Well… even talking about factory perfect vs factory perfect. There are WAY too many Bug reports for NATO tanks. About 30-50 for the Challenger 2 armour alone and plenty of evidence to suggest that Soviet ERA is notably over-performing.
You also have things not modeled like the fact many NATO shells are designed to counter Russian ERA by having a tip that perforates the ERA packets. This is not modeled in game. Additionally, tanks like the top tier Abrams has a shell from the 1990s rather than its correct shell from when it entered service because “the soviets dont have an equivalent”
When you look at other aspects of equipment as well, like the ADATS being the best Britain and US can be given, despite much better options being available, or looking at the Apaches which are limited to an AGM from the 1980s (iirc) instead of the more modern versions with both longer range, mmV seekers and FnF ability.
Even things like the fact that most NATO nations are rather limited on what targetting pods they get. Heck Britains TIALD IRL was Gen 2 by Gaijin standards, its modeled as Gen 1, that is a year old report.
BOL pods on many aircraft like the Gripen was Artificially nerfed to be less than 1/4 IRL Strength and is ommitted from many aircraft altogether like the F-15C and Tornado IDS.
I think its quite clear to see many NATO nations have some pretty major handicaps/restrictions to limit their strength in-game, but something like the T-80BVM is as strong as it possibly could be, if im not mistaken, and things like the Pantsir also has no restrictions on what it can do vs IRL, despite being by far the best SPAA in game.
Heck, the KA-52 pretty much single handedly killed any hope for a Heli PvP gamemode because of how overtuned it was and its not even like the NATO nations dont have equal equipment, it just wasnt modeled.
This is factually incorrect the M1s that were sent are m1a1SAs with the FMS export armor package. Originally they wanted to send m1a2s but decided not to.
Yep, and in contrast someone did the math, the ERA on the side of the challenger 2 TES, would be unable to stop an RPG with how its modeled in game. That is how weak it is and Gaijin refuses to fix it.
Well Russians also don’t have their top tier shell To my knowledge most of the apfsds rounds that NATO does have with the tip that the negates Russian era are the shells that we don’t have in game
Yea, shocking the nation with the highest military spending in the world, by far, has they best technologie.
Should gajin just implement this into the game so US players can one click destroy everything in unrealistic combat scenarios like in war thunder ?
From what I know pencir is slightly restricted at least when it comes to the radar performance however also the Russian tanks again I’m a t72 main T90 m does not have its full armor package which is not to say that it would change by much but there is a few things to note like lack of turret side bag era and nakitka termal cover
I also play UK and Israel, i take an Abrams any day over a Challenger or the absolute behemoth the Merkava is.
Im not against changes for the US. Altough im convinced most of it’s issues come from the s"itbait players one death leavers and not the actual tanks.
Im just asking myself why it’s been discussed why US doesn’t have it’s newest technologies modeled in the game, when it’s obviously why not → it’s a game
For example. Spike has been added to the game for many helis as a fire and forget missile. The Apaches lack this, despite having it IRL. Whilst the mmV would perhaps be too OP at the moment, just ommitting that and add FnF hellfires without the ability to see through smoke would help level the playing field. At the very least, they could fix the myriad of bug reports for the hellfire we have at the moment.
Likewise when you have show downs like KH-38 vs ADATS. Maybe it would be nice to give US (and Britain) an SPAA that might be able to shoot back, options exists like the SLAMRAAM HUMVEE (for US and Israel) or the Supacat HVM (for Britain) both would enable that ability.
Even minor things like upgrading some NATO nations to better Tpods would be a big boost. Britain stuck with Gen 1 for example, despite it suppose to be Gen 2 and Gen 3+ options available as well.
I dont think its about putting the US (and other NATO nations) ahead, but rather perhaps not leaving them miles behind as they are, especially in the CAS vs SPAA fight like we have at the moment.
And also to state there is a lot of Russian weapons for example lmur missile which it is fire and forget that is present on mil 28nm and ka52 is not present in the game that’s not to say that they are underperforming because of it but there is restrictions on the Russian weapons not just nato ones
True, though the Vikhrs is still probably the best heli AGM at the moment, even without FnF, but good luck ever getting a Hellfire off with a Pantsir active, and I think that is the main issue. ADATS can just about barely counter a KA-52, not a lot a Apache can do vs a Pantsir without being very, very sneaky
Adats is by far the worst top tier Spaa anyway, hell i even use the stormer over it.
I agree as well.
I don’t think the US is left behind. They lack SPAA i agree, but they make up for it with the best CAS/multirole jet the F16 is.
Their helis are dogwater i agree on that. (Except maybe the Z-Cobra)
In terms of range, Supacat HVM is probably the closest. Britains option which fires ASRAAM that have a range of 14-16km.
But I think its time to step everyone (including Soviets) forward. I dont think true balance can be acheived on a “match the Pantsir” basis. SLAMRAAM HUMVEEs are probably the best option for the US which fires AMRAAMs with around 20km max range.
I understand what you’re saying but the current state of US top tier is so bad right now. The combination of click bait players and the Abrams being average tank which gaijin refuses to fix, compared to the meta Leo/strvs is the perfect formula for such poor win rates. Not to forget the match maker but Russia,Germany, and Sweden on the same team most of the time.