I’m quite looking forward to trying out the GPS+SAL Paveway, and Brimstones seem to have some meme potential too
Fax
i mean compared to the a10c the tornado has it much better in arb, far superior airframe, also has hms, it should be higher than the a10c in air
are you really compering the tornado to the A10C?
and at 12.0 it would be.
Though…
- A-10C has better low speed handling
- 4x Aim-9M instead of the 2 on the GR4
- Full HMD and not HMS (the A-10C has the in-HMD-IFF which is really good in sim)
- Equal CM count (if running TERMA, less flares but more chaff if running BOZ)
- Both have MAWS (if you are running TERMA instead of BOZ)
- A-10C has better stand-off weapons for GRB
- A-10C has a much better gun with a lot more ammo.
Only major advantage of the GR4 is flat line speed.
2 Likes
it has better low speed handling because all it can do is low speed, hms is only relevant in 1 gamemode, the a10c has a higher BR in grb due to its better striking weapons, gun doesnt matter if the opponent isnt completely incompetent
So in air modes then. A-10C at 11, 7 Tornado Gr4 at 12.0. Done.
Just because the Tornado Gr4 is faster than the A-10C doesnt justfy the GR4 suddenly being 12.3 instead of 12.0.
youre underplaying the fm advantage of the tornado by a lot, its better in overall maneuverability on top of speed and climb rate
You will never win a turn fight in a Tornado IDS. Never. Unless the pilot you are facing is really stupid.
A-10C, if you can bait them low and slow, will win most of the time.
The Tornado is faster in a straight line that is it. That is the only advantage the GR4 holds over the A-10C. And again. Im not suggesting the GR4 be 11.7. Im suggesting it should be 12.0. Which is a higher BR than the A-10C.
1 Like
fair enough, but the a10c relies on foolish enemies while the tornado can hold its own better against fighters. 12.3 or 12.0 would probably work fine
It will be DOA in 1v1 battle against even 11.7/11.3 (RB/SB) like the Mig-23MLD (with a competant pilot). At 12.3/12.7 (RB/SB) That it has currently, it stands no chance vs F-16s or Mig-29s. Let alone those at 13.0/13.3 with fox-3.
Overall I’d give the GR4 the same A2A performance/survivability to that of the F-111F but its at a higher BR
4 Likes
Is there anything else worth boasting about the Tornado GR4 besides being able to fly at supersonic speed?
After the disappearance of the millimetre-wave missile, which was deliberately criticised by Gaijin for the “balance”, only the invincible aircraft of AGM114K can be used. Now I just want to use Su34 to laugh at it fiercely.
5 Likes
Minimal, but the FLIR is quite nice. Should be handy in Sim when flying the GR4 in the exact same manner as you fly the GR1 currently, low, fast and with a belly full of bombs. ePaveways are also kinda interesting, hoping to see those on the Gr7
But yeah… GR4 is a minor upgrade overall.
1 Like
The 11.3 f104 asa would beat it i think due if it gets past the 9ms
@Smin1080p_WT I have a real question, why do you (Gaijin, or the dev team, I don’t really know who is in charge of that) keep adding more and more modern planes to the game if you can’t introduce them with their real weapons?
One of the things I find more and more frustrating is that recently, all the planes added have been with reduced capabilities or limitations in their loadouts, why not wait another year (or even more if necessary), find equivalents for other countries, and add them all at the same time, with their real capabilities.
Not only would it make many players much happier (we wouldn’t even need to get upset in this thread) but also the balancing would be much better, since all nations would have weapons with similar capabilities.
4 Likes
Because it’s a Russian company with Russian employees, some of whom are extremely biased against Western weapon systems. In reality, balance considerations have not interested anyone since at least the open beta of the game. This fact, along with the desire to present Russian weapons in a more favorable light compared to Western counterparts, contributes to the current situation.
4 Likes
@mmyatt95
It’s an 18km range, not 12:
Easily stand-off of all SPAA when played correctly.
It probably should be 20km, but with current SPAA it doesn’t change the playstyle.
“Spam” Brimstones from 18 - 16km, dodge Pantsir with a minor turn, and get at least one kill, up to 3 probably.
@Flogger_cbs
So that’s why NATO stuff is superior to everything Soviet in War Thunder… oh wait, NATO isn’t Russian.
Soviet weapons in War Thunder are correctly portrayed as inferior, cause that’s what they are.
If Soviet weapons were superior, then T-72B would be 12.0 firing a round better than DM53 with gen 3 thermals.
snail cant bullshit that much to get away with that besides Russia doesn’t have a round like that that’s usable in the older T series tanks because of limitations to the auto loader
Russia has always focused on large numbers of good enough tanks and aircraft because they know they cant compete on a technological edge with the US (Russia also tends to overstate numbers where as nato tends to understate them)
so well the flighttime for 20km we are taliking 60s+, by the time the aircraft flys over the target and the lock is broken there still is 20s left to impact
That’s the point. Soviet equipment is inferior, that’s why newer equipment is higher BRs.
The more INFERIOR the equipment, the lower its BR for the newness of the vehicle.
War Thunder portrays Soviet vehicles as weaker, which is a fact that could only be refuted if they had a lot of older equipment higher in BR to newer NATO equipment.
On top of that, a Swiss mathematician gave us the penetration system for 3BM series rounds, not Russian.
NATO gave us T-series composite protection numbers [specially through declassified Soviet documents], not Russian.
NATO gave us Kontakt 1 & 5, and Relikt numbers, not Russian.
Well yeah, you’re not supposed to fly over targets in ground RB.
1 Like