Tornado GR1 - Missing ALARM

In the Heavy Cavalry update, ALARM has been added to the game but artificially restricted from the Tornado GR1 due to “balance concerns”.

This has a number of significant issues which quite frankly doesn’t make sense.

The first and most important of them all, is the hard requirement for the Tornado GR1 to remain at 11.3. Britain has 0 ground vehicles at 11.0 or 11.3, you would not uptier the 10.7 line-up to 11.3 just to make use of the Tornado GR1, so you would exclusively use the Tornado GR1 at 11.7 anyway alongside the Challenger 2s and ADATS currently at 11.7.

This is the same Battle rating as the Tornado RET8 which has gotten 4x AGM-88. The Tornado RET8 gains a number of advantages over the Tornado GR1 such as:

  • Better engines
  • More Flares
  • MAWS
  • Better Targeting pod
  • Better GBUs

The Tornado GR1’s only real advantage is the Fire & Forget PGMs which are of mixed value given their poor handling, slow speed and TV seeker. They are almost always intercepted before reaching the target.

ALARM are versatile weapons, able to engage pretty much everything they can encounter, but are slower than AGM-88 with less range. They also have an extreme loft profile that results in them missing anything that is too close. This heavily limits any surprise attacks and results in them being notably easy to intercept. For the most part, ALARM is weaker than AGM-88C.

The reason given for ALARM being refused is that any quantity of ALARM being added to the Tornado GR1 would result in a BR increase to 12.0. Even a reduced quantity such as 5. Just let that sink in for a moment. A Tornado GR1 with 5x ALARM, is considered 12.0 but a Tornado RET8 with 4x AGM-88C is fine at 11.7. I genuinely and completely cannot understand any possible reasoning behind it.

If 5x ALARM is so unbelievably OP then why not reduce the count even more? Worse case scenario imo would be 4 in the same positions as the AGM-88, 2x on the belly, 2x on the main wing pylons. An even more extreme limitation in count, but compensated for by a significant amount of flexibility would be limiting it to the 2x ALARM on the unique outer Pylons. This would allow 2x ALARM to be run alongside the full standard A2G payload, but the heavily reduced count would then not be unreasonable for the 11.7 BR.

This so far only considers the Tornado GR1 in a GRB context and fails to acknowledge the Tornado GR1 in an ARB or ASB context. The aircraft needs buffs. All 6 at 11.3 ideally need buffs. Adding ARM to these airframes would not only increase their functionality, but also make these aircraft more fun, without impacting balance in any way. The ASSTA1 and IDS (1995) probably should at least get 2x AGM-88 if not their full 4x AGM-88 just for Air modes alone. Tornado GR1 is likewise the same, and the outer 2x Pylons at a minimum would be the most effective buff for the Tornado GR1 at this time. Allowing for 2x ALARM to always be run. Increasing the count further, only aids it even more.

The bare minimum the Tornado GR1 should receive is the 2x Outer Pylon ALARM. I do not believe that gaining 2-3 on the belly on top of this would be unreasonable, bringing the total count to 4 or 5. Yes it would allow for 2x PGMs to be run at the same time, but these are hardly powerful weapons at this BR and rarely actually make it to the target. But the bare minimum should be 2x ALARM, and if 2x ALARM on top of the current existing loadout is considered unreasonable at 11.7, then there is simply no point to pretending that balance exists anymore.

What should the Tornado GR1 (at a GRB BR of 11.7) receive?

  • Add all available ALARM
  • Add a limited ALARM count
  • Don’t add ALARM
0 voters
7 Likes

Just add ALARM and raise the BR to 12.0 GRB

1 Like

They have just nerfed the 11.7 CR2s rather significantly, so yeah, why not

add alarm and better engines

2 Likes

+1

This is exactly the same issue affecting the Italian Tornado IDS line.

If the Tornado Ret.8 can receive 4x AGM-88C at BR 11.7, then ARM capability itself clearly cannot be considered a balance issue at this level.

Italian Tornado IDS aircraft from Ret.3 standard — and even earlier through the IDS-HARM configuration — were also able to use AGM-88 HARM. Italy operated the AGM-88B and later the AGM-88E, while the AGM-88C is already present in game.

So, if the Ret.8 already receives AGM-88C, there should be no real reason to keep the Italian Tornado IDS variants without any SEAD capability.

The same restrictive approach also affects anti-ship missiles: Italian Tornado IDS variants still do not receive Kormoran, apparently because it remains reserved only for the old German Navy event Tornado.

At this point, the Italian strike aircraft line is suffering from the same artificial loadout restrictions discussed here, despite having historically valid options available.

3 Likes

Gr1 can only be used at 11.7 in GRB due to lineups and if it’s used at 11.7 it will see 12.0 more often than not and what lives at 12.0? That’s right pantsir, can’t give us a way to deal with that now can they?

1 Like

Yeah, the idea that it needs to be kept at 11.3 so that it can be used alongside…

Checks notes

The 10.7 lineup

Is really stupid

1 Like

Might be wrong, but can’t buccaneer get AS-37?

1 Like

Yes

French Jagaurs also used it I beleive, so technical compatibility might also mean Jaguar GR1A?

2 Likes

The french Jaguars, Mirage III E can use it, the Mirage F1 were modified by the Iraqui to carry them but not the french variant.

But all of these planes used the basic AS-37 variant, in game we currently have the ARMAT variant witch is an upgrade of this first missile

1 Like

I need this, I need those 2S6 players specifically to be clapped by this. I’m happy its on the GR.4 but I do not have a 12.0 Lineup and pretty much no desire to get one at all right now. Not with that new Pantsir out.

2 Likes

Pantsir should be pretty comfortably slapped with alarm. Buk on the other hand.

+1

ALARM’s are also currently broken in the weirdset way, they need a radar lock to fire without the GR4 having a ground radar in game and it just isnt accurate. If you lock a plane with acm and fire an alarm at it, which shouldn’t be able to happen, it will act as a fox 1/3.

1 Like

Not to mention even assuming the tornado did have a ground radar, they only model ground radar being able to see moving targets (which is an issue for another day). Meaning you could not engage a static air defence position.

1 Like

could they not just copy paste the harm for now to fix it. i would like to see them add the full stand off of the alarm but i can hope it will come in time

They could have done many things to make tornado armament useful. Sound design decisions chase them constantly, yet they are ever faster.

1 Like

Buff the Tornados please, my GR1 with 3/4 pgm 500 should not be allowed against the Sm/Sv

Not the Pantsir SM SFV.
that thing will slap EVERY HARM Missile thrown at it because it can shoot down an entire Apache Rocket salvo.

They are reskinned AMRAAMs at the moment so WIP