USA A-10C bias needs to be 12.0 to be “fair”

So an aircraft that is notably slower than you and doesnt have a radar, managed to get mutliple rear-aspect shots with Aim-9M and now you consider Aim-9M an OP Missile?

By the sounds of it, you would have died even if the Harrier Gr7 has nothing but Aim-9Bs. Heck Ive beaten enough soviet pilots in the Sea Harrier FA2 or Harrier Gr7 using guns to know that the average Soviet pilot has no idea how to fight a Harrier.

If you are trying to dogfight a harrier in a low and slow combat, you will loose. Even a Harrier Gr1 will beat a Mig-23ML in that regime (I know, I use to do it all the time before we got the new sim brackets)

If you are trying to turn fight something like the A-10C or Harrier Gr7 in aircraft not suited for low and slow combat like a Mig-23 or Su-24. Then I think you need to change tactics and not beg for major buffs for aircraft that are perfectly fine at their current BR

1 Like

My mig-23MLD R-24R: misses a-10 that chaffed huh… kinda odd.

For the no spall, the only other time I’ve ever seen something similar, was some little 10mm plate on the side of the abrams that ate whole rounds, or the German external fuel tanks that are whole rounds.

Yes the pansir has the most range, as did the German top tier aa for quite some time, what 2-3 years if I remember right? And before that, it was the Adats, which comes stock with aams that can pen 800mm and kill tanks.

Let’s not forget if a ground threat approached the pansir, it literally cannot defend itself.

Sigh… you’re delusional.

I was hit from the front, since he was flying rather low. The harrier can certainly out-turn a Mig if it’s a decent pilot.

Why don’t you get back to the topic, instead of insulting yourself further but idiotic thoughts on how I fly.

To say it as plainly as I can for you, he was not behind me, and I was flaring, with my after burner off :) simple enough for you right?

Im fairly certain I’ve been killed, through the front plate, in a Challenger 2 by a Pantsirs gun or missile spam before. To say its “defenceless” is an exergation and its no more or less vulnerable than any other SPAA at the moment in game.

Yes the ADATS can in theory take out tanks, But my experience is that the AGMs suck, especially with how common ERA and APS is becoming. I have more success with the Starstreaks than the ADATS for killing tanks

1 Like

Okay, Su-24M is perfectly balanced at 11.3 and needs no buffs or changes at all.

A-10C might move, it might not. But its placement is totally irrelevant to the Su-24M

If you think the SU-24M needs buffs because the A-10C is at the same BR. Then you are delusional

If an Adats can in theory, than a pansir can’t at all.

If you died to a pansir in a chally, either your making this up, or you had to have let him kill you.

-1 gun depression, does not work well at all.

Get back on topic.

Su-24m needs to get its R-73s, and A-10C should be 12.0

Using a single experience as the whole experience is a logical fallacy.

Either you’ve been lucky or you’re just blocking out other experiences.

And the Rolands have been nerfed to oblivion, the ADATS costs an excessive amount to spawn, Israel’s stuck with a Chaparral, and there’s been no attempt to give nations an equal vehicle to the Pantsir.

The ADATS hardly can since it doesn’t have tandem missiles and dies to being hit pretty much anywhere. The Roland doesn’t even have a gun to defend itself at all, and the Chapparal can’t even fire missiles without looking at an Air target directly.

The Pantsir is unmatched, has 4 guns, and 12 missiles second only to the FlaRakRad’s best missile at the ready when stock. The FlaRakRad has to research its only usable missile. It’s clear to me that you’ve not experienced the agony of other nations. I’ve achieved 4 separate nations at top tier and can say from my experience that the Pantsir is the only good one.

And even that’s a stretch. The Pantsir is still bad compared to where Aircraft are right now. The Su-25SM3 still has more than double the range of a Pantsir and that’s absurd.

2 Likes

if Su-24M gets R-73s then Tornado IDS at 11.3 and maybe even the F-111s at 11.7 need to get Aim-9M/Aim-9Li and remain at the exact same BR they are currently.

Simple.

if A-10C moves to 12.0 then all Su-25s need to move to 12.0.

Simple

So in your world, NATO vehicles “must be superior”

1 Like

What?!

You are the one arguing for Su-24M at 11.3 with 2x R-73.

Im just stating that if the Su-24M at 11.3 get R-73s then the Tornado. its direct equal. Should also get the equivalent IRCCM missile. Such Aim-9Li.

You are the one arguing that soviets should be superior because “reasons”

Besides. We already have plenty of soviet BIAS in game. like the fact the Mig-23ML is 11.3 but the German Mig-23MLA which is identical is at 11.7.

Its pretty clear soviet kit always gets favoured by Gaijin and is way stronger than it should be

4 Likes

They are. It’s hardcoded into the game for ammunition to not explode occasionally due to NATO having blowout panels lol

The 2A7 is still stuck on DM53 when it should be using DM73 of DM83. The M1A2 SEPv2 is from the 90s while the Russian tanks are from 2018 and 2019. NATO armor is also extremely underperforming in many aspects.

Israel is stuck with their MBT being the wrong weight and having its armor unable to stop even 8.0 shells frontally all to help Russian mains compete.

2 Likes

Wasnt a thing found that showed Soviet tanks had a lower ammo det chance compared to every other nation. or something?

4 Likes

They also (along with China) have a lower spall modifier.

Granted, Spall Liners have pretty much made that moot.

2 Likes

Yep. They also model soviet armour using NATO stats or something so it over performs like mad. But then model all shells based upon arbitary calclator numbers which result in all NATO shells having way less pen than IRL data shows. Not too mention they dont model things like ERA perforation

2 Likes

Russian ERA is also given insane KE modifiers when we know it doesn’t stop that from recent events.

I only mention that since it’s relevant to the discussion at hand.

1 Like

Yep, Someone did the math and the Challenger 2 TES’s ERA at the moment, wouldnt stop a conventional RPG or something. It was actually insane. I think it might have been buffed a little bit since then. But its a fraction of what it should be

3 Likes

The Namer can’t stop a Bazooka on the side, which I have a post about.

Also, the Challenger 2 isn’t that good in real life to be honest. The 70 RPG figure was likely a typo or intentional exaggeration from a single interview years back. The real figure was actually 7 impacts that took it out of action.

1 Like

Compared to Gaijins modeling. its way better. The number of bug reports for it is actually kinda insane. Even basic things like the Aluminium backplate on the ERA. Totally fake thing Gaijin made up. After they announced that in the Devblog for it. Multiple sources were found confirming steel backplate. But Gaijin jsut ignored them. Kinda like they did with the Stinger max G bug reports.

its killed any interest in ground for me that Gaijin is that blatant in ignoring bug reports to nerf nations

whether the number is 7 or 70. In game. It couldnt stop 1.

1 Like

That is most certainly true, but not by much. They’re just kind of mid in general. The armor is old, and their engines aren’t good enough to make up for it with mobility. They also don’t have any kind of blowout panel, so they pop just like Russian Tanks.

In WarThunder, Gaijin has admitted that they prefer to balance vehicle armor based on gameplay rather than realism, but this hasn’t been very consistent. Vehicles like the Merkava, Leclerc, Ariete, Abrams, Challenger, and so on have been suffering for many years now due to a lack of reasonable protection.

In my opinion, the worst example of this issue is the Merkava 4. The Merkava has been treated pretty awful by Gaijin. Its armor can’t stop 8.0 tanks frontally in many cases and I’ve personally had autocannons go through my UFP and turret cheeks. The armor has a worse modifier than Rubber.

The turret cheek’s thickness is around 400mm to 500mm effective or so in KE despite being 600mm flat. If it was normal RHA, it would stop more.

Some people argue that it’s to stop only CE, but it hardly even stops 9.3 missiles since the modifier is 1100mm of CE, when it needs at least 1200mm CE.

It’s well known that the vehicle should be 80 tons and have armor capable of stopping Kornets, but Gaijin won’t fix the armor since they refuse to accept any source that says the Merkava 4 isn’t 65 tons despite it being obviously wrong.

1 Like