You complain that your main nation verhicles are nerfed and that you can’t play decent anymore. Just adopt the situation or switch another verhicle.
It’s been updated several times that the Russians are totally OP in planes and the other nations have nothing to compete with.
Especially since the addition of the R73 and R27er, The Americans should already have AIM 120s because historically the R27ERs were their rivals and not the AIM 7 ones which are very old for this BR,
not to mention the other nations, the French should have the Mica too if the Russians have R27ER?
Anyway, I don’t know if you play airplane but since 3 to 4 shifts the Russians are totally abused and these get worse and worse, it becomes unplayable.
4 Likes
If you are getting stomped at by R-27ERs its skill issue.
Pretty sure that aim 120 was confirmed for next year. Russia dealt with aim7d vs r3r for over 1.5 years. US can deal with aim7f vs r27er for a bit longer.
Control method doesn’t dictate realism.
@zoltayr
The last time Soviets were OP in planes was when LA-200 was first made 7.7.
That’s it, they’ve been on-par at best ever since.
R-27ERs were never rivals with AMRAAMs.
AIM-120A & B’s rival is R-77.
MICA EM’s rival is R-77-1, AIM-120C, AAM-4, etc.
It sure does more so than armor values.
Is it possoble to operate a tank with mouse aim in real life? No
Is it possible to add weight to an abrams without increasing armor? Yes.
Realism is about what is physically possible not about what actually is. That is called accuracy.
It actually is possible to aim a tank with a mouse.
Likely? Not really, cause joystick go BRRR & FCS lock functionality exists.
Do you not feel any embarrassment crying about russian vehicles, honestly? As far as MBTs are concerned Leopards are better in every way except profile.
1 Like
Some stuff is just not fitting for a game and other fall under ballancing.
R77 started development in 1982. FRD for the AIM 120 began in… 1982. The approval for the R77 into service came in 1994, the AIM120 in 1991. They are each other contemporaries, both in timeline and capability.
That said, the time-based contemporary argument is useless. This game is not about releasing time-based contemporaries. That would make for a terrible game. Balance can only be found by matching capabilities at a given BR. And yes, the AIM7M is not a match for the R27, but neither is the AIM120.
Hence why the Panther II, Flakpanzer 341 Coelian and Tiger II 10.5cm should return in their original forms. They never should have been removed in the first place. And Gaijin better adapt, because I will not, ever. I would rather die than accept their heinous removal.
1 Like
People keep claiming Russian bias while Sweden is over here with a 3.7 spg with a 1.2 sec auto loading 120.
Sure those exist but a a stabilized mouse like in game is always faster due to psychomotorical differences.
There has been research done since the 80s on that subject.
In selecting objects (which aiming is) the mouse is the fastest, since it is the closest to natural hand movements.
Also i repeat: hive mind.
Yes the control method is more important to realism, the armor thickness is irrelevant since it only corresponds to accuracy not realism. A famous example of realism is a painting of jesus infront of a medieval french church. It is realistic but completely inaccurate. The same goes for the abrams armor it’s realistic but not accurate. While mouse aim isn’t realistic since it works with information you only have in detail in a Computer program and couldn’t work irl.
See the difference?
sweden has the 2nd most bias so after they remove the ussr well riot about sweden
This, I pretty much only play air (and now naval lol) but sweden is always just as op as the USSR - especially any BR past 5.0.
None of what you critique is unrealistic.
R-77-1’s rival is the AIM-120D
No, AIM-120D’s rival is R-77M.
You’ve been reading too much Russia weapons propaganda.
R-77-1 is a 110km range AARH with a standard integral PD radar similar to AIM-120C1-C4.
Of course it is. It goes against physics and therefore is unrealistic.
Everything that can be is realistic. Hising an infinite amount of barrels in a tank and repair them is unrealistic.
Using mouse aim that needs reference points that your pc only knows because it is used on a programm running by the pc itself which a tank would have no access to in the real world is an unrealistic tank control (since a real tank lacks the information to be opertaed this way).
On the other hand accuracy is selfexplanatory but describes if something is modelled like the real world object.
Does a tank have the correct armor is a great example. For accuracy.
But you can put tons of weight to a tank without increasing armor. It is inaccurate but it is realistic since it is physically possible.
You get realism and accuracy confused.
You also don’t have any arguments, you just say “what you say isn’t unrealistic” without giving any reason or explanation. You have no argument and just childishly repeat a mantra.
R-77M is a missile that’s still undergoing testing. The AIM-260 is at the same stage of development as it is.