@@VulcanHDGaming well sometimes it elevates the unit over certain one/two/tree-shot thresholds e.g. the T14 with its armor upgrade doesn't get one-shot anymore by 1 Atacams or 2 Kh59mk/Kh59mk2s, or any other cluster damage that has a sum of 20 damage, like bombs or artillery shells (and not more than 400 pen, tho im really not sure if there is any cluster type weapon with more )
Coastal Troops have some very unique units, definitely the most interesting specialisation for me so far. The Magnolia looks super funky, like a little land train lol I'm really interested to see the Bereg getting used as SPAA, poor helicopter pilots getting slammed by a 130mm shell.
Different between ballistic and cruise missile is their flight path. Ballistic use a parabol trajectory, Iskander can still maneuver a bit to make it harder to intercept but generally it is a straight foward path. Cruise missile on the other hand have slower speed but they can fly lower to avoid radar detection and have the benefit of planned flight path.
It's in the real world. Is it realized in the game? I doubt it. I don't think anyone's ever shot down an Iskander. But here, Pivads will protect you from it for 80 points ).
I@@D87468It is modelled ingame. Ballistic do fly high up before foming down and get easily shot down by patriot/s300 while crousmissiles fly lower so the anti air reacts to it much later.
@@odysseus9797But idt game would implement hard supersonic missiles though, insta sniping shits from accross the map doesn't seem like enjoyable experience for gaming.
@ it already well represented in game, Cruise Missile and Ballistic Missile flight model are mostly accurate. They don’t have those crazy maneuver like what Russian advertised but they behave like how real missile does.
@@D87468 Ballistic missiles: are impossible to deal with by SHORAD and IR AA, but are quite easy to intercept by proper long range radar AA. Cruise missiles: are impossible to intercept by long range AA net, but flying over/close to SHORAD results in destruction of missile. Ballistic is better when you combine it with SEAD plane, Cruise is better for low terrain/cities or when used against enemy that doesn't have a dense enough SHORAD net (and dense SHORAD AA net tends to cost waaaay more and is also harder to setup than just buying one or two Patriots or C-300/350, which is enough to deal with ballistic threat).
Funny thing about the SVU-AS, it has the option in real life of up to 30 round mags and can be put into full auto. It’s basically a bullpup SVD that can be used as a battle rifle.
@@Muscovy7 If we talking about SVD-AS, so only 20rnd mags are existing physicly in our world. 30rnds are impossible or unusefull. 7.62x54R is RIMMED (that's what "R" mean). U can't get more of 20rnd for comfortable shooting. Also as I say - 20rnd are pretty rare 'cause of they experimental nature.
@ SVU*, the SVD isn’t in bullpup configuration. The 20 round magazines aren’t experimental, they’re standard issue for all SVU rifles. 30 round magazines have been used by the FSB, they are quite handy in urban scenarios like in Chechnya. Rimmed ammunition has issues with deep setting but that’s also why the magazines are designed to flare.
@@Muscovy7 1) Not for all SVU rifles. Not misunderstood SVU (No auto fire and minor upgrades) and SVU-AS (autofire) 2)You can just try to "Google" 30rnd magazine and fine nothing, or some "trust me" sources. On my side, I found some info about closing of program with 18 and 20 rnd magazines. In Russia they are a pretty rare even in a spec forces (SSO, FSB), basically - SVU-AS are less popular one, against other weapons, the 20rnd magazine is hard in producing and operating, causing often malfunctions.
It's helpful with Russian pronunciation to guess if it's a loanword or not. Lots of times they're basically the same word as English with different endings. Khrizantema / Chrysanthemum (they name a lot of them after flowers), Derivatsiya / Derivative, Koalitsiya / Coalition, and so on.
When it comes to infantry of those 3 specializations...vdv whatever squad u get they will hold their own against enemy infantry,guards are most specialised for what you pick them(at,aa etc.) and coastal are numbers and quantity.
So technically, i guess the playstyles would be as follows: Airborne=light infantry for flanking and blitzkreig Marines=versatile assault Armor=defensive/breakthrough
Warno is a bit faster paced but more historically accurate and "realistic" (relatively speaking) with more units on the field. They both have their pros and cons. I like warno a lot and it's very polished. If you're a fan of the cold war warno is good but if you want to scratch that modern itch broken Arrow is nice as well
They have different scale. WARNO, as well as its predecessors in the Wargame series operate on bigger maps with longer ranges, but less environment details.
Played warno for 300 hours, broken arrow for 10 so far, broken arrow definietly has potential, its already fun despite being unfinished, it has lots of fun stuff like nukes and prototype units, you can also airdrop units compared to warno where you can only helidrop. Both games are good, i hope both have a succesful lifespan and coexist to create some competition, better outcome than the game being a ,,warno killer'' as some claim it to be xd
In wargame games as far as I remember if a unit died, it disappeared from the deck. And points were given for capturing territory. It slows down gameplay. But here the units are revived and points are constantly given, it adds dynamics and chances for comeback. It's kind of like CS:GO (old mechanic 1 spawn) vs Rising Storm Vietnam (new, constant spawns).
feel like im missing something simple but how do you get the detailed screen for the weapons which show all the stats - rn i can only see range, pen, dmg & accuracy
Seems a bit weird to not have any T-72 variants in the game considering how important they are for the current Russian military. So many prototype only vehicles but the real thing is missing.
@@lucasrafael8777 I get it, still a bit weird to have basically proof of concept vehicles in and one of the most produced modern-ish tank missing. Weird priorities if you get what I mean.
It's a open beta. Only 3 out of 5 specialisations. Other vehicles will be in other specialisations. Also not that many prototypes (besides stuff like T-15 or Epocha module for Kurganets. Or that 57mm module for t-15/recon bmr)
most likely to another spec, it is rumored to get a dedicated motostrelki spec, as at the moment the russians do not really have a mostly wheel based spec. We know there will be a Stryker brigade spec for the US, and therefore the motostrelki spec as motorized spec seems a reasonable guess
first time for me was the beta in november and i found the MI8 veary usefull! it was quick with supllies and troopes, and could quickly make some CAS before returning back to base. is there anybody who know how cooldown on units is. it would be nice to plan the units avaibility before you try your deck out?
Does anyone know specifically what the laser does because i know you can do precision without lasering a target so does lasering increase the accuracy?
with ATGM, replacement for SPG-9-like 2A73 Grom which had rocket-assisted RPG up to 1300m. If you saw its trajectory, very mortar-like for non-rpg. Krupnokalibernyj perepoloch has that 100 mm test side of BMP-1 and only 4th direct hit manages to get through.
I think this game has a lot of stuff due to the rule of cool, rather than considering their balance implications. Many of the helicopters don't have much of a counter, and there is very little that can be done against the Kh-102 nuclear missile. I've only played a few games, but it seems balance is very much not a thing.
@DaBestEmperor You can shoot down the Kh-102 with Radar AA quite easily. Particularly Pivads or Patriot. Helicopters are a bit strong at the moment but it's the same on both sides.
@@VulcanHDGaming I've had a Kh-102 land right next to my S-350 with its radar on. AA seems very unreliable so far. Perhaps there is some mechanic that I am missing.
@@Det_core T-14, T-15, B-10, Derivatsiya-PVO, 2S35 and SU-57 essentially either doesn't exist or haven't been produced in any post-prototype numbers... Derivatsiya-PVO isn't even in use by Russia. Also, what are the Russians flying their Su-33s, MIG-29Ks and YAK-38Ms (lol) from? The Kutznetzov which is unable to sail without a tugboat? Giving the SU-57 and the F-35 essentially the same stealth and ECM is outright ridiculous.... You might as well give the US M1E3s, ICVVA1-30s, XM30s and V-280s... It's also absurd to give the Russian APFSDS close to US APFSDS penettration considering thei russian penetrators are both much shorter and much lighter. The Russian roster in this game looks like it was based on the deluded wishful thinking of a raging vatnik.
All those new toys shown in broken arrow do exist and are being produced in small numbers (besides prototypes like t-15 and those strange 57mm modules on vehicles). They are not used in current war just because of drones/lack of armor to armor warfare. Don't underestimate your opponent
@@rzu1474 T-14 crew have very funny voice line like... "They said it doesn't exist" "Drive now, you'll start the engine later" "We'll drive like a parade"
@@STRYKER1467 America focuses on air superiority for air defense, yes, but there are still ground-based air defense systems missing from the game, such as the Multi-Mission Launcher or upgraded Avenger. In addition, there are several helicopters and weapon systems missing that would provide needed counterparts to those of the Russians: AH-64E, MH-60M DAP, AH-6X, and weapons such as the Maverick, Spike, and Air-to-Air Stinger.
So many RF systems are downgraded to make US look competitive. S-300V4 outclasses anything US has both as ABM and AA. But future fairy tale weapons ... not good.
something I find odd with the vehicle selection is just how majority of these vehicles are just prototypes not actually in service such as the T14, T15, Kurganets, etc, meanwhile lacking backbone vehicles of the Russian army like the BMP-2 or T72B3
There is a reason Warno and previous games were taking place during the cold war. Current ru equipment never evolved beyond the 80's, US military equipment did evolve though. So now they have to put fantasy tanks such as Armata, to have a balanced match up against the real modern tanks. Or they just like to huff that copium, because they could have solved the issue in another, more realistic way, no copium and fantasy tanks involved. Just make T-72 and other older sov tanks cheap and available as fuck. Good luck to that lonely Abrams tank against 20 T-50 lol
The T-90M is far more modern than the Abrams in many areas, not to mention weight. The Ka-52 is better than the Apache. The U.S. has a lot of equipment that has shown itself poorly in practice, for example, their missiles that are guided by GPS. They jam and miss. Or the 777 howitzer, which has barrels that wear out, can't stand dirt. So the evolution here has been toward guerrilla warfare, not confrontation with an equal opponent.
@@D87468 Thing is... there are only a few T-90M equipped in Russian Guard Tank Brigades, while literally every single American armored formation have the M1A2 SepV3. Alot of their better stuff are never produced in enough number to matter even against Ukraine. Realistically that Russian deck should have way more T-72B and BMP-1 variants, and way fewer fantasy stuff like T-15 and T-14. Also, American GPS system can be jammed, but so does Russian Glossna. Russia literally does not have anything equivalent to an M777 firing Excalibur or a HIMARS in actuality.
@@khoivo7947there are still more decks coming out I'm sure there will be more love for the Armor, and to an extent there will be a match to the HIMARS once they add the Grad rather than just the TOS1
@@khoivo7947 The T-90Ms produce ~500 units per year, which is comparable to the number of SEPv3s available. Apparently RU weapons more resistant to interference and EW technology is not as developed on the west side. So in the news, you can read - "Why are 90% of US guided missiles and drones missing their targets... Excalibur rounds are apparently down from 70% to 6% hitting their targets". Not the other way around. Excalibur = Krasnopol. HIMARS = Iskander/Tornado-S. You're ill-informed.
@@D87468 New production T-90M doesn't even reach 100 per year, the vast majority of Russian tank "production" is refurbishing old T-72s an even then the number isn't that impressive. There is no evidence to suggest that Russian weapons are more EW resistant. 90% of GLSDB have increased CEP due to EW but that is hardly a surprise considering it's the cheap option for precision fires. GLSDB, ATACMS and Stormshadow/Scalp have had no reported issues since they're hardened. Excalibur and Krasnopol are not the same, Excalibur is GPS and/or laser guided (and Ukraine has received the GPS only versions), Krasnopol is strictly guided by laser designator.
Now I would like to have an expert fo over this and explain the actualy production numbers for these things. "Yeah, we've seen about three of these during a parade. That there looks like an irregular field modification. Those things appear to have not been in active use afte mid-2023, so likely either destroyed or deemed unsuitable for the conflict..."
T-14, T-15, B-10, Derivatsiya-PVO, 2S35 and SU-57 essentially doesnt exist in any real numbers (or at all) and a lot of Russian gear have hugely exagerated stats. It's also absurd that they get carrier-based aircraft considering the permanently docked, on fire or sinking Kutzetzov is their only carrier. Then again, it's also absurd to think that Russia would stand a chance in a conventional war against the US or NATO.
@@yxorvar I mean it does now feature nuclear warfare in the form of air-deployed tactical nukes but yes fair point. But that in turn brings things back to this being a game which needs to be fun for the people playing as the Russians and adding in cool stuff like T-14s and SU-57s is a great way to do that (personally I'm pretty excited about those T-80Y variants they've included too).
@@MrZioCerotto american fantasy units, RF fantasy units = immersion breaking. I know most RF stuff is better than of the US, so its not like I need US cope.
What are you talking about? Russia is already a powerful military country, someone even puts it above the US (experience greater and stronger nuclear weapons). Only prototypes with 57mm guns, all sorts of T-15s are a bit questionable. “Arena” is not common. Armata in low production, but its characteristics are downgraded to the level of Abrams, so the game balance is maintained..
@D87468 lmao. It's military has been utterly degraded with the war in Ukraine, having been rotten from the inside for years due to corruption and greed. The polish armed forces alone would decimate what remains of Russia's military. As for the nuclear weapons, given the incredibly poor state of repair and maintenance for the regular armed forces, I doubt the nuclear arsenal is much better. Russia's missile test last month - missile exploded in the silo.
@@D87468 The T-14s armor arrays isn't publicly available so no-one has any clue if it's been "downgraded" to Abrams levels, i doubt it's much better if at all considering the weight of the vehicle and the Russian habit of hugely exaggerating in their claims about performance (like claiming that T-14 would be invisible to radar and IR...) As for the prototype vehicles, Kurganets isn't adopted and is essentially in a prototype stage, SU-57 is barely produced with about 20 of them having left serial production (not to mention it having about 1000x the RCS of an F-35), T-14 has been produced in low enough numbers that it might as well not exist.... Not to mention the fact the the Russians somehow get naval aviation despite Russia not having an operational carrier... Russia isn't even close to the US when it comes to conventional warfare, it can barely make progress against a much smaller, poorer and weaker neighbor. The US can and have handled expeditionary warfare on the other side of the globe against a foe that was comparatively stronger than Ukraine. How "strong" nukes are is irrelevant when both countries have enough warheads and delivery vehicles of sufficient capabilities to destroy each other in a second strike. The game balance is maintained by gimping the US and giving the Russians a ton of vehicles and capabilities they have no way of fielding in relevant numbers IRL.
*avoid talking about Fagot missiles, avoid talking about Fagot missiles, avoid talking about Fagot missiles*
ha, man!
забавное замечание
Just read it as word "forget". )
Fun fact: Transmission oil used in soviet vehicles in WW2 was called Nigrol
:33
F missiles and Retarde bombs are crazy
I really hope we get good pve stuff for us that don't want to constantly sweat on pvp
Yeah I want good Skrimish also like.
They will get there. The game still has a while until release.
Yes, and a Sims 4 like home-front module for the girls' girls
@@Kagenism cool story bro. Some people like to chill and have a good time on games
I mean pvp hasn’t felt that sweaty to me, although I do suck pretty bad… so maybe I’m just bad enough not to care
25:32 When you upgrade the engine, the BMO-T gets racing spoiler on the back
FYI all armor modules also increase the HP of the vehicle which makes them very useful
They do but quite often 1 HP isn't going to make much of a difference. Where it is more, sure.
@@VulcanHDGaming well sometimes it elevates the unit over certain one/two/tree-shot thresholds e.g. the T14 with its armor upgrade doesn't get one-shot anymore by 1 Atacams or 2 Kh59mk/Kh59mk2s, or any other cluster damage that has a sum of 20 damage, like bombs or artillery shells (and not more than 400 pen, tho im really not sure if there is any cluster type weapon with more )
Coastal Troops have some very unique units, definitely the most interesting specialisation for me so far.
The Magnolia looks super funky, like a little land train lol
I'm really interested to see the Bereg getting used as SPAA, poor helicopter pilots getting slammed by a 130mm shell.
This kind of transport suitable for arctic environments
And bereg, two shots and heli is down. But very slow, so heli have a decent chance to win
Different between ballistic and cruise missile is their flight path. Ballistic use a parabol trajectory, Iskander can still maneuver a bit to make it harder to intercept but generally it is a straight foward path. Cruise missile on the other hand have slower speed but they can fly lower to avoid radar detection and have the benefit of planned flight path.
It's in the real world. Is it realized in the game? I doubt it. I don't think anyone's ever shot down an Iskander. But here, Pivads will protect you from it for 80 points ).
I@@D87468It is modelled ingame. Ballistic do fly high up before foming down and get easily shot down by patriot/s300 while crousmissiles fly lower so the anti air reacts to it much later.
@@odysseus9797But idt game would implement hard supersonic missiles though, insta sniping shits from accross the map doesn't seem like enjoyable experience for gaming.
@ it already well represented in game, Cruise Missile and Ballistic Missile flight model are mostly accurate. They don’t have those crazy maneuver like what Russian advertised but they behave like how real missile does.
@@D87468
Ballistic missiles: are impossible to deal with by SHORAD and IR AA, but are quite easy to intercept by proper long range radar AA.
Cruise missiles: are impossible to intercept by long range AA net, but flying over/close to SHORAD results in destruction of missile.
Ballistic is better when you combine it with SEAD plane, Cruise is better for low terrain/cities or when used against enemy that doesn't have a dense enough SHORAD net
(and dense SHORAD AA net tends to cost waaaay more and is also harder to setup than just buying one or two Patriots or C-300/350, which is enough to deal with ballistic threat).
Funny thing about the SVU-AS, it has the option in real life of up to 30 round mags and can be put into full auto. It’s basically a bullpup SVD that can be used as a battle rifle.
30rnd mags? I've heard only about experimental one with 20rnd. Those mags are pretty hard in development, so only 10rnd in series now
@ The FSB have used 30 round mags. The 20 round mags are standard issue with the SVU series not just the AS, nothing experimental about them.
@@Muscovy7 If we talking about SVD-AS, so only 20rnd mags are existing physicly in our world. 30rnds are impossible or unusefull. 7.62x54R is RIMMED (that's what "R" mean). U can't get more of 20rnd for comfortable shooting. Also as I say - 20rnd are pretty rare 'cause of they experimental nature.
@ SVU*, the SVD isn’t in bullpup configuration. The 20 round magazines aren’t experimental, they’re standard issue for all SVU rifles. 30 round magazines have been used by the FSB, they are quite handy in urban scenarios like in Chechnya. Rimmed ammunition has issues with deep setting but that’s also why the magazines are designed to flare.
@@Muscovy7 1) Not for all SVU rifles. Not misunderstood SVU (No auto fire and minor upgrades) and SVU-AS (autofire)
2)You can just try to "Google" 30rnd magazine and fine nothing, or some "trust me" sources. On my side, I found some info about closing of program with 18 and 20 rnd magazines. In Russia they are a pretty rare even in a spec forces (SSO, FSB), basically - SVU-AS are less popular one, against other weapons, the 20rnd magazine is hard in producing and operating, causing often malfunctions.
Oh no, the 2s38 that gives me nightmares all night has returned
It's helpful with Russian pronunciation to guess if it's a loanword or not. Lots of times they're basically the same word as English with different endings. Khrizantema / Chrysanthemum (they name a lot of them after flowers), Derivatsiya / Derivative, Koalitsiya / Coalition, and so on.
French / Latin / German loan words for the most part.
Yeah that's just gonna end in you using incorrect anglophone pronunciation.
When it comes to infantry of those 3 specializations...vdv whatever squad u get they will hold their own against enemy infantry,guards are most specialised for what you pick them(at,aa etc.) and coastal are numbers and quantity.
Tor M 1 ammo upgrade increases range 50 m and 100 m/s missile speed. it becomes Tor-M2.
So technically, i guess the playstyles would be as follows:
Airborne=light infantry for flanking and blitzkreig
Marines=versatile assault
Armor=defensive/breakthrough
To think these isnt even the full unit rooster when the game releases is insane, so much customisation
Ah the inevitable ytb comment war 😅. When folks think IRL follow game.
Just bought warno a month ago and now finding out about this game. Which do you prefer? And biggest differences? Thanks in advance
Warno is a bit faster paced but more historically accurate and "realistic" (relatively speaking) with more units on the field. They both have their pros and cons. I like warno a lot and it's very polished. If you're a fan of the cold war warno is good but if you want to scratch that modern itch broken Arrow is nice as well
They have different scale. WARNO, as well as its predecessors in the Wargame series operate on bigger maps with longer ranges, but less environment details.
Played warno for 300 hours, broken arrow for 10 so far, broken arrow definietly has potential, its already fun despite being unfinished, it has lots of fun stuff like nukes and prototype units, you can also airdrop units compared to warno where you can only helidrop. Both games are good, i hope both have a succesful lifespan and coexist to create some competition, better outcome than the game being a ,,warno killer'' as some claim it to be xd
In wargame games as far as I remember if a unit died, it disappeared from the deck. And points were given for capturing territory. It slows down gameplay. But here the units are revived and points are constantly given, it adds dynamics and chances for comeback. It's kind of like CS:GO (old mechanic 1 spawn) vs Rising Storm Vietnam (new, constant spawns).
Thanks for all of the replies. I really appreciate it! Loving warno right now and definitely adding broken to the wishlist. 😀
not me watching this video like ima play the game even tho i don’t own a pc
feel like im missing something simple but how do you get the detailed screen for the weapons which show all the stats - rn i can only see range, pen, dmg & accuracy
3 buttons top right corner of unit card, switch the lower one
Seems a bit weird to not have any T-72 variants in the game considering how important they are for the current Russian military. So many prototype only vehicles but the real thing is missing.
There is gonna be A LOT of T-72 in Motostrelki specialization, trust me
I wonder when they'll add all the rocket artillery for them as well
Keep calm the game is just launching.
@@lucasrafael8777 I get it, still a bit weird to have basically proof of concept vehicles in and one of the most produced modern-ish tank missing. Weird priorities if you get what I mean.
It's a open beta. Only 3 out of 5 specialisations. Other vehicles will be in other specialisations.
Also not that many prototypes (besides stuff like T-15 or Epocha module for Kurganets. Or that 57mm module for t-15/recon bmr)
Where did the bumerang go?
And Tunguska.
Moved to other specs apparently. Made Guards way too good with all the versatility they provided.
most likely to another spec, it is rumored to get a dedicated motostrelki spec, as at the moment the russians do not really have a mostly wheel based spec. We know there will be a Stryker brigade spec for the US, and therefore the motostrelki spec as motorized spec seems a reasonable guess
@@D87468 2K22Tunguska is in the PVO.
first time for me was the beta in november and i found the MI8 veary usefull! it was quick with supllies and troopes, and could quickly make some CAS before returning back to base.
is there anybody who know how cooldown on units is. it would be nice to plan the units avaibility before you try your deck out?
thanks for the video
Does anyone know specifically what the laser does because i know you can do precision without lasering a target so does lasering increase the accuracy?
It increases the range on some weapons and others you will see it physically correct the weapons onto the lased target it's pretty dope
When do you guys think it’s coming out ? Early 2025 ?
Seems like the case, the games in a decent state only issue is server and some minor balance, so early 2025 for a proper (functional) release
Hope they add more factions, UK, Germany, China, etc
I wish the bmp 3 was like rl. Its 100m gun is also a mortar system...
with ATGM, replacement for SPG-9-like 2A73 Grom which had rocket-assisted RPG up to 1300m. If you saw its trajectory, very mortar-like for non-rpg. Krupnokalibernyj perepoloch has that 100 mm test side of BMP-1 and only 4th direct hit manages to get through.
I think this game has a lot of stuff due to the rule of cool, rather than considering their balance implications. Many of the helicopters don't have much of a counter, and there is very little that can be done against the Kh-102 nuclear missile. I've only played a few games, but it seems balance is very much not a thing.
@DaBestEmperor You can shoot down the Kh-102 with Radar AA quite easily. Particularly Pivads or Patriot. Helicopters are a bit strong at the moment but it's the same on both sides.
@@VulcanHDGaming I've had a Kh-102 land right next to my S-350 with its radar on. AA seems very unreliable so far. Perhaps there is some mechanic that I am missing.
@@DaBestEmperor they were probably out of ammo or busy firing at another target
so far good vid
are there more nations besides US and Russia planned?
Bmp2,T-72,Progranichniki???
Lol after the war in Ukraine this feels like the army that the real Russian army wants to be when they grow up
Well they do have a lot of these systems it's just a matter of them not using them very well because of old rigid Soviet doctrine and corruption
@@Det_core T-14, T-15, B-10, Derivatsiya-PVO, 2S35 and SU-57 essentially either doesn't exist or haven't been produced in any post-prototype numbers... Derivatsiya-PVO isn't even in use by Russia.
Also, what are the Russians flying their Su-33s, MIG-29Ks and YAK-38Ms (lol) from? The Kutznetzov which is unable to sail without a tugboat?
Giving the SU-57 and the F-35 essentially the same stealth and ECM is outright ridiculous....
You might as well give the US M1E3s, ICVVA1-30s, XM30s and V-280s...
It's also absurd to give the Russian APFSDS close to US APFSDS penettration considering thei russian penetrators are both much shorter and much lighter.
The Russian roster in this game looks like it was based on the deluded wishful thinking of a raging vatnik.
@@Det_coreHad a lot of these systems
All those new toys shown in broken arrow do exist and are being produced in small numbers (besides prototypes like t-15 and those strange 57mm modules on vehicles).
They are not used in current war just because of drones/lack of armor to armor warfare. Don't underestimate your opponent
@griffinbrock9077 what did they lose the blueprints, factories, and workforce?
Armor package of brdm??
Weirdly the game decided I can only play russian default deck.
Even if the host enforces me to be US.
Was weird
We got a 3GB patch and like 1MB hot fix later on, seems we can select decks again 😅
is 'Arrow' russian for 'server' perhaps?
Arrow means "Стрела/Strela"
Surprised they didnt add that insane 10ft tall nail and plywood mast to fend of anti kamikaze drones in Ukraine.
Just remember not to follow the IRL VDV strategies when playing lol
So we have a Langley Emploee lol :D
The russian Dev is reeaaaaaally showing.
Especially with how they handle Armata lol
I mean if we would've gotten the actual Russian army the US would just curbstomp lol
Ruzzian wunderwaffle: the game. But yeah if you put their real military in the game it would be extremely unbalanced.
Hey, at least they make fun of the T-14 lol
@@giahuynguyenkim6389
Come again?
@@rzu1474 T-14 crew have very funny voice line like...
"They said it doesn't exist"
"Drive now, you'll start the engine later"
"We'll drive like a parade"
The imbalance between Russian and US anti-air and helicopters is actually insane.
america doesnt really focus in these two categories they dont have much its quite historical.
@@STRYKER1467 who has more helicoptors then the us?
@@STRYKER1467 America focuses on air superiority for air defense, yes, but there are still ground-based air defense systems missing from the game, such as the Multi-Mission Launcher or upgraded Avenger. In addition, there are several helicopters and weapon systems missing that would provide needed counterparts to those of the Russians: AH-64E, MH-60M DAP, AH-6X, and weapons such as the Maverick, Spike, and Air-to-Air Stinger.
@@operator9858 Canada.
So many RF systems are downgraded to make US look competitive. S-300V4 outclasses anything US has both as ABM and AA. But future fairy tale weapons ... not good.
something I find odd with the vehicle selection is just how majority of these vehicles are just prototypes not actually in service such as the T14, T15, Kurganets, etc, meanwhile lacking backbone vehicles of the Russian army like the BMP-2 or T72B3
Cool game
There is a reason Warno and previous games were taking place during the cold war. Current ru equipment never evolved beyond the 80's, US military equipment did evolve though. So now they have to put fantasy tanks such as Armata, to have a balanced match up against the real modern tanks. Or they just like to huff that copium, because they could have solved the issue in another, more realistic way, no copium and fantasy tanks involved. Just make T-72 and other older sov tanks cheap and available as fuck. Good luck to that lonely Abrams tank against 20 T-50 lol
The T-90M is far more modern than the Abrams in many areas, not to mention weight. The Ka-52 is better than the Apache. The U.S. has a lot of equipment that has shown itself poorly in practice, for example, their missiles that are guided by GPS. They jam and miss. Or the 777 howitzer, which has barrels that wear out, can't stand dirt. So the evolution here has been toward guerrilla warfare, not confrontation with an equal opponent.
@@D87468 Thing is... there are only a few T-90M equipped in Russian Guard Tank Brigades, while literally every single American armored formation have the M1A2 SepV3. Alot of their better stuff are never produced in enough number to matter even against Ukraine. Realistically that Russian deck should have way more T-72B and BMP-1 variants, and way fewer fantasy stuff like T-15 and T-14. Also, American GPS system can be jammed, but so does Russian Glossna. Russia literally does not have anything equivalent to an M777 firing Excalibur or a HIMARS in actuality.
@@khoivo7947there are still more decks coming out I'm sure there will be more love for the Armor, and to an extent there will be a match to the HIMARS once they add the Grad rather than just the TOS1
@@khoivo7947 The T-90Ms produce ~500 units per year, which is comparable to the number of SEPv3s available.
Apparently RU weapons more resistant to interference and EW technology is not as developed on the west side.
So in the news, you can read - "Why are 90% of US guided missiles and drones missing their targets... Excalibur rounds are apparently down from 70% to 6% hitting their targets". Not the other way around.
Excalibur = Krasnopol. HIMARS = Iskander/Tornado-S. You're ill-informed.
@@D87468 New production T-90M doesn't even reach 100 per year, the vast majority of Russian tank "production" is refurbishing old T-72s an even then the number isn't that impressive.
There is no evidence to suggest that Russian weapons are more EW resistant.
90% of GLSDB have increased CEP due to EW but that is hardly a surprise considering it's the cheap option for precision fires. GLSDB, ATACMS and Stormshadow/Scalp have had no reported issues since they're hardened.
Excalibur and Krasnopol are not the same, Excalibur is GPS and/or laser guided (and Ukraine has received the GPS only versions), Krasnopol is strictly guided by laser designator.
A good day to start SМO
Now I would like to have an expert fo over this and explain the actualy production numbers for these things.
"Yeah, we've seen about three of these during a parade. That there looks like an irregular field modification. Those things appear to have not been in active use afte mid-2023, so likely either destroyed or deemed unsuitable for the conflict..."
T-14, T-15, B-10, Derivatsiya-PVO, 2S35 and SU-57 essentially doesnt exist in any real numbers (or at all) and a lot of Russian gear have hugely exagerated stats. It's also absurd that they get carrier-based aircraft considering the permanently docked, on fire or sinking Kutzetzov is their only carrier.
Then again, it's also absurd to think that Russia would stand a chance in a conventional war against the US or NATO.
@@yxorvar TBF it's also absurd to think that a war between Russia and the US or NATO would stay conventional.
@@maxkircher4671 Sure, but the game is about conventional warfare, not an apocalyptic nuclear exchange.
@@yxorvar I mean it does now feature nuclear warfare in the form of air-deployed tactical nukes but yes fair point.
But that in turn brings things back to this being a game which needs to be fun for the people playing as the Russians and adding in cool stuff like T-14s and SU-57s is a great way to do that (personally I'm pretty excited about those T-80Y variants they've included too).
The Sprut, I think there's only like 30 of them irl
All RUS equipment is OP lol. T15 should be removed from the game or nerfed in to oblivion.
You can play american game bro for a very balanced and not biased experienced 😊
@@MrZioCerotto american fantasy units, RF fantasy units = immersion breaking. I know most RF stuff is better than of the US, so its not like I need US cope.
T-14 lmfao
I wonder how much of this kit existed solely on paper only in RL. The loadout and kit would make Russia a decent military power - if only it existed.
What are you talking about? Russia is already a powerful military country, someone even puts it above the US (experience greater and stronger nuclear weapons).
Only prototypes with 57mm guns, all sorts of T-15s are a bit questionable. “Arena” is not common. Armata in low production, but its characteristics are downgraded to the level of Abrams, so the game balance is maintained..
@D87468 lmao. It's military has been utterly degraded with the war in Ukraine, having been rotten from the inside for years due to corruption and greed.
The polish armed forces alone would decimate what remains of Russia's military. As for the nuclear weapons, given the incredibly poor state of repair and maintenance for the regular armed forces, I doubt the nuclear arsenal is much better.
Russia's missile test last month - missile exploded in the silo.
Insane cope @@karrick526
@@karrick526 What are you smoking? The mighty Polish army... 😃
@@D87468 The T-14s armor arrays isn't publicly available so no-one has any clue if it's been "downgraded" to Abrams levels, i doubt it's much better if at all considering the weight of the vehicle and the Russian habit of hugely exaggerating in their claims about performance (like claiming that T-14 would be invisible to radar and IR...)
As for the prototype vehicles, Kurganets isn't adopted and is essentially in a prototype stage, SU-57 is barely produced with about 20 of them having left serial production (not to mention it having about 1000x the RCS of an F-35), T-14 has been produced in low enough numbers that it might as well not exist....
Not to mention the fact the the Russians somehow get naval aviation despite Russia not having an operational carrier...
Russia isn't even close to the US when it comes to conventional warfare, it can barely make progress against a much smaller, poorer and weaker neighbor.
The US can and have handled expeditionary warfare on the other side of the globe against a foe that was comparatively stronger than Ukraine.
How "strong" nukes are is irrelevant when both countries have enough warheads and delivery vehicles of sufficient capabilities to destroy each other in a second strike.
The game balance is maintained by gimping the US and giving the Russians a ton of vehicles and capabilities they have no way of fielding in relevant numbers IRL.
the game of russian cope
> see anything russian
> UghHhH CoPe
you're pathetic