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
Before gaijin add 2x R-73. I want gaijin rename Su-24M → Su-24M2, add 2x R-73 and increase BR to 11.7 or 12.0 (Air AB, Air RB & Air SB) for next major update
Battle rating 12.7 for Ground RB, my guess
1 Like
i would love for su24m to get r73 but we will see
1 Like
The game first and foremost has to be decompressed further to at least BR 15.0.
I agree, AIM-9M don’t belong here at 11.3, but the bracket 12.0-13.0 / 11.7-12.7 we have in SB would make this plane DOA. Have you tried the Mig 29 recently? I tried to spade the Iranian F-14 and struggled hard against team full of Mig 29. I was first on my team but it still felt like an uphill battle, barely positive K/D. So then I went and tried the Mig 29 myself and I had a +30kill game with 3 deaths with it against F-16 / F-15 and F-14. Felt more like shooting fish in a barrel. But the Mig 29 can’t go up because it would find itself in this exact position against AMRAAMS.
Then there is the AV-8 with AMRAAM at 13.0 and J-8F with AMRAAM at 13.0.
Now imagine the A-10 going against these planes. It’s neigh impossible to get anything done before being intercepted with the A-10’s we already have in the game (thank you, killfeed!!!).
I would much rather they added the A-10C without AIM-9M to be honest.
1 Like
The only Tornado that have this ability in game is British F.3 (late)
I guess 0% win rate at Soviet/Chinese side in 10.3-11.3 bracket. Like just top tier already.
1 Like
yes，kh31，kh58u，kh59 all have long range，If paired with a good sighting system and anti-radiation missile working mechanism, they will perform very well in Ground RB
And while USSR has this everyone else has a feature USSR gets constantly denied (with only exception being Su-25SM3) having thermal pods that could have been in game for long time.
3 Likes
Simply, they could add ‘Khod’ pod to Su-25T and Su-25TM and not add Su-25SM3 or (I’m not sure about this) add pod french with thermals to Su-27SM. Both were denied AFAIK
1 Like
There’s also thermal pod that goes for MiG 29SMT, as well if I am remembering this right LIGHTING 2.
2 Likes