. Compared to their ground counterparts, wielding the same (or similar) advancecd radar components.
In terms of the west, people say the AirForce is the air defence, so if drones or whatever slip into the airspace, the aircraft will be able to detect and take it down. So is their aircraft radars more capable than ground radars that they can detect it but the SAMS can’t? I mean currently in Air RB we have the whole MCM meta going on right now, and to my knowledge it’s supposedly supposed to be extremely hard to even shoot at air to air missile being fired at you and resorted as a last ditch method.
This argument of consistency among weapons can even be brought back towards autocannons. Before the BMPT, the accuracy of the 2a42 30mm was a non-issue, nobody cared, it was strapped to a aluminum box. Now with the introduction of the BMPT, it’s a huge issue, so people point to videos of it not being accurate and high ROF for example and want it to be nerfed. Okay that’s fine, now apply that same to western autocannons which also aren’t pinpoint accurate.
What I’m seeing currently is most players supposedly having this idea that Western vehicles are superior at everything and are supposed to have absolutely no drawbacks and everything Russian is just supposed to below it on all accounts and not giving credit where it’s due–backed by the age of social media where Russian equipment really got pushed into the spotlight, which the U.S really hasn’t gotten a taste of besides the Patriot interception fails.
Here’s some food for thought. What if they added the Iron Dome System per say, everybody knows how sucesfful that system is and how well it can intercept munitions along with how many intercecptors it carries. There’s almost 0 nuance with that system, so… let’s just say if they were to add that (for whatever reason) what would the verdict on that be? It’s of western origin, proven preformance, there isn’t really much to debate on it.
2 Likes
I think you are conflating two arguments here.
- Is Panstir as good in real-life as the manufacturers say it is?
We likely have different views on this - but does it matter for War Thunder? Not really.
- Did Russia in the game NEED the most capable SAM system given it already has some of the best CAS/helo-ATGMs plus a certain BMPT et al?
This is the issue - since it’s game balance we’re talking about.
If you take ‘Russia’ out of it and made a totally new nation - Xlandia or something. Then give them… the best CAS, the best IFV/ATGM launcher, the best helo-ATGM with DIRCM and THEN… the best SAM system that also handily defeats most incoming munitions far quicker than it’s peers as well as having missiles that outperform all other top-end SAMs?
People would probably cry foul in such a situation as well.
The reason people pull up the systems IRL record is that those arguing that Panstir’s performance in War Thunder is just reflective of it in real-life haven’t appeared to have been paying much attention since 2022…
Weapons which are touted as ‘the best in their class’ will naturally get more scrutiny and we’ve all been treated to a very destructive few years where a lot of the stuff which was supposed to work, well it didn’t.
14 Likes
-
W response.
-
Russia pretty much having the best things all-round, yeah that I can understand the point of frusturation.
Now this, I will give a fair agreement on. Though my issue with this is this mostly comes from videos ciruclating on the internet, rather than digging for actual data and performance. Super handy (and easy) to show someone a single video of a missle doing a 180 and how everyone will take that at face value.
If you do enough digging, some things you will find (taking out, poor maintenance, operater error, etc. etc.)
That the main way of taking out these systems, was simply draining it’s interceptors and then finishing it off with a drone. Now the average person may overlook this and just focus on the “taking out” part. But what this implies is that it can take out drones, it’s just the low amount of interceptors that’s being taken advantage of, since once all 12 are gone, it has to vacate asap.
Ironically, a lot of videos of stuff getting destroyed, tends to be the aftermath of an attack not previously recorded, then followed up with a video of a finishing blow.
Now of course, everything in War-Thunder performs with no account for malfunctions, failrues, all that jazz. So when people complain about 1 thing, they have to remember, it applies to almost… everything.
Same deal when Nuclear Thunder was running about, people were ccomplaining that SPAA were taking out their 1 or 2 HARMs they launched from… ~35kms away… or ~15, or whatever the case may be, questioning how “consistent” they can intercecpt it, all that jazz, even though the SPAAs radar is basically on the same playing field as aircraft radars (if not better).
Of cocurse in DCS to make it more “fun” and less polarizing, you can disable SPAA intercepting munitions so you’re not slamming your joystick, can’t do that in WarThunder.
People wondering how FlakRads and OSAs wwere tracking them when they were hugging the ground. (Track radar + SACCLOS missle duh - ignoring any issues with them tracking through the ground)
5 Likes
Oh yeah, and I should add. That there is still a 3 year old bug report for the Pantsir S-1 (that’s been accepted)
in relation too. 1RS2-1 radar missing the autonomous scan capability (he can stay on and scanning at tws mode) and 1RS2-1 also have 90º horizontal scan area (the 60º cone it’s for the missile engagement area and not scan area)
Same to be said with the M247 missing it’s autonomus tracking, along with the Roland family.
Probably wasn’t messed with becacuse of balance reasons, but… that also means, that this can and probably will still be implented at some point.
1 Like
It already has 90 deg horizontal scan area
For the Pantsir S-1 not the Sm-SV since it’s in relation to the IRS2-1 radar
And i can read just fine, it does not change my answer, it has 90 deg of horizontal coverage.
2 Likes
In DCS you can saturate it because the radar isn’t magic and doesn’t detect HARMs at its absolute maximum range nor are the missiles perfect nor does the system have an instantaneous engagement cycle nor does it use the power of magic to not set off RWRs even when it’s well within the detectable bands nor does it have an ammo crate that magically replenishes its entire ordinance load. Often one HARM salvo is enough to completely take out a pantsir. Nobody reasonable has been complaining about the addition of the pantsir nor the tor-m2 (the real threat is still finding out there’s an S-300 in the area…). I have no clue where you got the idea people think it’s overpowered there. In many of the less serious servers pantsirs have basically been cut and pasted where we used to have tunguskas, because their capability is roughly equivalent minus the range difference.
Quick addition, the pantsir’s radar in comparison to actually good SAMs such as IRIS-T SLM is also very susceptible to jamming. The F-16 just folds it. Imagine if WT simulated that…
Another thing DCS has is the IRIS-T SLM, which there:
- works
- actually tracks things
- actually rejects flares
- can actually intercept munitions
- has the range and kinematics it should
- lofts the way it should
producing a weapon far, far more threatening than the pantsir ever could be. I have no clue where you got this idea that the pantsir is the peak of air defense.
I’d like to remind you that, in real life, the Pantsir regularly misses slow-moving drones and even failed to bring down a passenger plane on its first missile while it was approaching for landing.
1 Like
Okay, don’t gotta be agressive about it mate. Definetly not doubting your reading capibilities.
From what I’m seeing you are correct, so I will just go back and double-chceck my sources, that’s all
To be fair, the Pantsir in DCS is the S-1, with an older search radar and a PESA track radar. I already noted that it has troubles acquiring certain targets like Brimstones (In WarThunder)
Investing some time in the forums.
You’re saying this as if the IRISTs radar isn’t more or less suscetpible to the same jamming, if WarThunder simulated that, given it’s not redfor vs bluefor (which means it will almost always be fighting against western nations) they would realistically suffer the same issues of jamming.
Please keep in mind the IRIST-SLM has a way, way more advanced radar than the Pantsir S-1 and is a much newer vehicle, than the Pantsir S-1. The IRIST is NOT a shorad. The Pantsir is.
2024 system vs the S-1 that was rolled out in the 90s/2000s.
They fulfill very different roles, and just like in WarThunder, the normal long range SAMS are moresuscecptible to close-range engagments when the gap is closed.
Currently this thread is focused on the much more modern iteration of the Pantsir, so in DCSs case anyways, comparing the 2024 SAM vs the 2000s Shorad is questionable at best. So it’s no surprise the IRIST would be more threatning in the sccope it’s supposed to be threatning in. I only brought it up becacuse the complaints on arrival were quite similar to what we have now.
1 Like