Tornado GR.1 Balance Issue

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
53

It’s still only 4 9Ms on a stupidly slow airframe at 11.7. I’d much rather have 2 on a more capable airframe (even if it does mean losing MAWS and HMD. You severely underestimate how much the A-10s low speed handicaps it

You’re also severely underestimating how much of a boat the Tornado is, the A-10C and GR.1 both have their pros and weaknesses and saying one is better than the other is just a straight up lie. The A-10C as a stupid amount of countermeasures, MAWS, HMS and double the amount of AIM-9Ms as a GR.1 equipped with 9Ms as well.

Literally the only thing the GR.1 and I do mean LITERALLY is the speed advantage, they’d be pretty equal and by looking at videos on the A-10C, its very good for BR.

I just don’t want to be facing 9Ms regularly at 10.7/11.0. They are too good for that BR on an faster airframe

That’s a issue with decompression, one vehicle already suffers and by giving it AIM-9Ms, you levy the trash experience.

If it receives 9Ms it must be at 12.0 in order to remain balanced. 11.7+9Ms+supersonic plane wouldn’t be balanced, especially since it would only be 0.3 higher than the tornado with just 9Ls

Stop using other bad aircraft which are poorly balanced as an example, the Tornado IDS (11.3) should all be moved down to 11.0, they’re 11.0 worthy aircraft and wouldn’t even be the best 11.0 vehicle out there if moved down (looking at you F-5A(G)).

Obviously I said that the F-18 was balanced at 12.3, surely I haven’t said the exact opposite previously…

By saying you want the Tornado GR.1 equipped with AIM-9Ms to be 12.0/12.3 means you believe its A2A capabilities are near similar or not too far from one another, BR is a balancing method and you want to force a Tornado GR.1 into a BR range where it doesn’t belong.

China absolutely does, but there’s a language barrier, and Gaijin just doesn’t really care

I’m talking about on the main English forum, the one which is most significant.

1 Like
54

Yes, we know that the Jaguar, F-4 Phantom, Mig-27, Viggen, etc are boats.
You know what’s more of a boat than them? Su-24M, etc.

55

The Viggen???

2 Likes
56

I’ve amended the post to be more accurate.
Yeah, the Viggen’s FM was changed in like 2024 or 2023, and has been a boat since.
None of these are as bad as Su-24 of course.

You can use Statshark to compare flight models of clean aircraft: StatShark - See All Player, Missile, and Vehicle Statistics

Viggen does better in negative SEP which makes sense as Tornado needs combat flaps to pull more AOA.

57

Yes, we know that the Jaguar, F-4 Phantom, Mig-27, Viggen, etc are boats - You know what’s more of a boat than them? Su-24M, etc

None of them are as obese as the Tornado, the SU-24 is large but can actually turn compared to the Tornado iirc, the Viggen isn’t a boat when compared to the Tornado and so is every other vehicle you’ve mentioned - furthermore, the F-111C which is like double the size of the Tornado is a significantly more manoeuvrable aircraft.

1 Like
58

The Viggen is the strongest 11.3 still. Yeah, it may not be the most maneuverable plane in existence, but it is good enough to beat F-5s, Floggers and slatted Phantoms with relative ease.

1 Like
59

As I said previously, the F-111C should be 0.3 higher than the Tornadoes in air RB because of its maneuverability as long as they fire the same missiles.
Whichever one gets 9Ms should increase by 1 BR relative to where they should be currently, as 9Ms increase aircraft by 1 BR when compression doesn’t exist.

A-10A to A-10C: 1
AV-8B NA to Harrier GR7: 1.
Su-25 to Su-25T: 1.
Tornado IDS to Tornado GR4: 1.

And even compressed aircraft are 0.7 [1 if they were decompressed].
F-16A to F-16A [Belgians]: 0.7.

60

Just wanted to say that I’d prefer to see the Tornado GR.1 move down to 11.3/11.0 instead of actually receive AIM-9Ms, I only added it as a alternative option and it definitely wouldn’t be the best option either.

Maybe in the future we could get an Op Granby Tornado Gr1 with 9Ms and JP233s :P

Or a Saudi Tornado GR.4/F.3, surprised we haven’t seen one yet lol.

I do mostly agree with everything you’ve said as well

61

Whichever one gets 9Ms should increase by 1 BR relative to where they should be currently, as 9Ms increase aircraft by 1 BR when compression doesn’t exist

The addition of missiles doesn’t warrant a BR increase but the impact the combination both missile and aircraft have, it’s like when they introduced the PGM-2000 and PGM-500 onto the GR.1, it didn’t go up in BR after the split of ARB and GRB in battle rating and when the Mirage F1C-200 received the IRCCM buff it didn’t move up either iirc.

Su-25 to Su-25T

The SU-25BM exists and it’s functionally identical to the SU-25T/SU-39 in ARB minus the situational IRCM on the tail of the vehicle, also both the Harrier GR.3 and GR.1 sit at the same BR even though one has both better missiles, a RWR and countermeasures.

Furthermore it weighs less than both the SU-25T and SU-39

You’re being very selective and choosing what vehicles to make a comparison with.

F-16A to F-16A [Belgians]: 0.7

Me when F/A-18C L = F-18C (same BR)

62

I literally picked all the aircraft in the game that aren’t compressed.
Bringing up Su-25BM being under-BR’d only proves my post correct. Event aircraft tend to stay under-BR’d longer due to low player counts.

If you want the GR1 to go down, perform badly in matches to impact statistics.

63

Way ahead of you there.

1 Like
64

Dude same.

image
image2733×186 59.4 KB

Tho it appears I am earning the same RP per match as I am with Vark… which is concerning.
SL is in the toilet tho.

65

I do think 11.0 is optimistic at this time. Whilst yes the F-5A(G) with 2x 9Ls exists at the same BR, the F-5s are overperforming quite a bit at the moment and are due quite a heavy nerf. The Tornado is likely the stronger of the 2, even before its finished and at full strength.

But there is certianly no justification for it to be 11.7 at this time and should be 11.3

Now is their a path for it getting the buffs needed to warrant being 11.7 like getting BOL? Maybe. but I too would prefer the lower BR

The refit Saudi Tornado IDS is an option, but I dont think worth given we have the GR4 already, but what I really want is a Tornado IDS for the 10.0 GRB, that looks like fun gameplay and Britian is basically DOA past 10.7, so having a Tornado for that BR would be excellent. I see 2 good options for that. Either the Tornado Gr1B and be an MFG C&P or the Saudi Tornado Gr1 without its Tpod and guided weapons.

Saudi F3 would make a good premium too

But that is a matter for another thread.

But to keep it on topic,

Tornado Gr1 needs:

  • Mk103 Engine
  • 11.3 BR

All Tornado IDS need

  • BL755
  • Sky Shadow
  • Further FM development
  • Combat Thrust
  • Radar
2 Likes
66

What would a proper Radar even do in the Tornado? Or do you mean things like ground mapping?

67

To put this in perspective, the last time the Tornado was 11.0 it had a worse flight model and was among the best fighters in matches with 1 base of bombs.

It would bomb a base, frag 2 - 3 players, and RTB.
That’s why it went up in BR so quickly when first introduced.

And with the FM buffs last year, it would only be stronger.

68

Yeah, also potentially should have a fairly basic A2A SRC radar as well iirc. If its got IFF (I dont recall) then that is quite a decent boost in SB at least

1 Like
69

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like
70

I’ve taken a short peek into my two books on the Tornado on the issue of the Radar, and Ian Black (Author of the Haynes guide on the RAF Tornados) makes no mention of the Radar set/s being able to acquire aerial targets. Bernd and Frank Vetter (Authors of Motorbuch’s book simply titled ‘Tornado’) however do. But only vaguely. They mention the Radar/s being able of pursuing Aerial Targets (Luftzielverfolgung). Which to me sounds awfully like the simple ACM every Tornado already has ingame

71

I think flame found some info in the National Archives

1 Like
72

That’d be very interesting if true