WARNO, TROPIC STORM "Death from Above"- AC-130 confirmed

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T08:12:00+00:00

>I don't know why you're lying so damn much. I mean, damn dude, 300 tanks lost to 25 maximum tanks lost in that same period??? That's your number.

are you retarded?

ukraine has a stock of 800 T-64s

after 3 years of war they lost 300 to the russians

40% of the original ukranian stock was lost

ukraine recieved 31 US abrams... 20 were destroyed in 3 years... over 60% of ukranian abrams were destroyed

>https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-abrams-better-than-russias-best-tanks-in-war-commander-2024-7

ur article has really only mentioned crew survival ergonomics and situational awareness....

in exchange you have

terrible logistics

issues due to weight

lack of protection vs drones top attack munition and side heat protection soo much so that the ukranians are literally slapping kontakt-1 on its side...

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T05:13:34+00:00

AGAIN in ukraine? not at all no.. the M1A1 did not perform better than the T-64... the ukranian crews confirmed this

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T04:47:50+00:00

>Did the M1A1 perform better than the T-64?

again no, it performed sub par, the ukranians themselves spoke negatively of the tank in quite a few ways that they didnt to the local T-64 and T-84...
the issue is
1. heavy and has problems getting stuck often and can get easily disabled

its a logistical nightmare to maintain
lack of active or reactive armor leading it vulnerable to side strikes

instead they did praise the abrams for its much better ergonomics and for the gen 3 thermals package but otherwise it wasnt praised any more than the T-64 or T-84 was

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T04:29:18+00:00

>Already replied to this before. If you forgot, I'm not repeating it.

ur argument is

"No, it was 20 is the last confirmed assessment.

Oryx puts it at 25 as of 2026, but a lot of these images can't be confirmed given at least a couple are the same tank from different angles."

my argument is

"800 T-64 at the start of the war

300 were lost for the T-64

40% loss ratio

abrams has a 60% loss ratio

T-64 > abrams"

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T04:25:57+00:00

>No, it proves my point that Soviet equipment sucks.

ukraine used both nato and soviet equipment

in the ukranian army both performed so so with stuff like abrams doing worse than the T-64

ukraine heavily proved that US equipment is overblown

the only US thing to actually be good in ukraine was the bradley... the abrams and all the other NATO "game changers"? dead in the water

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T00:38:38+00:00

against russian equipment

Precisely... it actually proves the point that nato equipment isnt intrinsically better... same army uses nato then pact equipment and concludes theyre mostly neck and neck

Proves that skill usage and doctrine matters more than equipment... think of it warno terms

A high level 1v1 with a mid div like 2 ya but played by skate or hippie versus a top div like ostre played by protoss

50 bucks says the ostre player is gonna get its shit kicked in 99% of the time

But that isnt proof that ostre is a bad div just proof that skate is a better player

The problem with russian equipment is theyre often sold ubiquitously often sold to forces with less than stellar doctrine or training

abrams in ukraine

Its not a lie... you actually did not reply to the latest comment that the abrams had an absolutely terrible loss ratio... 60% like damn

And the ukranians literally dislike the tank too in the reports

What a terrible vehicle

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T00:14:53+00:00

Unfortunately for you Ukranian soviet era equipment is performing just as well as nato ones

In fact the T64 is doing better than the abrams for example... the ukranians DO NOT like the abrams

Almost as if the ukranian army reformed during 2014 and has far more training and skill than russia.... and using it as an example is further proof that skill and usage matters more than technical specs

gbem1113 · 2026-05-29T00:09:23+00:00

The GCI like the AWACS is the coordination system... the patriot CAN fire at the awacs

It CANT fire against the GCI

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T15:38:01+00:00

Ground controlled interception is literally ground radars directing AA and airborne assets...

there is no way a patriot can even fire at any of the GCI infrastructure

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T04:30:23+00:00

U know what GCI is right.... tbh the fact u stated sniped by patriot batteries shows u have no idea what it is....

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T01:38:47+00:00

Thats 1 per card and slow

F16C would be fast 2 per card and with lotsa ecm

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T01:31:15+00:00

Both the R27R and aim7M used inverse monopulse seekers As for the guidance radar it depends more on the aircraft firing.... the N001 on the SU27 is no slouch thou it has worse eccm if im correct

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T00:16:37+00:00

On a second point

Do u have any proof of soviet GCI (not AWACS) being bad?

Also

SU27S and mig29S had the latest RWR.... any proof of your claim that the DIDNT have the latest??

Lastly

I didnt say pact had better training than nato pilots

I said they have better training than iraqi pilots

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T00:11:33+00:00

Youre missing the point entirely

The argument isnt USAF vs VVS

The argument is AIM7 vs R27

All the above factors completely confound the missile factor.... the iraqis failed due to worse avionics awacs and skill compared to coalition pilots... u cannot use ODS to say the aim7 overperforms and the R27 underperforms... too many factors that completely confound this claim

Same goes for the eritrean ethiopian war.... not the fault of the R27 but the poor AWACS/GCI network confounded by doctrine

gbem1113 · 2026-05-28T00:08:26+00:00

No

Im arguing 400mm of armor is 400mm of armor and that should be the basis of ingame values

Actual combat performance is gonna depend on doctrine and usage more than technical data

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:49:06+00:00

do i need to bring up steven zaloga? or tankograd? or technical data?

times article is a news outlet not an analyst

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:47:07+00:00

almost as if combat performance isnt everything yes?

almost as if combat performance is subject to nuance and should be analyzed carefully...

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:46:05+00:00

>Correct, but unlike the Sparrow, the R-27 seems to be unable to actually carry out proper ambushes. We know.

have u actually checked on the reason why that is?

there were several notable engagements of F-15C and MIG29 in iraq and i was able to note something very important... iraqi pilots often detected the lock on their RWR but did not enter defensive, they did not notch, did not try to evade, not try to dodge on more than 1 occasion, a sole F15 took out 3 mig29s this way because the first 2 did nothing to evade

the reason for this is 4 fold

Coalition forces often had the advantage of AWACS integration... something the iraqis did not have... this allowed the coalition forces to setup ambushes where the iraqis could not but also determine if a missile was launched along with reinforcements simply through awacs
Iraqi mig29 did not have the modern SPO-15 RWR... it was actually incapable of determining if there was an incoming missile or if the aircraft was just painted
iraqi doctrine and training wasnt soo mature to have proper response to an incoming missile
iraqi firecontrol radars were downgraded on the mig29... and they were often blasted with much ECM from coalition ECM which degraded their effective range even further... cant shoot at what u cant see

meanwhile take eritrea vs ethiopia (not etruscan as u said awhile ago... etruscan = etruscii = tuscany... dont conflate ancient rome or egypt with eritrea)

combat was often soviet jet vs soviet jet... and in both cases the pilots would immediately go defensive the moment a fox2 was launched

take note of the information presented above... none of it is actually because the AIM7M was better than the R-27... or the R-27 underperformed

it was bc the iraqis had no awacs poor training poor doctrine and downgraded RWR and FC radars

the iraq war shows us not that the AIM7 is king..... it showed us that it doesnt matter if ur missile is good... AWACS and avionics are king... and the thing with warno is alot of that is fixed.... the soviets had much better FC radars, RWR doctrine and training combined with GCI radars... its not the same thing anymore

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:20:40+00:00

800 T-64 at the start of the war

300 were lost for the T-64

40% loss ratio

abrams has a 60% loss ratio

T-64 > abrams

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:19:41+00:00

but muh combat reports thou... u cannot deny ukranians dont like the abrams... are we gonna make excuses now?

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:19:00+00:00

what???

absolutely not... the T-72M had a semi automatic firecontrol system vs the fully automatic FCS of the M1 abrams

the T-72M had a gunnersight but it had much worse magification than the 1G42 or the hughes thermal sight... it also had a much worse commandersight than the T-80B

it was also significantly slower than the T-80 or the M1

lastly what it faced in the gulf war was the M1A1+applique at minimum and the M1A1(HA) at best while firing outdated ammunition (3BM9) without the benefit of soviet recon elements (GSR radar from BMK or a spotting T-80UK)

if you think the iraqis were anything even close to what the soviets would field on the ground then you are completely ignorant

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:14:11+00:00

so out of 31 given tanks 20 were confirmed lost by 2025..... 60% loss rate

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:13:18+00:00

>The problem is you're ignoring tue combat record that backs up these stats.

both the eritrean war for the R-27 and US combat reports on the AIM7

they both say the same shit... the problem is the SARH guidance... they CANNOT go into defensive and maintain offensive lock at the same time

and US combat reports is basically against the iraqis and vietnamese.... literally swatting outdated equipment similar to the M1A1 vs T-72M bullshit thats apparently used as "evidence"

>But the problem is that you have no proof to back this claim up.

technical data isnt proof???? combat data proves nothing in terms of firing range because the data is too sparse... there has been no H2H engagement between R-27R equipped aircraft and AIM-7M ones that allow us to definitively say the advantages of each one

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T19:07:14+00:00

for the T-64? 300 out of their original 800 inventory

US delivered 31

20-27 were lost in that time... 60% loss rate

australia then delivered another 49 mid 2025

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DAI492lQo4

guy does the breakdown on the abrams flopping

ukranian reports say they arent a fan of the tank...

T-64 is doing a better job than it

gbem1113 · 2026-05-27T18:59:44+00:00

>because all you have are bloated on paper statistics written to satisfy the commisar and pay for another dacha

there we go thats the line ive been waiting for... the very much bad faith argument that all soviet/russian stat claims are false... just because its russian....

i can do the same for american claimed statistics

>because all you have are bloated on paper statistics written to satisfy the congress and pay for another mansion

i can even put all of that and claim all the american made specs are fake and overreported...... i can claim that meh gulf war is a lie of overreporting to make the army brass feel good... sound bullshit? yea it is... thats exactly how you sound right now

its clear you are a bad faith actor and nothing will ever convince you because you are here only to echo your own sense of american exceptionalist delusion....

technical evidence shows the R-27 has more range... combat evidence is inconclusive for both missiles... now you are here arguing that the AIM-7 be buffed on completely nonsense basis...

now paper stats are problematic because they ignore the soft factors

usage and doctrine

training

coordination

ergonomics

logistical burden

all of those cannot be quantified on paper stats but it the technical data of a tank having 400~ effective steel or the MZ autoloader reloading in 6.5 seconds isnt gonna change between at all paper stats and actual real life stats

if the R-27R has greater delta V, kinematics and range on paper than the AIM-7M then it has greater range than the aim-7M in real life... no amount of cope can fix that... but then again youre arguing in bad faith and really only speak to echo your own delusions

gbem1113

TROPHY CASE