Please don’t take this thread off topic (even if you’re dropping truth nukes). As I’ve said here many times, please try to only discuss the relation between Air Support and Air Defense systems ingame when using this thread, not naval or the BMPT.
I just don’t want it to get locked… (looks at Kh-38 thread)
7 Likes
At the current state of this thread, there’s more complaining than any reasoning being used. So I don’t see much use of it long-term.
Yes SIM have a more large Russia bias
5 Likes
Thats two different things. Having a subpar K/D in a vehicle, sure you can still say you have a great time in it because you just enjoy the vehicle (Congratulations for evolving past the “Fun relies on K/D or K/S” mentality). That still doesnt tell anything about the actual usability of the vehicle and its capabilities which are at best comparable by its advantages, disadvantages and in small parts its specifications which in terms of statcards leave out half the stuff (and in terms of statistics that we have access to in K/D and K/S).
Sure you can call out imbalances, which is easy in case of the vehicle that is the issue here, because its rather obvious and its easy to jump on the already moving OPtrain.
If you were to look strictly at its specifications its easy to end up where all the “BUK is op” complainers ended up at without ever having played it themselves. Yeah the missiles are (or were upon introduction) the best spaa missiles in game. Doesnt mean the vehicle itself can still very situational and its usability heavily map-dependent. Vehicles are more than their statcard. And more than their ammunition. The Missile can be absolutely awesome in 1 out of 10 scenarios (Long range high altitude engagements…If you just ignore that those basically never happen in wt) if in the other 9 cases it just doesnt work or theres better alternatives in form of other vehicles then overall it can still be a chore to play.
So, how the vehicle actually plays on different maps and in different scenarios, how good it is in the meta is something that someone can judge better the more experience the person has facing it but also playing it.
1 Like
Me and my fella when someone justify the next broken thing russia gets in a row cuz “reverse and deprechion bad”
8 Likes
M19 tiles are also supposed to be rated against all types of shaped charges, including EFP IEDs as far as I am aware, which are essentially kinetic energy projectiles so it should definitely provide at least 80-100mm of KE, but apparently only Russia is capable of producing useful ERA.
Slightly hot take maybe: The Pantsir SM-SV shouldn’t be nerfed, other AA should be buffed to be as close as possible to it in terms of powerlevel (both with direct buffs and indirect buffs, for example a LDIRCM nerf would be an indirect buff for the SLM).
june-november 2025 was some of the most fun I have had in top tier GRB in a while, since the SLM, SAMP-T etc dominated CAS, meaning that ground actually meant something in ground RB.
3 Likes
Would be nice but ground meaning more means that tanks are more important which in turn means that nations with mid tanks suffer aka russia would become worse and we apparently can’t have that in the big 26
2 Likes
2 things gaijin could do right now that would change everything quite dramatically and buff multi-vehicle systems:
1: Lower multipath specifically for ground launched ARH AAMs. (Was rumored at one point in time)
2: Introduce ECM, via pods and built in systems. (ARMs would be nice as well, but not anything major)
And then with that the Pantsir will be on par with other systems
1 Like
I will continue to support you… though I don’t know if it will still help
Broken because of current map design
That would be the better overall explanation
I would more say buffs in-line with the vehicles actual preformance. Rather than trying to “match” the Pantsir, if that makes any sense.
2 Likes
completely destroy any semblance of functionality for any vehicle that isnt maneuverable or modern enough to be able to combat any of these systems on top of making every ARH SPAA effectively able to deny any and all ability to combat them.
Were seeing right now how fun SPAAs that ignore multipath are with SARH BUKs and HAWKs in nuclear thunder which cheat by often continuing to guide in despite lack of LOS and you want that on smaller maps with full on ARH systems.
People that want MP reduction just cant play SPAAs.
ok and what happens to those planes that get uptiered to see these systems without the ability to have ECM pods. Literally worthless, especially when coupled with your previous suggestion of no MP.
No, no it wont. Youve just made a much worse gameplay for anyone playing CAS of any nation. I cant imagine a more deaf toned thing to do than to get rid of MP so BUKs mach 3+ missiles can hit you whereever you are. And i say this as someone who like playing SPAA like CLAWS/NASAMS, Type03 and similar a lot.
This is accurate to how the strella’s seeker works it shouldn’t be able to be flared period its mostly limited by range
brother, all i can do is point to enemy(ies), left click, right click. every thing else is automatic
how else do you want me to do in Type 03?
5 Likes
HOJ would fix a lot of our issues. Python 5, IRIS-T and AIM-9X should have it. LDIRCM would just engage HOJ and they would die.
realistically its now the best 12.7 in the game by a large margin. its competing with a mig-29 with r-60s, a mirage 2000 with 4 missiles and a much worse radar, and f-16s with no radar missiles. AND YEAH SARH MISSILES AT 13.0 IS HELL, they really did add a su-27sm at a lower BR( premiums are the most hand held things known to man)
2 Likes
To be honest I think the mechanically scanned array options at 12.7 should be moved down to 12.3 minimum. (Fox three carriers can go 13.3)
No reason why the F16I and F18C late should be at 14.0.
(Edits were fixing errors thanks autocorrect, and adding the last bit)
mig-29 to 12.3 would be a plague I’d personally like to see the top end BR go up again and see all of the ARH demons move up