War Thunder "Hornet's Sting" - Changelog

[Master_Teaz]

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

SU33

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

14.0

What?

The Su-33 is just a heavier Su-27 with 2 more BVR capable pylons, it is not fit for 14.0 in any means,

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

SU34

its deserving of its BR, at 13.3, its flight performance is quite weak, yes it has 8 FOX-3s, but it is the standard R-77 which is poor, especially on the Su-34, which is the worst Flanker airframe

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

The bias R77s

R-77s are probably the worst FOX-3 in game, it only beats the Mica in range, and the seeker is poor, the R-77-1 is only bringing it up to AIM-120 standards

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

plus they carry like 12

at the cost of:
countermeasure count, (Su-33 only has 48, Su-34 has 98, against the F-15s 240 and Euro 384 at 14.0, only the Rafale has anything remotely comparable and its still much more than both (164) )
MAW, (Euro, Rafale)
TWR, (Significant Margin)
MER,
BVR ability (Airframe related not missile)
FOX-3 Seeker quality
top speed
acceleration

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

best Missile at the lowest BR.

only really the R-27ER could be argued for that, even then its not below 12.7, whereas the AIM-7F (same Flight performance as AIM-7M/P and a very similar seeker bar the DL on the P) is first seen at 12.0

R-73 too, but the R-73 really isn’t that special, with it being seen at 11.0 minimum on a Su-25, and not on anything competitive until 13.0

meanwhile
Magic II is first seen at 11.3 on the Jaguar IS (Semi-competitive airfame) and 12.0 on a competitive airframe,

AIM-9M is first seen at 11.7 on an A-10 (Su-25 Adjacent, 2x more missiles + HMD compared to Su-25) and also at 13.0 on a competitive airframe

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

Remember AIM7Ps arent Fore and forget Air to Air missiles either.

neither is the R-27ER, only the Su-34s, R-77 is, like stated before, is likely the worst 90’s era FOX-3 in game

[vizender]

@Master_Teaz

FOX-3 Seeker quality

I believe only the MICA has a different seeker with smaller notch angle while the others are identical.

Anyway, in air RB, I agree, the SU30SM is nothing special.
Aside from the R27ER insane performances (that are thankfully balanced with fox 3s), I do agree that most Russian air is okay, but not OP.
However, I do still have the issue of the r73 at 11.0 still facing planes that don’t even have countermeasures (many 10.0 aircrafts), which is a bit stupid (not for the IRCCM, but by the fact that they just can’t be dodged below 3km in any way, even more in front aspect). I have the same issue with all all aspect missiles that can go below 10.3 (where I believe every planes has countermeasures above 10.3), so it’s not just the r73, but the aim 9l is still somewhat dodgeable for some airframes in certain situations

[MotorolaCRO]

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

The bias R77s

RU is biased because they have pretty poor ARHs, hence they need to go up in BR.

One of the best takes in 2025 so far.

[noamax]

Su30 can get r77-1 but hornet cant get aim120c
If thats not bias then what is

[BasherBenDawg8]

Well which Aim-120C are you referring to? Theres quite a few variants with dramatic performance increases between variants. Keep in mind the R-77-1 is on par with the Aim-120A/B ingame right now, despite the fact those are underperforming. It’s quite a proper and balanced choice really.

[Pvt_Wade]

@HOMINUSNOCTURNO-live

SU33 and SU34 need to go to 14.0. The bias R77s and R7-1s plus they carry like 12 of them lol Russia has thier best Missile at the lowest BR. Remember AIM7Ps arent Fore and forget Air to Air missiles either.

su33 doesn’t have fox3s

[noamax]

Not rly r77-1 has the long range prformance of 120 with being the second best fox 3 for short range
The only fox 3 to have both good short and long range performance
And for 120c lets say the first variant for now

[BasherBenDawg8]

@noamax

Not rly r77-1 has the long range prformance of 120 with being the second best fox 3 for short range
The only fox 3 to have both good short and long range

Yet the flight model the missile is on is still pretty mid for BVR. The Aim-120A/B on NATO aircraft still outrange the R-77-1 quite easily and even have better platforms, but yes it’s slightly worse at close range and they have less missiles. It’s more of a tradeoff than an imbalance as I see. If the Su-30SM had something like the Su-27SM engines, I might see it a bit more as a threat,.

@noamax

And for 120c lets say the first variant for now

That would be the Aim-120C-2, with only an improved seekerhead. The Aim-120C-3 is the same but with clipped find and less drag, the Aim-120C-4 is same as C-3 but has a better warhead, and the Aim-120C-5 is same as C-4 but has a much better motor and much further range. Goes on beyond that too.

[Demokrat4]

AIM-120C (mostly C-5 or C-7):

Increased launch range (realistically up to ~30–35 km).
Improved resistance to jamming.
Faster transition to active radar homing.
More reliable behavior when maneuvering against targets.

AIM-120D (if added later):**
Significantly better range and active radar homing.
Almost instantaneous response to target position updates via two-way data link.
Extremely high resistance to EPR decoys (flares) and jamming.

[noamax]

@BasherBenDawg8

Yet the flight model the missile is on is still pretty mid for BVR. The Aim-120A/B on NATO aircraft still outrange the R-77-1 quite easily and even have better platforms, but yes it’s slightly worse at close range and they have less missiles. It’s more of a tradeoff than an imbalance as I see. If the Su-30SM had something like the Su-27SM engines, I might see it a bit more as a threat,.

Su30 is much better then f18c

@BasherBenDawg8

That would be the Aim-120C-2, with only an improved seekerhead. The Aim-120C-3 is the same but with clipped find and less drag, the Aim-120C-4 is same as C-3 but has a better warhead, and the Aim-120C-5 is same as C-4 but has a much better motor and much further range. Goes on beyond that too.

U confused me here ngl i didnt knew there is so many versions
I think the c5 which is in the files will do the work
And ofc on the f18
We dont want f15e or typhoon with c5

[BasherBenDawg8]

@noamax

Su30 is much better then f18c

Agreed, wish the F/A-18C was at 13.7 really (or the F-18C at least), or we get some decompression.

@noamax

U confused me here ngl i didnt knew there is so many versions

Yeah lol, I’m always confused myself when someday says just add the Aim-120C. I guess you could say in a similar fashion to mentions of the Aim-9M (which gaijin has yet to differentiate and label correctly), as some of these go up to really late variants with the 9X seekerhead and 35Gs of pull.

[Tristacomand]

@BasherBenDawg8

Yeah lol, I’m always confused myself when someday says just add the

Some simply won’t stop until every aircraft carries AIM-260, AIM-95 and AIM-9X block III.

I really hope we reach some kind of asymmetric balance soon and that the balance sticks.

I don’t want a game where F-22A and F-35A of 2024 specifications are flawless planes with no weakness that isn’t over compensated by overwhelming advantage, but I feel great consternation that this is the future of Air RB/sim/jetstrike/duels.

Current indications are that ‘redfor’ nations will not receive planes with superior flight performance, rwr or radar anytime soon. They should at least have better missiles or something as an edge to create interesting asymmetrical dynamics.

Right now we have missile parity, but huge radar, flight performance, rwr and maws disadvantages for redfor vs blufor.

Rafale is still basically flawless and lacks basically any counter or check.

[Pvt_Wade]

@Tristacomand

AIM-9X block III

block 3 was cancelled

@Tristacomand

AIM-95

very old cancelled missile probably didn’t even have irccm

[TaseR]

Why are the Su-7’s still at 9.3? They fight Mig-21’s and other vehicles with superior speed, agility, and weaponry

The bomb CCIP was removed, the bomb load is insufficient to destroy 1 base in ARB, and only has 160 ammo.

[Ion_Protogen]

@TaseR

Why are the Su-7’s still at 9.3? They fight Mig-21’s and other vehicles with superior speed, agility, and weaponry

Because 9.3 is the lowest a supersonic aircraft can go. It just can’t have it’s BR changed until Gaijin decompresses 9.3.

[mm10000]

Gaijin can you please lower the Tu-4 to 7.7 it already there in Realistic ground battles and Simulator mode but not in Air battles

[mm10000]

Gaijin with what logic does the Tu-4 actually makes sense being in 8.0🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[Psusennes]

Is it just me or anyone else noticed that the Gripen engine sound is identical to the Hornet. A bit odd, given that the Gripen does neither have the same engine type, nor it has two of them.

[Master_Teaz]

@Psusennes

Gripen does neither have the same engine type

they both use the GE F404, though the Gripen uses the Domestic License-produced version called the RM12

much like the P&W Cyclone and Shvetsov M-25
Or the RR Merlin and the V-1650 (“Packard Merlin”)

the real question is why the F-15 and F-16A have very different engine sounds despite both using the same model of the F100

[ALeX_M83]

Can someone explain to me how a 35mm AP shell hitting the bottom of a vehicle at a tangent from more than a kilometer away can blow up an M48??? What the ******* is this???

Moreover, in the tester you will not destroy the crew in any way and penetration is possible at angles of almost 180*, but in the game there is some kind of separate reality with some other laws of physics.