But they will do it in a relatively very long time. And meanwhile, russian players will just benefit from the META for months, even years. It’s always like that they indirectly impose the bias.
Pantsir 1 was dominated for years, and NATO had to wait years before getting some kind of equivalent SPAAs. Same with 2s38 : I remember it being one of the first IFVs getting that proxy he shell (maybe the first one if I remember correctly). Pe-8 was the first bomber with that big bomb, for years. And many other examples (I think the Mi-28nm got released before the AH-64E ? But I’m not sure).
And they’re doing the exact same thing with heavily armored unmanned turret tanks right now. BMPT is the only one rn. Maybe in some months/years, they’ll release those unmanned turret NATO MBTs as well.
But it’s always Russia that benefits from the good stuff first. And sometimes, they also benefit from the good stuff for themselves only (LMURs, effective russian ERAs, heavy armor unmanned tank (BMPT), x4 ATGMs on the russian IFVs, those big rocket loadouts on some of russian helicopters, …).
They do not, I can easily make you a compilation of spike launches and not even half gonna be lethal hits
China does have some, one its already ingame (the event thing with 4 Fnf (which also sucks) and mini ATGMs) and other not ingame yet.
Russia and China in the regular TT does not have them, but at least they have TANDEM launch-on-the-move ATGMs that NATO doesnt have, so pretty fair.
From my experience those work a lot better than people claim they do, also redfor nations don’t even have FnF ATGMs on their ground vehicles
Man stop, I’m not gonna argue with you further if you begin by saying spikes top approach modeling is not broken lol. The EBRC Jaguar is my most used vehicle beside the vbci2, I’m launching those missiles every day every game. They launch wherever they feel like it, they’re completely broken.
Russia doesn’t need those spike missiles as they are completely useless. They have the good effective stuff aka laser guided atgms.
They could even give spike missiles the ability to be manualy guided but no, they don’t want to, for “purpose balance” (oh well, it’s ok to balance NATO stuff but not russian stuff I guess).
EDIT : I could continue arguing saying TOW-2B missiles should be the main point of why people use Bradley (but they’re completely broken, too bad), that tandem atgms do not pass ERAs most of the time, that russian MBTs should have an equivalent of turret basket (even if they don’t have any) so it is fair to fight them as NATO, that the current NATO best darts still don’t pen russian UFPs so they’re factly useless, that yak-9k IS completely OP (“A player that is good with similar planes is equally as powerful”, wtf does that even mean). But you know, I know the drille : “russian bias doesn’t exist”
I rather have tandem launch-on-the-move (I didnt even talk about how russian IFVs can launch their ATGMs on the move while NATO ones can’t for some reason ?? Also, NATO IFVs must deploy their launchers too in some cases, and it takes very long time to do so. I should add that to the list), than useless spike/mmp missiles hiting a commander mg/era/track 90% of the time.
NATO ground ATGMs are usually guided by cable (like the TOW), suposedly no vehicle can launch cable guided missiles on the move because they intertwine or smth like that, BMP-2’s konkurs also suffer from this.
In compare, most of Russian ATGM carriers (like bmp3, bmd4, btr82at, bmpt) use laser guided atgm (no cable).
This is next level gaslighting; I main the Puma and Vilkas and I can tell you with a high degree of confidence that they are absolute dogwater. Their performance would greatly improve if they were modeled as top-attack and not the sea-skimming BS we have now. I’d take 4 Atakas or Khrizantemas I can actually guide and aim over some RNG missile that’s underperforming.
Now, I do a lot of testing in test drive as well, but I have found that for certain weapons the performance in test drive doesn’t really reflect the real gameplay performance
You only ever hit the same few spots in those tests, your target doesn’t move, the target vehicle doesn’t change, your only variations are (judging by the test rules) the angle at which the missile gets launched and your launch position and those variations can’t be all too big
Maybe it’s just the way I use them (or again, maybe I’m an outlier), but I’ve found them to work great on maps with rough terrain and ones with bush/tree patches (bonus points if there are high spots to sit on to off-set the lack of true top attack lol)
When I can see the target, I avoid firing them frontally at USSR tanks because of their turret shape and the possibility of ERA being in the way and Merkavas, because of their module and crew layout
Favoured targets are light vehicles, NATO and Chinese MBTs, helicopters and approaching planes
(I also like to use the Spikes against BMPTs, just to harass them, but I will admit, that isn’t a good way to actually kill them)
I’ve got no experience with them in actual top tier, so if the performance against 11.7+ MBTs is the actual issue, I won’t be able to argue that
Spoiler
Or maybe my time playing low tier Britain (and watching people Track-and-Barrel Torture heavies) has made me value crippling an opponent more than outright killing them lol
Sounds like your opinion to me mate, they work fine for me.
Naturally the would, which I am all for but if they get it they’ll absolutely dominate too.
There are no ground fired ATGMs which do proper top attack, like lofting etc.
Also my Spikes don’t skim all the time they go up and over like they should if it’s at a decent range.
I’d take a spiek I can lock n launch over them any day.
Again personal feelings.
aye, I too am using them on the Namer before and when I return to isreal, so I do know how they work, They’ve gotten me 90 percent of my namer kills xD not many but I’ve used it very little.
I have used spike a lot in my matches, and I can say they do not perform well, at least not for the BR as they stand (except AH-60, that one should stay and LDIRCM ones should go higher)
We can easily settle this with recording our 3 first matches of the day using Namer or other spike ground carrier and count how many of the spikes launched resulted in critical hits/kills.
Here’s an other : they are less efficient in an actual match compared to test drive from my experience
Now what
Let’s not pretend the mere 5-20° angle at hit we have in game is similar to the 30-45 one we have IRL
Let’s also not pretend this is a game limitation since LMURs do it just fine.
I’d prefer if we didn’t talk about ground launched in general, since CAS/Pantsir is a subject of this thread. If there are correlations being made to the loft angles of western FnF atgms and them being present on ground vehicles is being seen as their reason for its incorrect modeling as well that’s fine.
