The first part of the sentence condradicts the second.
Not that the lofting issue is only present on Ground fired atgms either way, so this is a moot point anyway.
nonsense, yes…
Best fixed wing CAS
Best heli CAS
Best SPAAs
The only area they don’t excel is tanks (although they are handheld by the carroussel not spalling and the relikt)
The moment Buk performs meh, they use it as an excuse to introduce a new Pantsir, yet from a pure statistical standpoint, Buk wasn’t even the worse
And don’t even get me started on the Manpads article which could basically be summed up to “Soviets couldn’t make Igla turn better, so Stinger and Mistral can not turn better either”
Sovestky Soyuz (i don’t even need to explain this one hopefully)
yeah it sucks that with some arbitrary rules make some vehicle rendered useless.
in my case that mi-28nm literally going 1500m above ground perfectly notch my TAD and chaffed my missile. like brother, the BUK will swat me out of the sky if i did this
Top 3 bottom yes, so there were 2 AAs that were even worse, yet those weren’t mentionned by Gaijin
Br again, Strela went up just fine, and Stingers + Mistrals are more comparable to these than they are to Igla. Trying to transform this train wreck of an article as a “gesture of good will to let the poor western Manpads get a lower BR” is quite a poor argument
The Pantsir SM-SV is Simply Too Strong, Russian Bias as Clear as Day
heh I guess
Spikes and other air launched FnF ATGMs are relevant to my thread. It relates to the balance of CAS between nations, and Russian being the outlier with the only one modeled wit proper top attack is a key point made at the start of this thread.
Was gonna bring this up but you beat me to it:
Me when everyone is forgetting about the QN506 (easily forgettable event vehicle so understandable, but their FnF ATGMs also lack a proper top attack angle)
Technically speaking the user did not mention “bias” once in the specific comment you’re referring to, and calling something “overpowered” doesn’t inherently means they’re referring to a bias behind it. If the user previously called it bias I missed that, but regardless:
Rather than insulting a point/argument or statement/claim you disagree with that’s being made by another user, please combat it with an argument of your own, thanks!
And as mentioned here:
It’s in the title, and the thread has been given a “Russian-Bias” tag. Russian bias in relation to the correlations between top tier CAS and Air Defense can be discussed within this thread, it’s a key claim of the original post.
No need to bring these up further, they don’t directly relate to the thread and can be considered off topic. The “Russia-Bias” should only be discussed as it relates to the current Top Tier CAS vs Air Defense setting please, thanks!
I tried to outline it a bit at the start of this thread in the first comment:
It’s money bias, whenever they smell an opportunity to get more sells, they will jump on it
The USSR tree apparently is the most popular one and their top tier vehicles sell the most, so at that BR range they get favoured
At other BR ranges other nations get favoured because of sales, Look at the T58, Turm III, VIDAR, PzH 2000, SAV 20.12.48, XP-50, F-5C, NF-5A, Su-30MKK (and MK2), A-6E, etc
When they find something that they can milk, they will avoid to balance it as long as they possibly can
But when they see that something might end up becoming less popular, they will do everything in their power to prevent that from happening (the China situation, the “domination cycle”, the CAS v AA arms race, the current situation, etc)
I can guarantee you, if high/top-tier USSR players weren’t so bad while also being their biggest customers, they wouldn’t get treated so well
Too strong for what exaclty? it’s good at shooting down munitions from what I’ve seen that’s about it.
If it weren’t for the whole game being plauged with stupidly over powered CAS we wouldn’t be here anyways.
Strela was under BR’d for ages mate.
What even ? It’s not about it being about goodwill at all. Not making a poor argument at all, I’m agreeing with you but if you’re too daft to see that then it’s on you
Gaijin themselves said that the Buk was underperforming according to their internal statistics and I would 100% believe them when they say that the average USSR player can’t make the Buk work
I don’t know maybe the missile that can go 1700 m/s while being immune to multipath and the sheer amount of ammo you can carry, all while not having to manage 3 vehicles and not being as high as a 3 floor building ?
I mean I find it a bit funny that this thing has more energy than a 450kg Aster past 20 clicks, but maybe that’s just me
What OP CAS does not include KH38s or LMURs exactly ?
Yes, exactly my point, fix the manpads and adjust the BR accordingly. If Strela went up, a fixed Stinger or Mistral should have no issue going up as well.
Sure, Russia has the best vehicles throughout the types (spaas cas mbts ifvs), but russian players are conveniently the “worst of all”, so we have to give them even more op vehicles
And when we say NATO loose 80% of top tier games against Russia, pro-Russia copers say “no no NATO has the best vehicles, it’s just the players who are trash”
So on 1 hand, russian players are trash so we have to give them more op vehicles even though they have them all already, and on the other hand, NATO players are trash but they already have op vehicles so they can’t have more of them.
Double standard, we can never win with the pro-Russia players
I mean if you are even sitting in your radar vehicle instead of spawn camping enemy CAS spawn with your instant refresh PESA equipped launchers, not even a death star can save you
Don’t even get me started on the “but missile is unreliable”
I don’t know if it’s just a SAMP/T issue, but sometimes my missile just won’t even go off with a solid lock, so I guess all multiple vehicle SPAAs are kind of screwed up in their own way