its not a question as to if the adats can kill tanks or not its a question of what br its effectiveness at both deserve and at 11.0 it would not be op in any way.
i am fan of variety and glad that osa and strela came to the german tree. they should fix the roland but even if it was fixed id still want osa here. we know who operated them.
wouldnt mind seeing the wheeled variant
1 Like
Dude the OSA is like top 3 10.3 SPAA
So, essentially it’s Osa or nothing for SPAA. Not because Gaijin is greedy or evil or something but because they have a limited amount of time and manpower for development. The options are either one vehicle in many trees or one vehicle in one tree, with the other trees receiving nothing.
Interestingly it always seems that people only disapprove of copy-paste after it is added. The Osa is a perfect example, with the Indian one only coming after mass demands from British mains when the Soviet/German/Romanian ones were revealed.
Being able to kill any tank in the game vs being able to kill nothing is a big advantage, especially on our cramped maps.
Those two should be at the same BR which is higher than the BR TOR sits at as they’re definitely better.
1 Like
Though I’ve never understood why the ADATS is considered all that good of a TD. Whenever I’ve found myself in a position to actually shoot at a tank, it’s taken 2 or 3 missiles to kill and it’s so slow and has such bad firing angles that to use it offensively is near suicide.
I’ve seen Pantsirs and 2S6s kill MBTs. I’ve killed MBTs with the Stormer HVM, but none have a BR influenced by their self defence abilities. Given most that flank to attack SPAA are light tanks, most easily killed by anything with a gun, I would still argue the 2S6 has the greater self defence performance over the British ADATS at the very least
Meanwhile Roland is at 10.3
1 Like
No one should be using ADATS offensively in most situations, but it definitely can defend itself better than most other higher tier AAs.
If it can kill MBTs from any angle, I’d say it’s good enough.
ZSU-57-2 is a nice example of how AT ability can mess with AA’s BR placement. Without those strong AP shells, ZSU-57-2 would be much, much lower than it currently is. Same deal with Falcon.
Tunguska’s ammo is on par with Gepard’s main belt, so it can get the job done but mostly from the clean side shots.
MBTs actually surpass most lights in terms of mobility at higher tiers, so I’m sure they’ll flank as well.
UK ADATS definitely is the worst of the trio as it has to waste missiles to defend itself.
It was a good TD when it released and the scariest thing was like a T-80U… most modern MBTs won’t even get penetrated
Buffed*
They have their 22G pull on the Stingers?
Their G pulled rn is accurate. Their seeker, however, is more sensitive than its supposed to be, and they have longer range than IRL.
There are a load of bug reports that would say otherwise
1 Like
And Gajin is smart enough to reject them. Repeating the same lie over and over doesn’t make it right.
What lie? Multiple primary sources confirm they are underperforming. If stingers are overperforming then IGLAs need their G pull halved
1 Like
People love to misinterpret information. That’s like saying the F-104 should be able to go 1,200 mph at sea level because 1,200 mph was it’s theoretical max speed, ignoring the fact it could only achieve it at, iirc around 40k ft.
Gajin is smart enough to realize the sources were using a different metric.
1 Like
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/yUohrEMuQLna
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/LbD7XSmoaAJc
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/CrgLh51VkpQZ
Well, the main reports have been accepted, including the maneuverability report. so…
1 Like