With the introduction of the su-34, and possibly more modern aircraft beyond the late 20th century. It is becoming abundantly clear that the USA ground tech tree needs the defense systems such as the THAAD or Patriot missile systems. The ADATS is being outperformed at the moment by the su-34’s capabilities. To be clear, I do NOT believe nerfing this plane is the solution or any other plane in that matter. The tree needs a Pantsir missile system equivalent vehicle.
6 Likes
That is meant for countering ballistic missiles and it requires a lot of auxiliary vehicles.
5 Likes
Even if I agree with this statement, are you aware that a Patriot IS NOT a Pantsir equivalent
6 Likes
There’s a little issue with that, the U.S. doesn’t not have an equivalent to the Pantsir, most of the U.S. doctrine is using aircraft as air defence.
4 Likes
Well most lf nato.
This brought us to the current dilema and the reason the effort for anti air systems has doubled.
At least we getting skyranger soonish.
The iris-t boxer gonna wait on itself for a long as time…
The trouble is that normally, to counter the threat of surface to air systems, American (and for that matter, most of NATO’s) aircraft would be carrying weapons and equipment for SEAD/DEAD missions. Things like ECM pods… ARMs… things we don’t have in game.
3 Likes
What does that have to do with anything. Giving an f15 an anti radiation missile wouldn’t make the adats better.
1 Like
Couldn’t they technically add paper vehicles and such for spaa?
Or if anything, nerf the patriot down to 20km’s just for ground forces
Probably would be a bad idea, cause the U.S. would get most of Russia’s top tier, and Russia would get some of NATO top tier
Probably the best choice for a SPAA the U.S. could get right now, the SLAMRAAM carriers. Wouldn’t need to make a paper vehicle controversy.
13 Likes
+1
(Paper vehicle controversy? We already got a lot of em don’t we such as the jap’s f16,E-100 and such?)
we should get AMRAAM Humvees and whatnot, but make the AMRAAMs hand guided like Pantsyr.
I would be interested to see how they would do that, because I’m pretty sure they don’t have a sight.
1 Like
Eh. A lot of people still don’t like paper vehicles in the game, and I’ve seen people use unrealistic stuff in the game to add more unnecessary stuff, so it’s just easier to use vehicles that were really made. I personally would not be against it, cause there were a lot of really cool paper tanks, such as the ALVT, that I would like to see in War Thunder.
1 Like
That’s the equivalent to the Russians getting the beat up Abrams as seen below your comment.
1 Like
Just saying that if a Pantsir equivalent is needed so badly and there is nothing else available (Which there is, SL-AMRAAM carriers being the best choice right now) the U.S. could get a literal Pantsir. I don’t think captured vehicles are the best choice right now. Especially. There are usually better vehicles that can be added and cause less of a controversy. Like instead of a T-90A for the U.S., they could add the Object 478BEM-1, which would make pretty much no controversy whatsoever.
That Pantsir is in no way able to be operated as it was torched, it’s just a hopium mobile at that point. Also the SLAMRAAM would be your best hopes, plus they’re Fox-3 which is cool.
1 Like
Just start playing other nations. It’s proven Gaijin doesn’t give a flying fuck about US ground. We’re the cannon fodder to stroke their egos