Soviet "Quality" - Warno Memes So we tried out Warno with some mods. Music: NATO Anthem Twitch: / bokoen Patreon: / bokoen1 My Discord: / discord Twitter: / bokoen1 #warno #Memes #FunnyVideo #Bokoen
Ya AA in this game is very bipolar. sometimes it shoots shit down very quickly other times it wont fire at a helicopter near by with clear line of site. Also some Counter-Battery artillery might have helped out swimmy against those MLRS a little.
Every single update they tweak AA stats trying to balance it but they make it even worse and I'm not kidding. When Last big update dropped AA was literal hell to use
Bo, who gave you permission to upload actual combat footage of the ongoing war?!?! Haven't the Russian Armed Conscripts been embarrassed enough??? The answer is no, but still!!! I'm glad Swimmy and Swimmy2 (I don't know his name, aight?) were appointed to lead Russian troops, they know how to rack up a high kill/casualty count! A high kill/casualty count on which side, you may ask? I don't know, but they rack up a high kill/casualty count!
> Flies a SEAD plane against an infrared Strela bus > Doesn't work > Malding > Plays East German tank division centered around spamming mid-tier tanks > Complains USSR is trash > Malding > Cluster bombs light infantry positions > Wonders why it doesn't work > Malding > Spams T--55As against Leopard 2A3s > Loses > Malding
@@sfctw1 six months later, you can ask the irl russian troops about the effects of cluster munitions on infantry. Though not a lot of direct witnesses would be able to tell you anything.
@@tommygunmitvierm724 SEAD missiles track the radiation emitted by a radar when it is actively emitting it. If the radar is off it has nothing to track begin with, and with the Strela its an infrared missile with a passive (aka not emitting any trackable radiation) seeker. It just tracks the thing in the sky emitting the most heat (itself a form of radiation). This is either a planes exhaust or the sun or flares.
@@dudududu1926 definitely. I re downloaded steel division 2 then wanted something more modern so I gave warno another shot last week and it was amazing on the same lvl as steel division just without campaign mode but it’s coming soon I think
I remember playing Red Dragon a few years ago and it was so crazy fast, the AI would just spam units non stop and there was no in between of shit tier to god tier ai. Playing against friends was a least a little fun but I got stomped on anyway lmao
I loved the pace personally, it was refreshing that there finally was a game where you couldn't cheese _everything_ by being _proactive_ everytime but the AI actually dictates many things/fairly often
My only guess for the soviet missiles just kinda dipping is that they need constant radar signature to work and the jammers and other counter measures on nato just kinda fuck on those missiles.
@@Aqueox Broken Arrow reminds me a lot more of World in Conflict with some bits of Red Dragon and mixed together. Looks great, hope it turns out great.
You mean god bless the ability to copy russian equipment cuz thats what most NATO missiles at warno's setting were effectively since you know their missiles didn't tend to lock onto clouds and shit and i forget how many millions in todays money the CIA paid to yugoslavia for examples of those missiles.
@@greekguy5647 makes sense, the russians really focused hard on the ground war stuff. nato took a more all rounder approach and made great air vehicles.
TL;DR: Not to say that this is good for game balance, but that's how it worked in the real world. Both Soviet AND NATO missiles during the mid and even late cold war would often struggle to hit their targets as pilots had a variety of maneuvers and systems at their disposal to counter them. But when they did, a missile hit was nearly universally fatal. To start, a missile has two outcomes once fired: it will either miss or completely destroy/critically damage a plane (severely damage engines, airfoil, etc, leading to a crash). It wasn't until the 90's (T80s, MiG 31s using the R-73M or R-74, Abrams M1A2s, F/A-18s using the AIM-9M+, etc) where we got missiles that could consistently hit their targets in all-aspect firing, until then it was basically a 50/50 depending on the missile whether you'd get a miss or a kill. Notching, which was a commonly taught tactic even in the early 70s, was a method to effectively dodge the then cutting-edge Pulse-Doppler radar guided missiles due to the way their imaging system worked. Chaff would disguise planes from earlier radiation-based radar and their missiles as well. Flares were highly effective against all Infrared based radars and missiles up until the R-73 and AIM-9L and later. And in the modern day, we have Electronic, Radiation, and TV Countermeasures and Jammers to further distract missiles. Jets from the 70s and onwards also tended to have Laser-warning systems that could detect if their plane was targeted with ground-based laser-guided SAMs and ATGMs, and while not having a way to effectively 'distract' the system with countermeasures, they could often simply dodge the missile via extreme maneuvers as these systems tended to only be guided by humans 'painting' the target with a laser designator, at least during the cold war. Additionally, field/mobile radar systems often performed well below the level of their equivalent permanent radar encampments and would often have issues with ground clutter and sustained use in a combat environment. All-in-all, as long as the pilot is aware of their surroundings and has the systems available in then-modern jets to counter then-modern missiles, it was extremely hard to take them down with one. The fighting doctrine throughout the cold war was to use your missiles to make an enemy pilot bleed their speed by making them take evasive maneuvers, then finishing off the low-speed pilot with a gun kill. Otherwise, a good pilot could often dodge up to three missiles in a row before being forced to disengage or making a fatal mistake. There's a reason even the modern F-35 still has an internal gun, when the ANCIENT F-4 phantom was originally designed without one, in favor of being able to hold over a dozen missiles. Now, when a MiG-23 (1967) or Su-22 (1975) (as shown in game) goes up against an AA configured F-15E (1989), there's absolutely no way that jet is going to be able to dodge a missile from it, as it was never designed to fight something that far ahead of its time. Honestly, I'm not sure why the game is pitching late-60's and early 70's soviet aircraft and tanks up against late 80's NATO tech, but it's definitely the reason why this video gives off a sense of 'NATO technological superiority'. The USSR definitely was playing catch-up in technology during most of the Cold War, but their doctrine of cost-effective ATGM/APFSDS platforms (T-55/64) was extremely hard to combat with the American doctrine of '...accept nothing but the best'. When an $800,000 (T-64) [Quoted at being 40% of the price of a T-72, which costs ~$2,000,000] tank is able to shoot a round capable of penetrating and likely destroying a $4,400,000 (Abrams 1A2) tank, you can see why the Russians often didn't care that they didn't have the leading technological edge, especially considering they had over twice the amount of nuclear warheads as the Americans in 1985, and nearly quadruple in 1990.
To be fair I think there is actually a problem with AA in warno. Both Soviet and NATO AA tend to one shot or hit nothing. I played 6 games 3 as Soviet’s and 3 as nato and AA ate rocks on both sides, missing all shots, which is surprising because even the best AA is bad ( Roland on nato side and BUK on Soviet ) guess it’s like steel division 2, but reversed 😂.Maybe the issue is that accuracy gets severely penalised by agility stat of planes, but I am not sure. Till this moment I would say that red dragon is still better, more units on both sides and less problems. Also I think radars aren’t working as they are supposed to in warno, unless they are using different system than in red dragon.
In warno its all about short range missile spam/guns for kills. the long range shit just doesnt perform well other than suppressing the target unless you spam them out. most payloads that can be used are in range of infrared/guns and the ones that dont can be countered through positioning
@@jgrantrichardson3748 So the game basically wants you to build a real air defense grid, with forward infrared/short range missiles and long range missiles behind the lines. This seems like an interesting solution, but I doubt it's worth it. To preform an air defense grid you need a lot of points, and planes, at least in vanilla, are mediocre (the performance of bombs is quite poor, and missiles can't destroy many targets).In the end it looks like you can just ignore AA and counter enemy Air with yours and just spam cheapest AA you can.
TL;DR: Not to say that this is good for game balance, but that's how it tends to work in the real world. Missiles during the mid and even late cold war would often struggle to hit their targets as pilots had a variety of maneuvers and systems at their disposal to counter them. But when they did, a missile hit was nearly universally fatal. You either miss or completely destroy/critically damage a plane (severely damage engines, airfoil, etc, leading to a crash). It wasn't until the 90's (T80s, MiG 31s using the R-73M or R-74, Abrams M1A2s, F/A-18s using the AIM-9M+, etc) where we got missiles that could consistently hit their targets in all-aspect firing, until then it was basically a 50/50 depending on the missile whether you'd get a miss or a kill. Notching, which was a commonly taught tactic even in the early 70s, was a method to effectively dodge the then cutting-edge Pulse-Doppler radar guided missiles due to the way their imaging system worked. Chaff would disguise planes from earlier radiation-based radar and their missiles as well. Flares were highly effective against all Infrared based radars and missiles up until the R-73 and AIM-9L and later. And in the modern day, we have Electronic, Radiation, and TV Countermeasures and Jammers to further distract missiles. Jets from the 70s and onwards also tended to have Laser-warning systems that could detect if their plane was targeted with ground-based laser-guided SAMs and ATGMs, and while not having a way to effectively 'distract' the system with countermeasures, they could often simply dodge the missile via extreme maneuvers as these systems tended to only be guided by humans 'painting' the target with a laser designator, at least during the cold war. Additionally, field/mobile radar systems often performed well below the level of their equivalent permanent radar encampments and would often have issues with ground clutter and sustained use in a combat environment. All-in-all, as long as the pilot is aware of their surroundings and has the systems available in then-modern jets to counter then-modern missiles, it was extremely hard to take them down with one. The fighting doctrine throughout the cold war was to use your missiles to make an enemy pilot bleed their speed by making them take evasive maneuvers, then finishing off the low-speed pilot with a gun kill. Otherwise, a good pilot could often dodge up to three missiles in a row before being forced to disengage or making a fatal mistake. There's a reason even the modern F-35 still has an internal gun, when the ANCIENT F-4 phantom was originally designed without one, in favor of being able to hold over a dozen missiles. Now, when a MiG-23 (1967) or Su-22 (1975) (as shown in game) goes up against an AA configured F-15E (1989), there's absolutely no way that jet is going to be able to dodge a missile from it, as it was never designed to fight something that far ahead of its time. Honestly, I'm not sure why the game is pitching late-60's and early 70's soviet aircraft and tanks up against late 80's NATO tech, but it's definitely the reason why this video gives off a sense of 'NATO technological superiority'.
Bo why do you keep releasing vids at like 1 AM or midnight? You are in Denmark so you litterlay have the same timezone as me so I will ask again..... why the hell do you post vids at like midnight or 1 am
Oh hey, my company just shipped a operation, maintenance, and repair training program for HIMARS at the start of February. Clearly the NATO-bros in Bo's game have benefitted from all the new training material.
Artillery capability in general has atrophied over the last 20+ years and only recently has the US Army begun to reinvest in it heavily with projects like the M1299 and PrSM
Man, I remember that episode in the Bokoen Cinematic Universe when I was in the cinemas, when Braun uttered his catchprase after winning with Bo against swigma- "Bokoen1 : Swimmy 0". It was definitely one of the moments of all Time
Honestly the t55 are pretty good if you support them with other units I usually use them as bait while attacking with mech inf so they either have to shoot the inf or the tank. Plus they come with smoke so if you are watching them they can survive at least one atgm
@@billbob2205 3 months later I can't help but ask, how's Avdiivka going, buddy shill? Lost a few brigades-worth of equipment by the looks, what a shame!
I gotta say after playing the game on launch and immediately refunding it then having just rebought it recently, It's pretty good nowadays and Rimmy really was doomerpilled as hell when first looking at the game. Eugen has shown that they care about the title despite its rushed release in my personal opinion.
@@Danilinart you realize a casualty does not mean killed right? i would point out as well that if the Ukrainians had actually had over 400k dead then they would have lost by now or is putin purposely delaying the war for some weirdo master plan
No no westoid it is U dat is lying! Russia has actually killed ALL the Ukrainian soldiers, we are now only fighting NATO!!11!11! Our news is totally unbiased, the news told me so! Now whatabout…
Remember when in Wargame, Russian Equipment was actually dangerous and ever since they put the realistic values in they cant hit for shit, realism at its finest
What realistic values lol? Can you like back up a single nerfed value? If those values are realistic, how did NATO get trashes by Soviet gear in the cold war?
@@dwarow2508 Do tell, when did NATO get thrashed by Soviet equipment in a stand up fight? Because last I checked, while Norfolk and 73 Eastings were pretty one sided it wasn't in favour of the soviet equipment.
@@עודד-כ7ל *cough* 1 : 89 K/D ratio of Soviet planes against NATO planes over Vietnam *cough* M4s getting massacred in Korea by T34s *cough* Indian T55s slaughtering M48s *cough* Literally every African proxy where Soviet and NATO gear was used *cough* MiGs dominating the skies over Korea *cough*
Too bad the USA can't field the NIKE Hercules nuclear sam system. That's right. America fielded an anti-aircraft system with nuclear tipped missiles with a top speed of mach 4 and a max altitude of around 100,000ft.
always good to see some realistically overpowered NATO shit in games. Im not saying russian stuff is dysfunctional dog shit (even though it is as we are all learning), but it definitely looks it next to the insane weapon systems nato has. That HIMARS in particular was beautiful
Honestly the Russian equipment in WARNO isn't that bad at all, justifiably with the 80s timeframe. Its just that the people playing the PACT side chose the worst unit combinations possible. For example: not having a single close-in gun AA to follow up on successful missile hits and/or just do chip damage to the planes.
1. I know this is a joke. 2. I don't think any of the sides really use T-55s, they are too outdated even for the Russian Army. Usually the ones that are used are T-62s and T-72s. Russians once for a while take out the copebricked T-80 and rarely T-90s. I don't think I have seen yet any footage of T-55 in Ukraine in active combat but I maybe wrong, if so I would really be grateful for the footage.
@@niewiemjaksienazwac1652 Before the time you wrote this I know Ukraine had been or were going to be given those heavily modified T55s from Czechia or Slovakia iirc. Also I'm sure you've seen the recent videos of the Russian trains.
@@pleaseignore3055Oh, and most of the prisoners they recruit are drug addicts. Yeah. That’s bad. Also wagner is no longer recruiting prisoners, you want to know why? Because THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IS MAKING A PENAL LEGION IN 2023!
A more realistic approach would be a 2h pre-battle phase as the russians where you have to try and get old soviet equipment to "work" before the match actually starts lol.
Turns out, when you use Russian equipment properly and pair it with good tactics you actually get results....someone wanna maybe tell the Russians this?
@@MyFunnyVids888They have too much to do that, we all thought they were scary due to how much they have, when in reality that’s what’s making them so weak. Oh and their dogshit tactics, with a few exceptions. And the fact that corruption is another main reason very little equipment is maintained! Just look at the case of the Moskva, jesus!
The funniest part is that they are using MARS (Medium Artillery Rocket System) that is a German system, and calling it the HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System), that wasn't developed by the games timespan of the cold war and isn't in the game.
