Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 25/09/22 in all areas

  1. It is a welcome change for the most part. However... Su-25/Su-25K 9.7→10.0 Personally the BR of Su-25 series need a rise as well, the all-aspect missile spam against other 9.0-9.7 should be suppressed. IS-2 (1943) & Obj.248 Remain their current BR The IS-2 (1943) and Obj 248 should stay where they were, the rise of stats partly credit to the BP challenge, not meaning the vehicles themselves getting any better. XM8 AGS 9.3→9.7 with M774 added / 9.3→10.0 with M833 added Why should XM8 stick to C76A1 round that it might never use while CCVL get M833? M1A1 Changes of M1A1 is a bit weird, for it's still inferior to M1A1HC even with M829A1 added, better let it stay where it was and no new shell needed. Skink Remain 4.7 It's just a Wirbelwind with better turret protection and firepower endurance, is it really too good to stay at 4.7? Merkava Mk2D Go to 9.3 but with M413 (105mm DM33) or M426 (105mm DM63) round added The Israeli can't fight TRUMS-T with DM23. The difference between Mk2D and Mk1 is quite minor, additional armor pack can't save it from modern APFSDS. Type 59 A long waited change... finally! If only type 69 can get downtiered to 7.7 as well. M60A3TTS (China) 8.7→8.3 / 8.7→9.0 with DM63 (TC84) added Its role in Chinese 8.7 lineup is quite embarrassing, the constant uptier lead to a quite apparent conclusion that M735 is just not good enough against 9.3 and 9.7 beasts. It would be a decent addition to 8.3 lineup or given full capacity and join the 9.0 lineup with CM11 . M41D 8.0→7.7 The 76mm APFSDS is pure pain due to horrible afterpen effect. The advantage of thermal sight and laser rangefinder won't be overwhelming over other 7.7 but would unquestionably be a decent addition to 7.7 lineup and enhance its performance.
    74 points
  2. Regarding the Merkava 2D battle rating change, since I have an unhealthy amount of battles using it, I feel like it is unreasonable. Its current firepower is way too lacking to face opponents at its new battle rating, especially in uptiers. I recommend the addition of M426 as a new type of ammunition to the vehicle to boost its firepower so it can be on-par with other vehicles of similar battle rating.
    68 points
  3. G.91Y [RB] 9.3 -> 9.0 Reason: no countermeasures, no AAMs, no AGMs, no ballistic computer, subsonic; G.91YS [RB] 9.7 -> 9.3 Reason: completely outmatched especially by relatively new planes, no countermeasures (literally 0), no AGMs, subsonic, bad AAMs (2 AIM-9B); SIDAM-25 [RB] 8.3 -> 8.0 Reason: poor power-to-weight ratio (can't climb even a little), low amount of ammo, low range, no search radar, very low amount of apds shells (60 at max), no ap shells in stock belt (Not even SAPHEI-T), large profile, no armor, no NVD. PS please do smth to Moffets/Helenas afk players spam in naval RB, idk maybe reduce multipliers or just make something to stop it...
    50 points
  4. I am fine with the changes except for 2: Realistic Battles: IS-2 should stay 5.7: They are the counterweight to the German Big Cats and need to stay on the same BR as Tiger I E and Panthers G/A. SK60B should stay at 7.3: It carries 2x ATGMs which shouldnt be lowered to prevent those being used at BR 6.0 tanks - it quite low even on BR 7.3.
    41 points
  5. most are welcome, except for a select few: apologies for not including the affected airplanes in my list, i'm not really an Air RB person IS-2 (USSR, China, #402) Planned change: 6.0 must be: STAY at 5.7 reason: very slow-loading gun with obvious weakspots (LFP and mantlet). Why nerf this even more, now giving it the likelihood to meet King Tiger (H)'s even more, as well as 7.0 HEATFS vehicles. It does not even have an HMG to counter the 6.7-7.0 light vehicles with chemical/sabot rounds! Moving this to 6.0 will also take away the only Soviet thing that can penetrate Panthers, angled Tigers, and Jumbos frontally. The slow reload should be a catch at this point. Object 248 Planned change: 6.7 must be: STAY at 6.3 reason: yet another vehicle to have the same fate as the Object 279. Just because it was played well mostly by sweaty players during the event/BP grind, that does not mean it is completely suitable for that BR. Look at the 279? Suffering from DM33 and C76A1 all over. Now this thing with trollish armor at the most as a heavy tank is getting to have this strength invalidated? Please no. This is in no way a Tiger II (H), for the gun is unfortunately not as fast as an 88mm. T-34 (1942), T-34 (1943) (CN) Planned change: 4.0 must be: STAY at 3.7 reason: Not as armored as the T-34-747 (r) of Germany, as well as it faces very powerful 75mm guns. Why are the Pz. IVs, that are equal opponents, going to be lower than this? Plus, 3.7-4.3 soviets can easily be countered if Germans utilize their powerful 140mm penetration rounds. Now they're gonna face the Panther prototype, I won't be surprised if they are gonna be uptiered to 4.3 so they can face Tiger H1s/Panther Ds, and the Wehrs will have their dream of Tigers and Panthers being unbeatable killing machines manifested. M1128 Planned change: 10.0 must be: STAY at 9.7, or make slat armor addon armor option and continue with the change. reason: yes, the unmanned turret. But has the mobility ever been considered? Currently the worst of all MGS vehicles, tie it with the add-on slat armor that is fixed for you. Doesn't have tracks, so sand and snow will make it a sitting duck if caught in the open. Skink Planned change: 5.0 must be: STAY at 4.7 reason: yes, it's immune to most strafing attacks. But it comes with its own catch: low-velocity shells. Plus, the British have no lineup at 5.0, so trying to bring this at 5.3 or 5.7, or even higher, is just going to be a laughing stock for planes at that range. Suggested BR changes (all in RB): T25 currently at: 6.3 must be: 6.0/5.7 reason: with the stabilizer already gone, this thing can be deemed to be no match against opponents at 6.3, or higher. Thing can be lolpenned even by Panthers at 5.7. Continuing to butcher American tanks because of sTaTs, I see? T26E1-1 currently at: 6.7 must be: 6.3 reason: clearly not 6.7 material. Front can be reliably penetrated with long 88mm and 100mm with ease. Unlike the T26E5 (colloquially known as the Jumbo Pershing), the armor is already invalid even against later APHE-firing guns. As a result, the armor is almost always simple deadweight even at its own BR. T14 currently at: 4.7 must be: 4.3 reason: overtiered at 4.7, gun is laughable in uptiers. Has big weakspots, including the turret itself. Sides are also flat and easily pennable, and thus renders it as a "dead" premium. Pretty much an American KV-1 ZiS5. Stormer HVM currently at: 10.3 must be: 10.0 reason: GB 10.0 lineup now has no viable SPAA especially in this era where revenge-killing is encouraged even more via drones. KV-1B currently at: 4.0 must be: 4.3 reason: enough with condoning P2W clubbing, especially in this thing that is almost impossible to kill in most non-German tanks! Newb players dying while this thing racks up 10 kills unharmed and the clubber receives a huge S/L/RP yield? Happens almost all the time this one is in the battlefield so please no. KV-1E currently at: 4.0 must be: 4.3 reason: relatively similar to the KV-1B, still P2W but not as OP since it faces the KwK 40s Pz. IV H, Pz. IV G currently at: 3.7, 3.3 must be: 4.0 (with rank III promotion), 3.7, respectively reason: why is Germany's only decent lineup at rank III (which implies extreme significance) only starting at 5.0/5.3 now? This will just entice more players to jump to the Tiger/Panther BR, thus making the skill issue problem even worse, especially in events. Black Prince currently at: 6.0 must be: 5.7 reason: this thing has been brought up a lot, every time that BR change updates are released. Do I have to explain for the umpteenth time that just because of its rarity, it deserves to be neglected and left in a BR where it just outright suffers? Mi-4AV currently at: 8.3 must be: 8.0 reason: it's practically only the ATGMs that keep this thing capable at 8.3. Big and slow target, even early radar SPAAGs can kill it from several km's away due to its size and lack of mobility. ZTZ59D1 currently at: 8.7 must be: 8.3 reason: though it has 1st-gen thermals, the turret rotates like that of a Panther D and its mobility and protection is by no means fit for 8.7. WMA301 and PTL02 currently at: 8.3 and 8.0, respectively must be: 8.7 and 8.3 (with rank VI promotion for PTL02) reason: honestly, top tier tech at this low BR which faces immediate postwar tanks? obviously an extremely big technological discrepancy. Although yes, the mobility might be somewhat subpar for an MGS vehicle, it's still fast, and with its players' growing numbers (more are grinding China, especially after the data officer incident), this vehicle's spam and overall presence is irritating by a lot. Imagine getting sniped in your T32 or IS-3 from like 2km away from cover while in a large, field-like map? Please no. Either this, or nerf the reload rate and keep them in their respective BRs, as you have said before, reload rate is a balancing factor decided by devs. VEAK 40 currently at: 8.3 must be: 8.7 reason : it's basically a Swedish Sgt. York (Sgt. Bjork, as its known). Airburst shells against slow and often, fast prop or early jet CAS seems to be a mismatch. If the similarly-performing M247 is even at 9.0, why not deal with this? U-SH-405 currently at: 7.7 must be: 8.0 reason: unlike the R3 T106 FA, this thing can spam rockets at you, until you're dead. An absolute menace at 7.7 that is also a clubber against uptiered heavies. M48A2 C currently at: 7.0 must be: 7.3 reason: Germany is not really suffering at this BR now, given the fact they now have Marders, an undertiered Leopard 1, and so on. This can fit perfectly in the 7.3 lineup, if the Leopard 1 would no longer be moved back to 7.7. M41D currently at: 8.0 must be: 7.7 or 7.3 reason: The vehicle is SLOWWWW, has no stabilizer, and has one of the weakest APFSDS in the game, with no fast reload to compensate. It's an AUBL HVG that is worse in all aspects except offroad mobility! Chi-Ri II currently at: 5.0 must be: 4.7 reason: thing is HUUUUUGE, yet poorly armored for its tier. Is not seen so often in ground battles because of the fact that it is overtiered. If similarly performing Pz. IVs (which are perhaps even better in everything except firepower) can go as low as 3.7, then why not this, just a 0.3 BR lower? BMD-4 currently at: 8.7 must be: 9.0 reason: small, fast, and can yeet you out of nowhere with those tandem ATGMs with little notice. Might be not as sneaky as the Wiesel, but you get the point. This thing, despite its rarity, against 7.7s that are slow, unstabilized, and potentially blind? Please no. On the bright side, this thing can form a Russian 9.0 lineup, to help such nation stand against strong contenders such as Germany with the extremely solid 9.0 and 9.3 lineups. TAM 2IP currently at: 8.7 must be: 9.0 reason: perhaps the closest candidate Germany has to the BMP-2M. Undertiered nimble assassin-like vehicle with DM33 105 that lolpens? too much for 7.7s and other heavies at that range. Just because people from low tier can access the vehicle and produce somewhat subpar stats, doesn't mean this should remain undertiered. Felt like an even better CV 90105 TML at 8.7 due to the round, extra protection, and mobility. Also, if CV90105 (XC-8) is 9.0 with DM33, why not this? Object 685 currently at: 8.7 must be: 8.3 reason: similarly performing to the Ikv-91-105 at 8.3, but not as nimble as the TAM at 8.7. Basically a lighter and faster T-55A with no armor. I think it's time to give this a necessary downtier as an incentive as well, due to its extremely rare presence in ground battles. It's pretty much that "hidden gem" in the Soviet researchable tech tree, because of such reason. M4A3E2(76)(W) currently at: 6.3 must be: 6.0 reason: at this point, the reason should be clear that it is just not fit for 6.3 due to the mostly negative player feedback on this recent BR bump. T-44 currently at: 6.7 must be: 6.3 reason: the gun is almost laughable at this BR, given the more heavily armored opponents which almost always require the element of surprise to be emerge victorious against such in this vehicle. Specifically, this is also ineffective even against a Maus' sides point-blank, right-angled. This is also not a "newb" BR, so aiming for obvious weakspots should not be a pain to be done here. If we need to shoot at a Panther's turret in my T-34-85/Sherman 76 to defeat/disable it, then why not against the T-44's turret, which is similarly weak against German Panther's 75 and 88s? T-54-1947 currently at: 7.7 must be: 7.3 reason: No chemical/sabot rounds, only APHE, plus a weak turret face. Object 279 currently at: 8.7 must be: 8.3 reason: BR was only moved up due to extensive usage and seemingly broken performance after people have grinded the vehicle in the event. Armor often resists the chemical shells, but then becomes deadweight in 8.7 where almost all of the shells you face are powerful kinetic rounds such as DM33-105. IS-4M, T32E1, T-10A, Maus currently at: 7.7 must be: 7.3 reason: what are they even doing here at 7.7? Can't fire sabot/chemical, the reload rate is trash, all are slow af. M103, on the other hand, can fire HEATFS, hence 7.7 is justified. The former two and the fourth, once the meta, now an RP, SL, and SP pinyata! The third example also got a first impression of being a terrible vehicle when it first came out, even in the eyes of WT content creators. T-10M currently at: 8.3 must be: 8.0 reason: despite stabilization and mobility, the reload rate is horrible and makes it somewhat an impractical choice for a vehicle in your 8.3 lineup. ZLT-11 currently at: 9.3 must be: 9.0 reason: HORRENDOUS mobility for an MGS its size. Pretty much a Class 3P (obviously, bus-like and clearly visible!) that unlike such example, it can be lolpenned by IFVs from the front, .50 cal'ed from point blank, and can get easily overpressured, but with greater firepower such as thermals, a better round, and ATGMs. Clearly a glass cannon with a size that says "shoot me". Either downtier it as I said, or buff its reverse speed. Such is a likely reason why this thing isn't as common as a PTL02 or WMA301 in their BRs. 2S3M currently at: 6.3 must be: 6.7 reason: that top HE shell is broken and a clubber for most vehicles it faces, especially when compared to the Type 75 SPH. Basically point and click against Shermans, Panthers, and Tigers. Extremely stable too compared to the Type 75 SPH, meaning you can delete an enemy head-on when suddenly confronted, as if you have a stabilizer, while the enemy needs to aim for a weakspot due to no armor, best armor, and a rear-mounted turret. G6 currently at: 7.0 must be: 6.7 or even 6.3 reason: perhaps the worst mobility for a wheeled vehicle one could get. If other contemporaries, especially more mobile ones like Type 75 SPH and 2S3M as low as 6.3, then why not this? Sometimes even feels like a T95/Maus on snow or sand. Rooikat 105 currently at: 8.7 must be: 9.0 reason: DM33, 1st gen thermals, excellent mobility. Sure, consideration to not put it THAT high (9.3+) given its premium and many brainlets from low tier can access it. But I hope there is consideration too for 7.7 players, especially those who still rely on armor. T-55AMD-1 currently at: 8.7 must be: 8.3 reason: the APS is the only thing that makes this strong at its BR. Basically a T-55AM-1 with no NERA on turret. It should be okay at 8.7, but given how prone to uptiers 8.7 BR is, and how bad USSR is at 9.0-9.7, I would suggest lowering this to 8.3 as it was before. (Not to mention, why would even 100mm rounds on a not-so-mobile platform be considered 8.7 worthy?) Leopard 2 PL currently at: 10.7 must be: 11.0 with DM53/63 reason: DM43 is underperforming even for 10.7, tie it with the bad hull armor. If it is able to fire DM53 with the same ability as that of the Leopard 2A5, also with a reworked barrel to fit it for such, then why still castrate it until today? AFT09 currently at: 8.7 must be: 9.0 or even 9.3 reason: It's almost a better Khrizantema due to the number of missiles and mobility, as well as the existence of a thermal sight. It's by no means a MEPHISTO equal given the upgrades. Pretty sure no one wants to face this thing in a slow 7.7 or 8.0 with no stabilizer and thermals right? Tu-4 currently at: 8.0 must be: 7.7 reason: this thing facing missiles almost every time in uptiers? I hope the playerbase has enough consideration to not say "jUsT tUrN oFf yOuR eNgiNes" to deter missiles. Really slow, lumbering prop in a BR of transonic jets and even early supersonics (in full uptiers)?, oh come on. Additionally, the reason for this thing's downfall in air RB is the lessened frequency of destructible airfields. Either make the destructible airfields more common for games involving bombers, or downtier it to 7.7 so it can still be felt with worth as a heavy bomber with significance to battle outcomes. B-29A-BN currently at: 7.3 must be: 7.0 reason: somewhat similar reason to Tu-4, but worse, since this has weaker defensive armaments. Thus, even attacking common jets (Me-262), (what more when against MiG-15s?) cannot be fended off with ease when compared to the Tu-4. (insert the destructible airfields thingy here too) Sea Hawk Mk. 100 currently at: 8.0 must be: 8.3 reason: very maneuverable and with 4x AAMs vs superprops and super-early jets at 7.0, seriously? BR roof for ground battles: raise to 11.3, and decompress 8.7+ reason: given the stomping by T-80BVMs and Leopard 2A6s/Strv 122s, I hope 10.0 and 10.3s can be given more chances to breathe. This is also to help when we get a newer generation/sub-generation of top tier MBTs like M1A2 SEPV2, Leopard 2A7 (basic), and T-90M/Object 640. It can also help with current and upcoming 4th-gen jets being able to keep up with the tank BR roof (eg: M1A2 and F-14A both at 11.3, M1A2 SepV2 and F-14D both at 11.7 in the future?) as time passes. Potential candidates for 11.3: T-80BVM Strv 122A/B Leopard 2A5 Leopard 2A6 M1A2 2S6 ADATS, ADATS (M113) ItO 90M (FR, SWE) Challenger Black Knight Merkava Mk. 4M FlaRakRad Move to 11.0: T-72B3 T-80U T-80UK M1A1 HC M1A1 AIM HSTV-L (sorry Spookston) Move to 10.3: T-72M2 Leopard 2A4 T-80B M1 Abrams Strv 121 FlarakPz1 Roland 1 Move to 10.0: T-72AV (TURMS-T) ZTZ96A Challenger DS BMP-2M Khrizantema-S TAM 2C Move to 9.7: Begleitpanzer 57 ZTZ96 AFT09 XM-1 (GM), and give it more powerful top round Move to 9.3: BMD-4 Leopard 1A5 Leopard 1A5NO Leopard A1A1 (L/44) M247 TAM 2IP Rooikat 105 Type 16 MCV Centauro 1 105 R Centauro VRCC Move to 9.0: T-62M-1 VEAK 40 BMP-3 Centauro 1 105 TAM OF-40 (MTCA) ZTZ88A Move to 8.7: T-55AM-1 WMA301 WZ-122MT IT-1 Strike Drones: currently available at: 9.7+ must be only at: 10.7+ reason: why would we even condone 8.7-9.3s to face this? Sure, there is the type 93, Ozelot, and PGZ04A, but again, not all countries have MANPADS or reliable enough SAM to track them at such low BRs, plus they can hardly be seen and tracked even with SACLOS SAMs given their spawn altitudes!
    40 points
  6. RB Leopard 2A4/Strv 121: Add DM 33 The 2A4 is kinda getting left behind in the meta due to its lack of armor and penetration. The M1 at 10.0 has a worse shell but gets significantly faster reload as well as better armor and 3BM42 or similar starts at 9.3 for the Russians and Chinese. Radkampfwagen 90: Add DM63 The RKW 90 literally only has decent mobility (which is about equal to other lights at this BR range like 2S25, AGS, XM8, CV 90105 etc.) But unlike the ones above it neither has an autoloader (and worse reload as well) nor any thermals. The gun handling is also quite a bit below average and thus I think it could at least get a bit of a firepower buff. Marder 1A1: Add DM63 The Marder 1A1 in one of the worst IFVs in game. It has THE worst ground based ATGMs of them in terms of of damage output and they're slow (and only has 4 of them with very limited launch angles). The gun is also very poor since it only has APCR and cannot even penetrate a BMP-1 frontally. I think it should receive a little bit of a firepower upgrade, DM63 is quite weak by itself but it would still help. Marder 1A3: Add MILAN 2 The Marder 1A3 suffers mostly from the same problems as the A1 above. Poor ATGMs, poor gun and poor mobility as it's over 3 tons heavier. MILAN 2 is still a bad missile in terms of damage output and speed, but still at least a small improvement over the MILAN 1. BMP-2, Warrior, Bradley etc. all have better missiles and much better guns. F-4F Late: Add AIM-9L The F-4F is sub par to the other Phantoms. It lacks any kind of radar missiles and also has very limited ground ordnance and a complete lack of guided ordnance except 2 Mavericks (other Phantoms have 6!) Me 262 A-1a/U1: 7.3 --> 7.0 Only has good firepower, flight performance is horrible and since much much much superiour planes like Su-11 or F-89B are at or below it's BR, it should definitely go down. J7W1: 6.0 --> 5.3 Beyond horrible flight performance in all aspects. It only has good firepower, but has no chance against basically ANY fighter at its BR currently. J6K1: 6.0 --> 5.7 Very slow, very bad climb, mediocre turn Only has good armament, same as above.
    35 points
  7. CL-13A Mk.5: should move down to 9.0BR from 9.3BR in ARB F-86F-40/F-86F-40(ROCAF)/F-86F-40(JASDF): should move down to 9.0BR from 9.3BR in ARB The reasons why the BR should be lowered on both aircraft are almost the same, but before I get to that, I need to touch on why the transition to 9.3 was made. The issue goes back to around 2018. Jet RB MM was changed in the spring or summer of 2018 from being divided into NATO(US/Great Britain/Japan/Italy/France) vs Eastrn nations(Germany/USSR) to Allies(US/USSR/Great Britain/France) vs Axis(Germany/Japan/Italy) from WW2 for somehow. At first glance, this may not seem like a problem to players who have never experienced this MM. However, instead of the Allies having "almost" useless bombers (B-57/Camberra/IL-28/Tu-4/Tu-14T/Vautour IIB), the Axis did not have a single bomber between 8.0BR and 9.0BR, so Jet RB players at that time were effectively playing at 8 vs 12. Of course, there were occasional German-Soviet matches/USA-Japan matches and fully mixed MMs in Jet RB, but most matches were Allies vs. Axis, and due to the difference in numbers of Allies teams and the M3 50cals problem described below, the top dog of the Allies teams at the time (F-86F-2/Hunter F.1/russian MiG-15bis and MiG-17) suffered. Also, another problem occurred when all the aircraft of the enemy and friendly teams were BR 9.0 jets. First, look at the lineup of BR9.0 aircraft at the time. USA(Allies) F-86A-5 F-86F-25 F-86F-2 F9F-5 F9F-8 FJ-4B FJ-4B VMF-232 USSR(Allies) MiG-15 MiG-15bis MiG-17 Great Britain(Allies) Venom FB.4 Hunter F.1 France(Allies) Vautour IIA Vautour IIB Germany(Axis) CL-13A Mk.5 MiG-15bis(GDR) Japan(Axis) F-86F-30 F-86F-40 Italy(Axis) Nothing because both G.91s weren't 9.0 at that time The aircraft highlighted in bold and italic type are what were called top dogs at the time. If we focus on the allies 9.0 BR jets of the time, the F-2 Sabre, F-25 Sabre, Hunter F.1, MiG-15bis, and MiG-17 were top dogs, but the A-5 Sabre, F9Fs, and Venom were not their equal. However, the Axis team had the CL-13A Mk.5, which was the fastest Sabre in the game at the time, and the most maneuverable F-40 Sabre, plus the MiG-15bis and F-30 Sabre which is copy and paste. This means that there was not a single underpowered 9.0BR aircraft like the A-5 Sabre or F9F in the Axis teams at that time. So, The Axis team's top dog back then, the CL-13A Mk.5, had a winrate of over 80% in the Thunder Skill. Statistics of CL-13A Mk.5s from Thunder skill an around January or February 2018(Pre MM switched to Allies vs. Axis) Statistics after MM was switched to Allies vs. Axis(September 2018 iirc) Also, the M3 50cals was very overpowered at the time, and instead, large caliber guns such as the 20mm (T-160, Hispano Mk.5), 23mm (NS-23, NR-23), and 30mm (ADEN, DEFA)/37mm (N-37D) were quite often sparked because of bug, thus added to the problem of the Axis team's tendency to win. If you want to know more about those days, I recommend you watch this video and topic. Although months have passed since then and supersonic aircraft were implemented, the power creep was not as bad as it is now, and other than the F-100D, MiG-19s,T-2, and Javelin Mk.9, no supersonic aircraft had yet been implemented, so the CL-13A Mk.5 statistics were still good, so its BR was changed from 9.0 to 9.3. Around the same time (3 or 4 months ago from at that time, to be exact), Gaijin had the 2x AIM-9B loadout implemented for the F-40 Sabre, so its BR was changed from 9.0 to 9.3 as well. Up to this point, there were not many supersonic aircraft yet, and AIM-9B and R-3S were the predominant AAMs in the ARB, and the Shafrir that the Vautour IIA/IDF had was considered slightly "better", so the F-40 Sabre's move from 9.0 to 9.3 was still made sense. Also, since the F-25 Sabre and F-30 Sabre were 9.0 BR at the time, it made sense to move up the CL-13A Mk.5 to 9.3 BR, even though it would have raised another issue of having the same BR as the CL-13B Mk.6 (9.3) of the time. However, their BR problems slowly began to happen when the BRs of the A-5 Sabre and F-25 Sabre and F-30 Sabre moved down to 8.7BR. It still made sense for the A-5 Sabre to move to 8.7 BR itself, since it should not have had the same BR as the MiG-17 and F-2 Sabre, except for the problem of getting the F-84G and Sabre to face. However, since the BR of the F-25 and F-30 Sabre, which have exactly the same airframe as the CL-13A, has moved to 8.7 and has been sitting at 8.7 for a long time, even though it moved to 8.3 for a while, the CL-13A Mk.5 has a slightly "better" engine and a different BR of 0.7 should not be a reason. Also, there should be no reason for the F-40 Sabre to continue to sit at 9.3 BR in the same way, since the MiG-17AS, which could carry R-3S later, was implemented at 9.0 and continues to sit there currently with the BR unchanged for a long time. Also, power creep today has made the CL-13A Mk.5 and F-40 Sabre almost unplayable, as they are faced against MiG-21SMT/MF with R-60s, which are almost impossible to dodge without a flares, and F-5C spam quite often. So... Why are they still sitting on 9.3BR??? Their performance is literally on par with the aircraft sitting at 9.0 BR and they should still be able to compete well with each other currently. Their BR was changed due to the unbalanced MM created by Gaijin, NOT because they were tremendously overpowered. Also, the current MM is virtually a fully mixed bag, and the problems that existed in the Allied vs. Axis MM have already been tossed out the window. Without what has happened in the past, they should have absolutely no reason to continue to sit on 9.3BR. Of course, I am not suggesting that the CL-13A and F-40 Sabre be lowered to 8.7BR. If the BR were to be lowered they would be OP again. However, 9.3BR is just patently absurd. MiG-21bis(RU): should move up to 11.3 from 11.0BR with R-60M in ARB It is litearlly pointless to play it at the moment because German MiG-21bis has R-60M. It made sense, at least at the time, that the reason the R-60M was given for the MiG-21bis-SAU was because Germany did not have an aircraft equivalent to the MiG-23MLD or Phantom FGR.2. However, Germany now have MiG-23MLA which is almost same as MiG-23MLD in the russian TT. Why russian MiG-21bis still not have R-60Ms? Also, no 11.7BR even gen4 jets came out in the game??? Really?
    35 points
  8. I find it extremely hilarious that the premium A10 goes up, while the Su25, with 2 all aspect missiles + much better speed + much more deadlier ordinance stays at 9.7
    33 points
  9. Why is the SU-11 still the same BR? while ur nerfing planes like the a-10 which are fine and used mostly for the Brrrrt gun memes? Get your priorities straight the XP-50, Wyvern and SU-11 are blatantly overpowered up Br those and not planes that don't deserve. Also the SK60B had no problem in 7.3 the only thing it struggles with is the high repair cost. With kind regards
    32 points
  10. I overall like the changes, A-10's going to 10.0 and 10.3 is a good change. But, it would be very good to decrease the pressure on 8.7-9.0 vehicles by moving Su-25s up as well. All are in RB: Su-25/Su-25K: 9.7 ==> 10.0 Having speed, 128 CM, 2 x R-60M All-aspect missiles and superb ground striking capabilities makes this plane a very 10.0 worthy plane, I'm pretty sure it will stay competitive and not so much performance drop will be there. Milan: 9.7 ==> 9.3 / Provide changes to balance the vehicle at 9.7 My opinion on this might not be very popular, but it's worth reading: This plane isn't really 9.7 material, it doesn't have flight performance of J35A, doesn't have RWR, radar, countermeasures, missiles or anything that make it a 9.7 worthy fighter. It can be played as a bomber but with existence of all-aspect missiles and their spam at 9.7-10.0, Milan has no chance of surviving the battle. I can say the only positive part is the speed, it's definitely fast but lacks the energy retention it needs to fight MiG-19 series. Merkava Mk.2D: Stay at 9.0/Provide changes to balance the vehicle at new 9.3 BR Currently. the gun performance is very lacking in terms of penetration, going anything higher than 9.0 makes it face 10.3, it already faces TURMS tanks a lot and gun's performance can't handle the armor on this tank. Harrier GR.7: 11.0 ==> 11.3 Playing even the stock vehicle shows how powerful it is for all usages, it's a deadly CAS, deadly air superiority fighter, and is shortly not a 11.0 plane. Currently planes around 10.3 can meet it regularly which simply is not something positive. All the capabilities, including 700 CMs, 4 x AIM-9Ls, 4 x AGM-65Ds, deadly 25mm guns, great flight performance, etc. etc. make it a 11.3 material. CL-13A: 9.3 ==> 9.0 Comparing it to 9.0 F-2/K Sabre, this plane doesn't belong to 9.3. Just because it's a faster Sabre doesn't make it a 9.3 material. It's currently meeting A-10 and Su-25s very often which make the plane unplayable. Only very competitive players can hardly make it work at 9.3. The gun is not as deadly as other 20mm Sabres which is obvious.
    31 points
  11. I agree with the most of the changes. Now, i going leave some suggestions for Realistic Battles ONLY: T25 Suggested change: 6.3 to 5.7 After lose the stabilizer his performing drop significally, is not 6.3 material anymore. Sherman M4A276 and M4A376. Suggested change: 5.7 and 5.3 to 5.3 and 5.0. Completely outclassed by his other nations counterparts like T-34 or Panthers, average armor with mediocre mobility a small downtier is well needed. M47/KPZ M47. Suggested change: 7.3 to 7.0 Those tanks are not much better than M46 and worse than M48, decreasing to 7.0 give the possibility of create a proper lineup for Germany and strong option to weakers M46 for US, moving to 7.0 is good for both nations. Panzer 4H. Suggested change: 3.7 to 4.0 and move again to rank 3. Good armor, movility and fire power, this tank can perfectly do fine in 4.0 and Germany need a mediun tank in rank 3 becuase the only option is much worse J premiun version only. Leopard 1. Suggested change: 7.3 to 7.7. Very good firepower and mobility for 7.3 , another tank perfom extremly well in his old BR. Jagdtiger. Suggested changes: 6.7 to 6.3 or stay in 6.7 with reload speed change. Terrible outdated tankdestroyer, his main adventage is his thick armor but due the compression lose this adventage practically in every battle, with HEATFS or even mouase guide ATGM in his BR there is no reason for stay in 6.7. The only way for stay in 6.7 is buff his reload speed. Maus. Suggested change: 7.7 to 7.3. The great forgoten, this tank is just a old dinosaur is incompresible why stay in 7.7 when the are a lot of tank in lower BR can easy deal with his armor, there is no reason for leave in 7.7 anymore, specially whn similar tanks like IS3 or IS6 are in lower BR since long time ago. VK45.01 Suggested change: 5.3 to 5.0. Worse than Henschell Tiger in practically everything, very rare and much worse armor and turret rotation. In 5.0 this thank is far from be a problem, 80mm of flat armor are easly beat for anything at that BR. T-34 mod 41. Suggested change: 3.7 to 4.0. This is overperforming since one year ago, near and over 70% win ratio since volumetirc armor change, this tank is a low rank clubber and need go up. T-34 mod 40. Suggested change: 3.3 to 3.7. Right now this tank have 81% win ratio, lower ranks are completely dominated by soviets since volumetric armor changes and need some adjust now. If much worse panzer 3M (35% win ratio) can move to 3.3 this tank of course too. KV-220. Suggested change: 5.7 to 6.0. This tank is one of the most and older clubber in WT, is blatantly undertiered since long time ago. 6.0 material, excelent armor, mobility and firepower. Stop this p2w please. M26/ M26 Ariete/ M26A1 Suggested Change: 6.3 to 6.0 Reason for change: Very obsolete tank in comparission with another 6.3 M26E1 or Tiger 2 P, moving down to 6.0 those tanks more than probably they dont gonna create any balance issue and that BR they can breath a bit from constant 7.3 uptiers where are obsolete. Churchill MK3/ Captured version. Suggested Change: 4.3 to 4.0. Is ridiculous move this tank to 4.3 when the overperforming KVs stay in 4.0. This vehicle is very overtired need go back to 4.0 where his armor and poor speed perform more better.
    30 points
  12. Dear players. From September the 24th we have faced prolonged DDoS attacks on our servers. As a result, some of you may experience problems with the availability of the game and other game services. We are aware of this problem, our specialists are promptly switching the load to other data centers to stabilise the situation. We want what's happening to have minimal impact on your gaming experience during our Events, so: We will be increasing the number of Crates with Material and Pieces of Tape tasks for project “Overpowered” that will be available after October 3rd (12:00 noon GMT). We will update you with the details in the event news during the week. Twitch Drops event participants who clicked the "Get" button in their Drops inventory will receive their earned rewards during the week. Once the situation stabilises, we will extend all active premium accounts. We will inform you about this in another news item. We will keep you informed.
    30 points
  13. IS-2 changes shouldn't be happening, it's balanced at the br. Big gun with nice punching power but very long reload, armor which can be trolly at times but is mostly average and crew placement which means most of the time they're shot it's a 1-shot.
    26 points
  14. Here We Go Again... Editing As I Go. Undertiered (RB): M4A3 (105): 2.7 => 3.0 Wyvern: 4.0 => 5.0 | Why Even Is It Down At 4.0 To Start With?? 600 km/h Turbo-Prop, Crapload Of Ordinance & 4x 20 mm's Shouldn't At All Be Facing Anything Lower Than 4.0 IJN Kako: 4.7 => 5.0 | It's Kinda Screwed Up How Kako's The Lowest Heavy Cruiser In The Whole Game, Dishing Out 203mm's At 4.7 Is Insane Overtiered (RB): IJN Hatsuharu: 4.3 => 4.0 / 3.7 + Place Before Yugumo | (It's About Equal / Worse Than Ayanami) Why In God Name Was The Hatsuharu Added In Her PRE-COMMISION Refit, Her Turrets Slowest As They Can Get, Barely Any More Firepower Than Any Japanese DD And Lacklustre Type 90 Torpedoes. IJN Shimakaze: 5.0 => 4.7 | Torpedoes, Isn't, Everything. The Moment These Torpedoes Are In The Water, The Only Thing I Can Rely On Is The Speed To Run Away From Combat, The 127mms Don't Hold A Candle At 5.0 And Get Outmatched By Faster Firing Cannons Like Those On American Destroyers, And Lack The Damage Carried By Being Limited To Pure HE. To Further Pull On The Torpedo Argument; Japanese Destroyers Come With An Average Total Of 16 Torpedoes (In 2 Salvos) Instead Of Shimakaze's Single Load 15, Yet Get Treated Differently (Yugumo At 4.3). IJN Isuzu: 5.0 => 4.7 | She's Loaded With 3x Twin 12.7cm Guns And A Boat Load Of 25s, While Decent At Close Range Anti-Air, She Doesn't Provide Much Damage Output As A Cruiser, Equalling That Of Average Destroyers At This BR F-86F-40: 9.3 => 9.0 | How Do 2x AIM-9Bs Warrant 0.7 More BR Over The Regular F-86F-30? It's Simply Insane. Different Balancing Issues: 1. (Naval AB/RB) Frigates & End-Tier Coastal: (Coastal End-Tier Isn't Even Consistent Across Nations, Where Italy Offers The Saetta (4.7 + Missles), Other Nations Offer Lacklustre Frigates (3.7-4.0 + Some High Fire-Rate <100mm), With BRs Colliding With Mid Tier Bluewater Even Though Not Being Able To Do Much Against DDs, Any Coastal Above 4.0 Just Doesn't Work As A Coastal Vessel As It Will Be Very Unlikely To See People Use Coastal From 3.7+, Being Able To Capture A Single Zone And Do No Significant Damage To Larger Vessels) Frigates & End Tier Coastal Is Such A Mess And I Don't Get Any Of Its Reasoning Behind, As A Japanese Main, I'll Be Bringing Up These Vehicles, But This Drags On Into Other Nations Aswel, And Will Be The Further We Go Down More Vehicles For All. 1. End Tier Coastal Just Ends Up Becoming Starting Tier Bluewater AT THE RP COST OF BATTLESHIPS. Chidori: A Torpedo Boat (Just Like T-Class German Destroyers (Torpedoboat)), Misplaced Into The Coastal Tree Rather Than Blue Water Shonan: A Coastal Defense Vessel (2x 120 mm And A Good Amount Of 25mm), With The Spawn Of A Destroyer, At Coastal Slow Speeds Ps. To Unpopular Opinion: I Genuinely Think Shonan & Chidori Should Just Become Tier I Bluewater, With JDS Yugure & JDS Harukaze Taking The End Of The Line For Coastal Making The Coastal Tree Evolve Into The JMSDF, While Keeping The Bluewater Fleet IJN 2. The Other End Of The Coastal Spectrum Is Frigates & Destroyer Escorts Which Don't Play Exactly Like Bluewater, But Still Gets A Way Too Far Spawn To Be Called Coastal Chikugo, Akebono, Isuzu: At Best Get 2x 76 mm's But Come As A Destroyer Escort / Frigate, So Unrightfully Get Destroyer Spawn, Which They Can't Full Fill Their Duties As, Lacking Behind In Speed, And Getting Out Ranged & Gunned By Larger 120mm+ Guns At Long Range Without Much Counter Play (Italian) Albatross, (Russian) Groza, (German) K2, FGS Köln, FGS Lübeck, ...: All These "Gunboats" Have The Same Issues, And Should Be Relabled And Rebalanced To Better Suit Bluewater - Coastal Balance. My Suggestion Is To Add A Intermediate Naval Spawn, For All Larger Vessels, Other Vessels That Shouldn't Spawn Here Get Free Reign Over Defenseless Patrol Boats Just As Gunboats Did In The Past, These Ships Are (Among The Few:) (Main Concern; High Survival Damage Model) USS Cyclone, USS Hoquiam (For Some Reason Gets Destroyer-Like Damage Model With PT Spawn - Extremely Resistant To Small Gun Fire) LCS(L)(3) Pr.206 (All) MZ1, M-17, M-803 RN Gabbiano Flower-Class ... 2. (Simulator Ground) Differing Operating Countries From Alliance As An Avid War Criminal Myself, Painting My Italian Sherman With American Tank Division Emblems & Flags, It's Irresponsible To Not Atleast Bring It Up. The Fact That Allied Italy & Fascist Italy Stay In The Same Axis Side With Both Vehicles Is Ridiculous, Captured Tanks Such As German/Finnish KV-1 Or Russian Pz.III (T-3) I Don't Mind, As They're In Fact, CAPTURED. But Lend-Lease Post-Axis Factions Simply Don't Fit The Bill In The Match Making And Make Simulator Ground A Chore To Play And By No Means Is It "Simulator". To List Up The Problems: Low Tier Sim Brackets (Allied x Axis | WWII) (Allied / Post-Axis) Italy: M3A3, M24, M4A4, M4 Hybrid, M4 Firefly, M4 Tip, M36B1, M26, FIAT XXX, R3 XXX... (Occupied / JSDF) Japan: M24, M16, M19, M42, M4A3E8, M36B2, ST-A1-3, Type 61, Type 60 SPRG, ... (West) Germany: leKpz M41, Ru 251, JPz 4-5 (These Shouldn't Even Be Playable In Low Bracket Imo) High Tier Sim Brackets (NATO x Warsaw | Cold-War) (ROC) China: M48A1, M41D, M113A1, M60A3 (TTS), CM11, CM25 (GDR) Germany: BMP-1, MiG-15 / 21 / 23, Mi-24 Limiting The Decals You Can Place On Vehicles Is Honestly A Bad Solution As It Doesn't Really Solve Anything, Just More Loopholes To Jump Through To Commit To War Crimes. Just Placing Vehicles On The Right Alliance Would Solve Most Of These Problems.
    26 points
  15. Welp, seeing as M1A1 is receiving M829A1 and that CR 1 Mk.3 already has L26 at 10.0 - Leopard 2A4 and Strv 121: should receive DM33 as they're currently being left behind in the game's "meta" due to insufficient penetration as well as post penetration spall. The tank's armour is already underperforming, DM33 would at the very least give it a fighting chance in uptiers. - Leopard 2PL: With M1A1 receiving M829A1 and with M1A1 AIM and HC both having M829A1/KE-W respectively plus T-90A and T-72B3 having 3BM-60 at 10.7, there is no reason to withhold DM53/63 from this vehicle at all now, it is also performing really badly due to DM43 grossly underperforming. - Panther A (Soviet, French, etc): Lower their HP's to 600 since they are to be identical in that regard to the German one; otherwise, return 700hp engine back to the German one.
    24 points
  16. We continue to monitor the Battle Ratings of vehicles and their competitive capabilities. Below you will find a list of the changes we want to make in September 2022. To open the Battle Rating changes list in a new tab, click here! If you think we should make some additional changes or do not agree with listed changes, please support your suggestions with arguments! We read all your feedback, so it can take some time to approve your post. Please be sure to stay on topic. Thanks! You can leave your feedback in this thread
    24 points
  17. Again, very random changes. ALL FEEDBACK ARE FOR Realistic Battles (RB). US: M1A1 : Stay at 10.3 I don't understand why it needs to go up in BR. It does not have the M1IP's reload rate, and its round overall is arguably a bit worse than the M900 despite being 120mm. Furthermore, its armor profile is vulnerable to 3BM42 (and anything around that range) (Not to mention the 3BM60 and 3BM46 you'll face), whilst M829 can't really deal with most Russian tanks frontally (T72B series / T90A - B3 and T90A being 10.7 as well) whilst they can lol-pen you. Its never been absurdly strong at 10.3 - it was just fine there with the M1IP deservedly at 10.7. Very baffling change there. AGS : Give it M833 and move it up to 10.3-10.7 Range I like that Gaijin is giving it the M774 and moving it up, but as of right now it still is kind of in that US event LT spam range where there still isn't a lot of variety. US could use an extra (Good) LT at top BR (>=10.3), and AGS certainly fills a niche alongside the more unconventional HSTV-L. M1128 : Stay at 9.7 - If you insist on moving it up to 10.0 - Please let us uninstall the SLAT Armor to give it more mobility I don't believe the Stryker is insanely broken at 9.7 - it is a good tank at that BR but is it that strong to justify it going up a BR? I disagree. The mobility is overrated on it and it's reload rate (7.5s vs 7.1s) often gets you killed against Russian tanks (Granted M900 is very good against anything not T-72B or above). If Gaijin insist on moving up BR, I strongly suggest you let us uninstall the extra armor - honestly at that BR, I'd rather be a little faster than have some pretty much useless deadweight armor. Soviet / Russian PT-76-57 : Can easily go even higher up, but I am not complaining that it's going up. Long overdue. IS-2 (All changed variants) : Stay at 5.7 Letting it go up is absurd. In what way it is a better tank overall than all Panther variants (all of which are under or at 5.7)? In what way it is materially better than the Tiger Is (apart from the gun)? In what way it is a match to something like a M48A2C (which has HEAT round, great APHE and good armor against any APCBC rounds)? It has mediocre armor at best even if you do the reverse "trick", its gun reload rate is horrendous (27 seconds), its mobility has just been nerfed and never had been that great in the first place. It does not deserve going up in BR. Please let it stay at 5.7.
    23 points
  18. The A10A Late got increased to 10.3, which is fine by me. But why are both Su25 still unchanged at 9.7? They are at the same battlerating as the premium A10A, which is a lot worse.
    23 points
  19. I'd like to suggest some changes: #1 J 35D 10.7 -> 10.3 ; this aircraft is anything but competitive at 10.7. it only get 4 Rb 24Js, no RWR and no Countermeasures. Lower it, its been dead for 3 patches now. if you dont want to downtier it, you can still change it to the J 35Ö/OE/XO which is the Austrian modificiation of it which used AIM-9P-5s, had RWR and countermeasures. it could stay at 10.7 in that case. but we all know its not going to happen so downtier it. you also somehow ruined its flight model, making it compress a lot at speeds higher than 500kph. in other words, its not even an outstanding dogfighter anymore... #2 A 32A 9.3 -> 9.0 ; basically the same as the J 32B but it gets chaff and RWR, still does not compare to other 9.3s #3 J 29F 9.0 -> 8.7 ; it doesnt turn all too well and lacks anything *extraordinarily* good. moving it to 8.7 would solve a lot of its problems with uptiers while not being too powerful. #4 F-4F 11.0 -> 10.7 ; seriously, how is this Phantom with no sparrows and only 9Js at 11.0? makes no sense. either downtier it or give it the AIM-9Ls it deserves #5 Su 25(K and non K) 9.7 -> 10.0 or 10.3 ; actually, why the hell is it at 9.7? its fast, great gun, R-60M/MKs it has NO REASON to be at 9.7. NONE. good changes are the J 32B(although it could maybe even go to 9.0) and the SK 60B. A-10s moving up is also great. that is all maybe you could move the Lvkv 42 to 4.0 ideally we'd see decompression by moving things like the F-14, Mirage 2000 and maybe the MiG 23MLs to 11.7 or 12.0 but we all know that that's not going to happen
    22 points
  20. Heres my long list of BR change suggestions, all are for Realistic Battles: Aircraft: Bf109 E-3: 2.3 -> 2.7. This is a 3.0 worthy plane which got lowered from 2.7 unnecessarily. Its probably one of the most broken OP planes at this BR. It should go back to where it was. S-199: 3.3 -> 3.0. its a BF109 without all of the things that make a Bf109 good. Its extremely frustrating to play where everything out performs you, Its probably worth 2.7 but lowering it .3 is a start. A6M3 Mod 22 Ko: 5.0 -> 4.3. Compared to an A6M5 this has worse climb rate, roll rate, dive speed and acceleration, and less ammo and suspended ordinance options. Its been so over tiered that its a complete waste of time to play anymore. Nothing makes this worth the same BR as an A6M5. Speaking of.... A6M5 (all versions): 5.0 -> 4.7 (otsu 5.3->5.0) Ive changed my mind about just downtiering the base A6M5. Players Inability to learn to NOT turn with Zeros is NOT A VALID REASON to keep increasing their BRs. They are ALL massively outclassed by everything at 5.0 and its not the Zeros fault that people flying bf109s keep trying to turn with them! Su-11: 7.0-7.3/7.7. Everyone hates it, everyone says its OP. it runs rings around the Me-262s performance. It needs to go up, its a menace at 7.0. F2G-1: 6.0->6.3: This is a 6.7 plane sitting at 6.0. It needs to up up, it decimates in down tiers which are common thanks to the broken MM at 6.0. Ju-288C: 6.0 -> 6.3. This change, frankly, does nothing to the 288. It will not change how it plays, what it does, or how effective it will be at what people use it for. What this change WOULD do is add an extra .3 of a BR to all the people who play to AVOID the damn thing. 4.7 is easily one of if not the most popular prop BR for that exact reason. allowing players to go up to 5.0 and avoid it will be a godsend. Wyvern: 4.0 -> 5.0. Turboprop that even 6.0s will struggle to catch in a straight line, good ordinance, 4x 20mms. Its so undertiered. The only reason its not is because most people use it to fly to a base, bomb it, and then die. Anyone who actually knows what they're doing can and will decimate all with it. Tanks: Tanks: M24 Chaffee (all nations): 3.7 -> 4.0 AND move to Rank III for ALL nations. The chaffee deserves it. Its not a rank 2 tank. It should be rank 3 and raising it to 4.0 will also not hurt it at all, its a very capable tank. it PZIV H: 3.7 -> 4.0: You had your laugh gaijin, Move it back to 4.0 where it belongs please. And also put it back in rank 3. WMA301: 8.3 -> 8.7. Gen 2 Thermals, mobility, great optics, a strong gun. this is practically worth 9.0 frankly, but its sitting down here at 8.3 being completely broken OP. PTL02: 8..0 -> 8.3. Same story as the WMA but with a slightly smaller gun and MORE penetration. STB-1: 8.0->7.7. OR give it its HEAT round back. It has zero reason to be at the same BR as the Type 74C which has the same HEAT Round that it lost before also losing its good optics and being uptiered. Type 74E/F: 8.7 ->8.3. You know, I was going to leave these off, But having just looked up the PTL02s ammo while typing this out it convinced me to add them. The Type 74s have been repeatedly and substantially nerfed over the past year, They were average at best a year ago back when they had better optics, more mobility, and better gun traverse speeds. the Type 93 ammo was the only thing stopping me from believing they could be lowered in BR. But seeing the PTL02 gets nearly as much penetration on its dart a full 0.7 lower WHILE also getting thermals? Yeah Type 74s can go down to 8.3 and maybe be slightly above average for once in their poor lives. Rooikat 105: 8.7 -> 9.0 or 9.3. Stupidly high mobility, 12x zoom. thermals. DM33. Just drives behind your spawn and spawncamps everyone. Theres no reason that this should be below 9.0. ARCADE BATTLES : Ki-84 Hei: 7.7->6.7. Im convinced gaijin is trolling with this. A WW2 prop fighter SHOULD NOT be able to get matched against supersonic jets regardless of game mode!
    21 points
  21. Suggested changes are all for Air RB: Vehicle: Su-25 & Su-25K Current BR: 9.7 Proposed BR: 10.0 Reasoning: With all aspect R60Ms and far better flight performance than the A-10, the Su-25 is significantly undertiered and ruins all opposition in any downtier it gets. It's an attacker that gets to roleplay as an air superiority fighter and dunk on far inferior subsonics that have zero defenses against it. It's been out for long enough to have collected adequate stats; it needs to go up (but we know why it won't). Vehicle: Mystere IVA Current BR: 8.7 Proposed BR: 8.3 Reasoning: Worst 8.7 that's objectively incapable of dealing with most planes at 9.3, let alone 9.7 when excellent missiles (AIM-9G, R-60) and superlative performance are combined on numerous platforms (Harriers, AV-8s, MiG-21S, etc). It's an equivalent performer to the Cougar and Javelin roughly (both of which are 8.3), while having no A2A missiles. At best, it's a sidegrade to the Mystere IIC in practice, despite it's superior on-paper specs. Vehicle: F-84Fs (all) Current BR: 8.3 Proposed BR: 8.0 Reasoning: It's hard to imagine a jet in this BR range with worse flight performance and conformance to the meta. F-84Fs are regularly bullied by their predecessor F-84Gs in downtiers, and make absolutely zero impact to the match almost universally - regardless of uptier or downtier. They're categorically worse than every single other 8.3 fighter/attacker/mixed-role plane, and are subpar compared to many planes below 8.3 (La-15, F2H, F-84G, Mystere IIA, La-200, etc). I see little reason for them to remain at 8.3, and they will likely still be terrible at 8.0 (though obviously, shouldn't go any lower than that). Vehicle: Spitfire F Mk.22 Current BR: 6.7 Proposed BR: 6.3 Reasoning: I daresay it's futile to even bother mentioning the Mk.24 after the last session's comments on its efficiency (which I have yet to see in my playtime of late...), but the Mk.22 itself is comparable in metrics to planes at 5.7-6.3 such as the Bf 109 K-4, F2G-1, P-51H, late Ki-84s, Yak-3 VK-107, etc... Really not sure what metrics are being observed here, but other than Ju 288 farming, this plane was never imbalanced at 6.3. Edit: The F4D-1 Skyray getting bumped down to 9.0 is great, but ultimately it'll still be meaningless as long as it has its bugged instructor since it will still be unplayable.
    20 points
  22. Lets start with feedback to your BR changes in SB: Seems like you forgot these My suggestions for BR changes in SB for the next update: Vehicle: MB.5 Mode: SB Suggested Change: 4.7 to 5.0 (SB EC3 to SB EC4) Reason for change: Post-war Super Prop with way too good flying performance for EC3 Vehicle: Wyvern Mode: SB Suggested Change: 4.7 to 5.0 (SB EC3 to SB EC4) Reason for change: Post-war Super Prop with way too good flying performance for EC3 Vehicle: Mörkö-Morane Mode: SB Suggested Change: 1.7 to 2.3 (SB EC1 to SB EC2) Reason for change: With the upgraded engine it has way too good flying performance for EC1
    18 points
  23. Dear players. From September the 24th we have faced prolonged DDoS attacks on our servers. As a result, some of you may experience problems with the availability of the game and other game services. We are aware of this problem, our specialists are promptly switching the load to other data centres to stabilise the situation. We want what's happening to have minimal impact on your gaming experience during our Events, so: 1) We will be increasing the number of Crates with Material and Pieces of Tape tasks for project “Overpowered” that will be available after October 3rd (12:00 noon GMT). We will update you with the details in the event news during the week. 2) Twitch Drops event participants who clicked the "Get" button in their Drops inventory will receive their earned rewards during the week. 3) Once the situation stabilises, we will extend all active premium accounts. We will inform you about this in another news item. We will keep you informed.
    18 points
  24. Air Realistic Battles •G91YS - 9.7 > 9.3 Below average performance compared to other planes at it's BR or lower, like the F5 Shenyang, Mig19, T2, Jaguar, J29F, Lightning, SU7, SU25, Yak38, Mig21(S, PFM, F-13), Lim5, AV8 and more. As well as having no countermeasures and not enough speed to counter the majority of these jets. •CL13B Mk.6 - 9.7 > 9.3 It's a sabre. At 9.7 No countermeasures, not enough armament to be there, not enough acceleration, not enough speed, not enough thrust to weight. •SU25 & SU25K - 9.7 > 10.0 Superb armament, all aspect 30G missiles and a big amount of countermeasures, jets at it's BR like the J35A with good performance and armament or even a G91YS face a great and unfair difficulty against these jets, and I'm not even talking about 8.7 jets yet!
    17 points
  25. Those proposed changes are pretty decent for a first go around, but i feel like a few things are missing. All suggestions apply for Realistic Battle modes Su-25, Su-25K Those bad boys have similar Air-to-Air armaments to the A-10A Early while being faster and sometimes even tanking a AAM. they might not have the same range when it comes to their Air-to-Ground ordanance, but their HE-rockets are rather effective at dealing with enemy tanks and when loaded with 8xZB-500 bombs, it can quite effectively take out 2 bases before engaging enemy aircraft due to its decent speed. Would be nice if those would go up to 10.0 CL-13A Mk.5, CL-13B Mk.6, F-86F-40 (all versions) The late Sabres were once the pride of their respective Techtrees, but they have been superceded quite heavily and are not as competitive anymore. Their armament of 6x12,7mm M3 Brownings requires the player to make multiple good hits where many other planes require a single round to hit its target to score a kill. The 2xAIM-9Bs will probably work a bit better on a reduced BR, but will hardly be gamebreaking. I'd like to see a 1-step down in BR for these planes (from 9.3 to 9.0 and from 9.7 to 9.3) S.O. 4050 Vautour IIN (late) The Vautour interceptor easily locks up at medium to high speeds and is in general not very manouverable. The Matra 511s have a very low chance to hit the target as almost every other plane can easily dodge them without much effort, Tu-4's might have a hard time, but they appear to be rather rare regardless. The AA.20 Nords are hard to use and mainly work in headons, if at all. It is also currently in the tough spot where it keeps getting dragged up against 9.7s with decent AAMs like the Harrier and the Su-25, where the Vautour has no chance of survival. I feel like the Vautour would be better placed at 8.3 Wyvern S.4 The Wyvern is a very capable aircraft with decent to good handling, great air-to-air and air-to-ground armament and high speed, so i dont see a reason to keep it at its current BR aside from maybe new players who don't know how they should handle their newly acquired premium Aircraft. A increase of the Wyverns BR would be very much welcome, even if its just a 1-step up A-4B the A-4B is quite a bit worse when it comes to flight performance, survivability and groundstrike capability compared to the A-4E. They both don't excel at Air-to-Air combat, but the A-4E still has a edge over its predecessor. I'd like to see a differentiation between the A-4B and A-4E, as it wont change much in Ground Battles, as there isnt a single vehicle in the US Ground Forces Techtree at BR 8.3 and it would just make it a bit cheaper to spawn in. I'd suggest to move the A-4B to 8.3 Su-11 The Su-11 is, again, a very capable aircraft with decent handling, great speed and decent cannons. It is more capable than its Techtree equivilent, the Su-9, and can fight other 7.3 and 7.7 aircraft quite comfortably. The improved flight characteristics should reflect a increase in BR compared to its non-premium counterpart. In my oppinion it would've been nice if it went up to atleast 7.3 a while ago Me 262 C-2b The C-2b version of the Me 262 is the most capable Me 262 in the game, don't get me wrong, but when the MK 108's are already hard to score a hit with on 7.0, its quite rough at 8.0. The rocket boosters are very useful for this plane, but they are probably also the reason for the relatively high BR and dont really last long enough to warrant that. I would welcome a reduction of the Me 262 C-2b's BR to 7.7 KV-1E, KV-1B The uparmored KV-1's are rather hard to kill, as their armor makes them sometimes completely invulnerable to tanks of the same BR. They often get "abused" during events due to how you can sometimes flatout ignore a enemy tank and him still not being able to destroy you. These KV-1s would probably be better placed at 4.3 That would be it by me for now, keep up the great work Gaijin bois
    17 points
  26. Hello, Thank you for this. Suggestions in RB: IKV91 7.0 to 7.3 - It has a laser range finder, fantastic zoom & 400mm pen heat on a decently mobile chassis with decent survivability due to the size of it. It is the same BR as the Eland7/AML90 which are more mobile & harder to hit granted, but are worse in every way. Gepard 8.0 to 8.3 - This is possibly the best Radar SPAA without missiles or Proxi, it acts like it uses magnetic shells plus it's on a decently mobile chassis plus it has a search and lock radar when others at it's BR have to use their search radar to lock. The Rooikat ZA35 is 8.3 also with a more mobile but less armoured chassis. Chieftain Marksman 8.0 to 7.7 - If the M163 is going down and the ZSU-37/2 is already at 7.7. The Marksman uses the worse part of the Chieftain (the hull) which is incredibly slow, combined with an absolute shed of a turret that negates any armour advantage the Chieftain hull offers. It's guns are so far apart that quite often you will shoot either side of targets. Falcon 8.0 to 7.0 - Wait for a moment before you spit out your tea. Remove the APDS round so that is has to focus on SPAA where it is much needed at that BR. It is being BR'd as a tank destroyer rather than an SPAA. Skink Keep at 4.7 - there is no line up at 5.0 and it is armoured well but has worse guns than the Wirblewind which is at 3.7. 4.7 is a good BR for it and supports that excellent line up of tanks at 4.7 Stormer HVM 10.3 to 10.0 - Why oh why is this sitting at 10.3, it hardly even works since the patch before last, 10.0 now has no suitable SPAA which has been made even worse since the introduction of Drones... Vickers VFM 5 9.3 to 9.0 - Good mobility and round but poor armour and no thermals, either give it thermals which were an option on the vehicle or put it back down to 9.0 please! G6 7.0 to 6.7 or 6.3 - It is not worthy of this BR considering other SPGs such as the Russian and Japanese ones are 6.3 and the Swedish BKAN is 6.7. It has very limited turret traverse and its huge. Churchill Mk3 4.3 to 4.0 - this was moved up along with the German Churchill due to how well the German version was doing, this is as it never faces German guns which at that BR can easily pen the Churchill. Both can move back down to 4.0 now as there are better guns in the game with the addition of Sweden and now mixed nation battles removes that advantage that Russia and Germany used to have as a pair. Chi To & Chi To Late 4.7 to 4.3 - These tanks are pretty awful at that BR, compared to their equivalents the Sherman Firefly, T34-57 or M4A1 (76) W, they are simply awful, they are in every way worse than those three tanks. VK 3002 (M) 5.0 to 5.3 - This is just as good as a Panther D, less armour but more mobile, it should not be facing 4.0 tanks. T-55AM-1 8.3 to 8.7 - Far too strong for 8.3, very good armour, good mobility, laser range finder and good pen for APFSDS and ATGM. Compare this to the Chieftain Mk3 which is worse in every way. Chieftain Mk5 8.7 to 8.3 - It has slightly more HP than the Mk3 but it hardly turns it into a race car, it is just as slow and cumbersome. Chieftain Mk10 9.0 - 8.7 - Has no thermals, still brew armour doesn't have the same impact as it once did and its slowwww, compared to the new Oliphant Mk2, which is faster, Gunner and commander thermals, DM63 and armour of comparable effectiveness. Or turn it into the Chieftain Mk11 and give it thermal for the gunner. Challenger Mk2 & Challenger DS 9.7 to 10.0 - Give them both L26 as the Mk2 Was issued it and the DS is a mark 3 anyway. Would give a better line up for Britain. Turms T 9.7 to 10.0 - It is heavily upgraded t72 with good armour, gunner & commander thermals & a very good round. TTD 9.7 to 9.3 - This thing is awful, it is a worse Oliphant Mk2 apart from Armour. 9.3 would be fine for it. Challenger A30 5.3 to 5.7 - It is comparable to the Comet which is also at 5.7. That is all I can find the energy to do for now, thank you for coming to my ted talk.
    17 points
  27. Add M413 or even M426 APFSDS to merkava mk2d,M111 is one of the worst AP round for BR 9.3,and without any competitiveness with other 9.3 MBT or even LT. It will be the worst rank VI premium pack vehicle in the game.
    17 points
  28. Realistic battles, ground US T25 6.3 -> 5.7, this vehicle was moved all the way from 5.7 to 6.3 to be an alternative to the Pershing for its short stabilizer, but then the short stabilized was REMOVED, leaving no reason to play it over the Pershing. Either put it back to 5.7 or give it back the stabilizer (perhaps by changing its designation to a variant that had the short stabilizer). It is one of the most redundant vehicles in the American ground tech tree. M26E1 6.7 -> 6.3, as significantly longer reload offsets its higher pen. It has the same gun and ammo as the T26E1-1 while lacking any of its upgraded armour. An alternative would be to raise its fire rate as the ammo it fires is smaller than that of the T26E1-1. A stock reload of ~10 seconds would be feasible. M4A3E2 (76) Jumbo 6.3 -> 6.0. This vehicle fulfilled its purpose as an upgunned Jumbo. It is a heavy tank, and should at least sometimes behave like one. At 6.3, even in a full downtier it sees vehicles that can penetrate it frontally anywhere very reliably (Panther D) while in its own BR it faces the long German 88 that does not even need to aim at all when shooting at the Jumbo, while the Jumbo struggles to pen it Tiger 2Hs (in a slight uptier) anywhere frontally. A BR reduction would at least give the Jumbo 76 a chance to NOT face Tiger 2s. M48A1 7.3 -> 7.0, I still don't understand why the American M48 needs to be at a higher BR than the German one while being WORSE. M60 7.7 -> 7.3, Worse than a Leopard in everything but its armour and made entirely redundant as just .3 BR above it a stabilized version with better armour exists. M50 Ontos 6.7 -> 7.0, while being very map dependent, the Ontos is far better than contemporary Recoilless vehicles in terms of firepower. M60A1 RISE 8.7 -> 8.3, no laser rangefinder and worse mobility than the Leopard A1A1 without armour significant enough to matter at the BR (unless facing HEAT). Very similar in terms of performance to the Shot Kals of the Israeli TT. If moved down, similar Israeli vehicles could be considered for the same move too. M60A3 TTS 9.0 -> 8.7 or give it the same ammunition as the Taiwanese CM11 (DM-63). As it stands, the M60A3 struggles to pen well armoured 10.0 vehicles frontally, something the DM-63 round would alleviate. M1128 Stay at current BR or even lowered, with less mobility, gun depression and worse armour while being a larger target makes the M1128 inferior to the likes of Centauro 105R, Type 16 and ZLT11 while only having its top round be better. In addition to having it AT LEAST stay at its own BR, add a modification to either REMOVE or ADD its current additional armour as it serves little purpose in terms of armour and would reduce weight making it more mobile and competitive. Germany Leopard 1 7.3 -> 7.7, does not need to be 7.3 at all. It did well at 7.7, with nothing it struggled to pen anywhere, except perhaps the odd T-62M and T-55AM. This isn't enough of an excuse to let it face vehicles that cannot compete with the long range ability, speed and accuracy of an L7 with HEAT-FS. USSR T-10M 8.3 -> 8.0, simply does not add much other than HEAT-FS and APDS over the T-10A. Object 685 8.7 -> 8.3, it does not have much value above a T-55A except its autoloader and a laser rangefinder, where it sacrifices armour and gains huge size. T-80B 10.0 -> 10.3, this vehicle is overperforming and much better than the legacy Abrams, Leopard 2A4 and Vickers Mk.7 in almost every aspect except manoeuvrability. BMP-2M 9.3 -> 10.0, 4 ready ATGMs that pen anything it looks at while being able to fire them on the move, as well as fast firing, decent penetrating APFSDS rounds and HE-VT ATGMs make this thing the master of almost every situation. Best IFV in terms of BR, and make all other IFVs it shares a BR with (M3A3, Dardo) laughable while still being superior to IFVs that are ABOVE it (VCC-80/30). 10.0 would be GENEROUS for this thing as it is frequently seen doing well even at top tier. Great Britain Conway 7.0 -> 6.7, think of it as a British T34, while lacking a lot of armour and post pen performance. It is a slow and poorly armoured gun platform except for the turret face. Rooikat Mk.1D 8.3 -> 8.0, honestly an atrocious vehicle as its APFSDS has incredibly anaemic post-pen performance. To have this ABOVE the PL-2 is a travesty. VFM5 9.3 -> 9.0, has no lineup to fit into while not doing great where it currently sits. Lacks any special quirk to make it unique (autoloader, impressive round, impressive mobility, small size, good survivability) compared to its contemporaries. Vehicles such as the XM-8, TAM 2IP/2C and CV 90105 XV-8 outperform it in terms of most if not all of these regards. Would not overperform at 9.0, and would make it a viable vehicle to play as a first spawn, and not as a back-up. Japan Chi-Ri II 5.0 -> 4.7, it is HUGE and poorly armoured! And all for a 3 round auto-loader. This thing is a round magnet to any and all vehicles that see it. It is at most a sidegrade to the Chi-To's which are much smaller and weigh 10 tonnes less while only lacking 100HP. A Tiger 2 size tank with none of its armour. China M41D 8.0 -> 7.7, even more anaemic post penetration performance than the Rooikat, all while unstabilized at just .3 BR below it. Simply not justified. PTL02 8.0 -> 8.3, This thing is has APFSDS, thermals and a laser rangefinder on a mobile and stabilised platform all at 8.0? Performance no other vehicle can match at its BR, and even a bit above it. WMA301 8.3 -> 8.7, a straight upgrade to the PTL02, and as such should be higher if the previous suggestion goes through. Italy AUBL/74 HVG 7.7 -> 7.3 or fix the post penetration performance, this vehicle went from "best wheeled vehicle in the game" to "unplayable" in a single patch where its only viable ammo started doing little to no post penetration damage. Dardo 9.3 -> 9.0, lacks a lineup while not being much better than its contemporaries. As top-attack ATGMs have received significant nerfs it no longer stomps with them. France AMX-30B2 8.3 -> 8.0, objectively inferior to the BRENUS. The 1 tonne less worth of ERA weight does not warrant the same BR. Would fit perfectly as the medium tank equivalent of the AMX-10RC and make it less redundant. ARL-44 5.3 -> 5.0, for it to fully utilize its armour, it should be at a BR where it actually does something. Currently, any vehicle at its BR penetrates its turret face with ease. 5.0 could give it a chance to change that as it would have no chance to face early Tiger 2s, and give it a chance to not face Panthers and Tigers in every engagement. Sweden U-SH 405 7.7 -> 8.0, this thing is a menace. Fast, insane fire rate and surreal and plentiful ammo. Please reconsider its BR. Ikv 91 7.0 -> 7.3, basically a leopard 1 with a laser range finder. Feels dirty to even play at 7.0, especially in a downtier on a long range map. Strv 103C 8.3 -> 8.0, everything it faces at its BR and above can penetrate it frontally with relative ease, which was the only ace card of the earlier Strv 103A. With its only addition being a spall shield, higher engine power and APFSDS, it should not be two steps above its earlier variant.
    16 points
  29. Meanwhile the BMP-2M stays at 9.3. aside this, the BR changes are great, but why would you raise 2D's BR to 9.3 while it retains a very mediocre round? (M111)
    16 points
  30. I will second this Mode: Air RB Vehicle: Westland Wyvern Current BR: 4.0 Suggested BR: 5.0 Reasoning: Speed advantage in level flight over pretty much any aircraft at that BR or higher coupled with hefty external ordnance carrying capabilities plus 4x20mm Hispano Mk.5 cannons.
    16 points
  31. With the PT-76-57 going to 8.0 it should get a rank increase from rank IV -> Rank V at the very least as it's battle rating now lines up more with Russian rank VI vehicles that you would play it with
    15 points
  32. So can someone explain how an A10A and A10A Late are now higher BRs than both SU-25s that fly faster, have a better main gun and have better missiles due to them being launched at generally 200mph faster speeds off the rails......... if the A10s are going 10.0-10.3 respectively then the SU25s need to be in the same BR period. no excuse or reasoning as to why. Merkava Mk2D going 9.3 is just dumb....... give it a better shell because at 9.3 it will now face 10.3 consistently which means 10.0 consistently and with the only other 9.3 being the Gal Batash which ironically has a better shell then I dont how this has gone up without a new shell being added. they dont even have a 9.3 lineup (Machbet doesnt even count as its trash)
    15 points
  33. Italy: [RB] G.91(pre-serie) 8.3 -> 8.0 [RB] G.91 R/1 8.7 -> 8.3 Just a bit powered [RB]G.91(p) with Nords, that doesn't justify +0.4 BR [RB] G.91Y 9.3 -> 9.0 Lack of CCIP [RB] G.91YS 9.7 -> 9.3 No countermeasures, poor AAM's in amount of 2, subsonic. [RB] P.108B serie 1 3.3 -> 3.0 Lack HE belt for defensive 12,7mm [RB] P.108B serie 2 3.7 -> 3.3 Lack HE belt for defensive 12,7mm [RB]All Reggiano and Macchi planes shouldn't go up in BR.
    15 points
  34. The Su-25 really needs to go up to at least 10.0, it's absolutely crushing ARB at the moment fighting Sabres which can do practically nothing against it. I would also like to see the Puma brought back down to 9.0. I think the nerf to 9.3 was heavy handed and currently there is no reason to take it over the Begleitpanzer. And as others have mentioned, DM-33 on the Leopard 2A4s. It used this round, and it would be a nice small buff to bring it in line with the other 10.0 tanks.
    15 points
  35. Air RB J35D 10.7->10.3 I understand the great turn speed, but the flare and lack of RWR at the current 10.7 is lethal in the top meta. 10.3 is also fine. Spitfire Mk.24 7.0->6.7 Mk.22 6.7->6.3 Everyone knows that it is the highest spec Prop aircraft in the game, but it is hardly in the same league as Su-11, F-89B, etc. 6.7 is fine, and with the reduction of BR for Mk.24, Mk.22 should also be 6.3. G.91 YS 9.7->9.3 G.91 Y 9.3->9.0 There is no reason why the BR of J32B should decrease and the BR of G.91YS should not decrease. It would be somewhat harsh to abandon G.91YS alone. Ground RB AMX-13(HOT) 8.0->7.7 With no night vision, poor guns, and only 6 HOT missiles as a lifeline, I don't think this tank should be at 8.0 7.7 would be fine. CV 90105 XC-8 9.3->9.7 All the specs are way ahead of the average 9.3 light tank. 9.7 is fine. Naval RB M-17 3.7->4.0 M-802 3.7->4.3 These are the most powerful ships on the boat battlefield today and should be fought with higher BR! USS Helena 6.0->6.3 This high DPS, HE-firing ship is an unusual match for the current game system, and far outperforms inferior battleships in firepower, so we recommend raising it to 6.3.
    14 points
  36. Realistic battles, air US P-51H-5-NA 6.3 -> 6.7. This machine has the climb rate and manoeuvrability similar to late griffon Spitfires while having an even higher speed. Insane how it retains this BR while late Griffons were moved up to early jet territory. XP-55 - Moved to Rank 3, I don't understand why a 4.3 aircraft is at Rank 2 while being the highest vehicle in the game at that rank. In the same tree, the XF5F is at rank 3 while being BR 2.7. F-86F-2 9.0 -> 8.7, It's superior armament does not warrant it being .3 higher. If anything, it is a side grade as the higher punch comes at the cost of a shorter firing time. A-7D & A-7E 10.3/10.7 -> 10.0, these two aircraft are nearly useless in air RB. I propose, as many have proposed before, to have a SEPARATE BR for different game modes. The A-7s being dive targets as free kills to whoever gets to them first at top tier is bad for both team. One team loses an aircraft as it is useless in battle and the other gets half their team mowing the lawn for ineffective aircraft. F-14A Early 11.3 -> 11.7, Best top tier aircraft, and thus should not share the BR with other inferior aircraft. The BR could be populated with more aircraft for the time being to ease matchmaking, but as it stands it simply bullies anything in a downtier. Germany Bf 109 G-10 5.7 -> 5.3, I don't understand why the low altitude variant of the G-14 is at a higher BR. It is just a different role that it doesn't too noticeably excel at. Horton 229 7.0 -> 6.7, this aircraft has been rendered useless in air RB after its nerfs, especially to its gun accuracy. Have a proper look at this plane and decide weather you want to buff slightly or lower its BR. MiG-21MF 10.3 -> 10.7, flares, 4 R-60s and a fantastic flight performance. It went to 10.3 because it had no flares, but now that it does it should be put back. Su-22UM3K 11.0 -> 10.7, having its R-60Ms nerfed to regular R-60s makes this aircraft not nearly as good as the Su-17M4, and a far leap from the MiG-27K that also sits at 11.0. CL-13A/B 9.3/9.7 -> 8.7/9.0, the little extra engine power the CL-13A has over the 8.7 sabres makes very little different at this stage of the game. It's not like its unheard of that similar aircraft of different nations share the same BR (see Vampire FB.5 and Vampire FB 52A, Britain and Italy). No longer is Sabres vs MiG-15s the top tier. The CL-13B, while having a much better engine than the 8.7 sabres, does not have much more than that.. The Aim-9Bs are no longer a "surprise weapon" like it was when it was added and now a days every decent player will avoid them unless fired from complete stealth. Being placed at the same BR (and soon to be ABOVE) aircraft that it cannot touch, such as the Lightning F.6 makes this aircraft laughable. USSR Su-11 7.0 -> 7.3, a menace to its BR range. Not much more needs to be said. Yak-23 8.7 -> 8.3, the reason this went up is because only the very best played and enjoyed it, inflating its stat figures. It has only superficial advantages against its contemporaries. Turn fighting to lose all its energy isn't a viable strategy at this BR. Su-7BMK 9.3 -> 9.7, blatantly better than the main tree Su-7B while equal or even identical to the Su-7BKL. Su-17M2 11.0 -> 10.3, No Flares, terrible manoeuvrability and less armament than the Su-22 of Germany and the USSR squadron vehicle. It is nowhere near the MiG-27s in terms of capability. Su-22M3 11.0 -> 10.7, just like the German Su-22 variant, this one is not as good as the Su-17M4 and not nearly as good at the MiG-27K. A slight BR drop would not make it overpowered in ground RB, and certainly wouldn't have any impact in air RB. MiG-21SMT 10.3 -> 10.7, see German MiG-21MF for explanation. MiG-23MLD 11.3 -> 11.7, One of the best aircrafts in the game when it comes to top tier. Why does it get to face Crusaders, Hunter F.6 and Mirage IIIs (some of which lack flares). If moved higher, I could see the potential for the F-4EJ Kai, MiG-23MLA and F-14A to be moved here as well to populate that BR. Great Britain Vampire FB 5 8.0 -> 7.7, It can no longer catch anything at this BR. Anyone dumb enough to turn with it deserves every ounce of punishment as you simply have to energy fight it and win every time. It has less powerful engines than the other Vampires while still struggling to catch anything at its current BR even in a downtier. Turn fighting is not a viable strategy for jets and do not warrant a higher BR. I would go so far as to say it was fine even at 7.3. Hunter F.6 10.3 -> 9.7, Speed, agility and armament is key at top tier. The Hunter F.6 has none of these, while lacking key tools like flares and RWR. The SRAAMS it has requires the aircraft to get close, which is something it simply does not do as it lacks the speed to catch up to anything it faces. Basically any missile launched by a faster enemy (and they are almost ALL faster) will result in a guaranteed kill at a Hunter F.6 if it is below 2500m altitude. There is simply NOTHING the Hunter can do. Harrier GR.1 10.0 -> 9.7, lacks flares which is one of the key parts of air combat when you have poor manoeuvrability. SRAAMS aren't so powerful (especially compared to Aim-9Gs) that they warrant a raised BR while letting the aircraft lack countermeasures. Japan F-104J 10.7 -> 10.3 or given countermeasures, it may have never historically used them, but it can definitely equip them and as such for balancing reasons this should be the right choice. As it stands it is without a doubt the worst F-104 in terms of BR placement. F-86F-40 (all nations) 9.3 -> 8.7, the worst aircraft by BR by a long shot. Laughable and forgotten, this vehicle sits at its legacy BR from when it was released back in late 2017 when the Aim-9E was the best missile available. The 2 Aim-9Bs it gets exist at 7.7 and aren't some game changing component. It has no real advantage over the F-86F-30/25 that it can abuse, not like armament seems to matter consistently in War Thunder BRs (See G.91 R/1 compared to G.91 R/4 of BR 8.7). China F-104G 10.7 -> 10.3, second worst F-104G in terms of performance to BR. Similar to the F-104J, it lacks flares to be competitive but has some decent ground ordinance. Italy G.91 Y 9.3 -> 9.0, similar to the F11F-1 in terms of flight performance while lacking A2A missiles but instead having a larger bomb load. G.91 YS 9.7 -> 9.3, a true old school brawler, eclipsed by better missiles and faster speed. Would fit perfectly at a slightly lower BR where it doesn't regularly see as many 20+ G AAMs while not having any of those of its own to dumpster lower BR aircraft. France M.D.452 IIC Mystere 8.3 -> 8.0, the IIC isn't that much better than the IIA to warrant a BR increase. Sweden J35D Draken 10.7 -> 10.3, lack of countermeasures and RWR kills this aircraft. The flight performance is great until you actually have to use its turn radius at which it loses 2/3rds of its speed and becomes a sitting duck. Lack of radar locking AAMs does not help its case either. It belongs at the bottom end of the top tier range bracket due to its shortcomings.
    13 points
  37. Why M1A1 goes to 10.7? Armor is less effective then M1A1 HC Thermal is not good as M1A1 AIM Firepower only gets a bit better since M1A1 AIM is useing KE-W Pls, keep M1A1 where and what is it now! M829A1? No need Unless SEP V1 is to be added along with M829A1
    13 points
  38. I know that we did get some BR changes with Drone Age for Bluewater Naval but I honestly didn’t expect it to lack BR changes right now with the whole bot/script with Moffet/Helena spam While I’m pretty on board or neutral about most of the changes, some of it are quite odd . Ground RB: IS-2, IS-2 (China) and IS-2 no.402 (China): 5.7 to 6.0 [Make it stay at 5.7] I feel like this is such an unnecessary BR change. While I do note that this vehicle is very solid, especially in its BR line up, moving it to 6.0 is honestly a move that only serves as purely inconveniencing players who plays USSR/Russia rather than an actual “Balancing” change. Do note that there are plenty, I mean plenty of vehicles that can handle it at 4.7 to 5.7 range on its own. Examples being, British 17pdr users with their regular APCBC and APDS, German 75mm KwK/PaK 42 and 88mm KwK36 and KwK/PaK43, US 90mm M3 now with M348 HEATFS, and I’m pretty sure the list goes on. And we must remember that the vehicle’s biggest drawback is the reload time, which can be crucial, especially when it sometimes has to face more than one vehicle. And while having a good amount of armor protection, doesn’t really protect it from most of the threats it faces on a regular basis, yes, even frontally for most of the time. So, from just these facts we already know that it doesn’t really need the raise that much. Air RB: F-89B and SK-60B: 7.3 to 7.0 [Make it stay at 7.3] I don’t think I’ll be the first one to say how bad the 6.0-7.0 BR range for Air RB, I don’t think we need to crowd the poor high-end props and super-props BR range with these two, although I have my own reason for disagreeing with each change of these two vehicles. While F-89B has some flaws that makes it unable to handle uptiers very well, that doesn’t mean it does terribly, especially compared from its peers with the same BR. And it especially can still harass many of the props that unfortunately has to face it. While the SK-60B does have a lot of flaws in terms of flight performance, what it does bring to the table is an AGM, which moving it to 7.0 is going to make problems for not Air RB, but for Ground RB. Yes, it can’t carry cannons with it around, but getting an AGM user as low as 7.0, and also paired with a Light Tank that by the way, has LRF can be quite the problem later on for the folks that has to face it. Now these are my suggestions: Ground RB: PTL-02: 8.0 to 8.7 I don’t know why this vehicle never saw the BR increase considering how problematic it is, far more than the Centauro 105 back then which only has DM13 APDS at a planned 8.0 BR before it gets DM23 and become 8.7 as a balancing act. While this vehicle does have a bad stock APFSDS round, it does get a long rod APFSDS (DYW-PT86-100) that’s almost comparable to DM33 at 8.0! Not only that, but it also gets thermals, which already is quite a privilege enough considering there aren’t that many 8.0 that has Thermals, let alone a vehicle that has a kit this good. Yes, it’s not as fast as the Centauro 105, or the Rooikat Mk. 1d (which both are at a higher BR), but it’s fast enough to get to where it wants to go. If the devs used to want to make Centauro 105 with its normal APDS at 8.0 before, why is this vehicle not any higher than 8.0? WMA301: 8.3 to 8.7 I will argue the same way for this thing like the PTL-02 (since it is also fully stabilized AND has Thermals). While it doesn’t get a round as good as the PTL-02’s (Type-83 APDS being closer to DM23), it’s not so terrible that it needed to be lower than most of the LAVs that uses 105mm Gun and also DM23 (Centauro, Type 16 (P), TAM, Rooikat MTTD) and doesn’t have the flaws like JaPz. K A2/SK 105A2, AMX-10RC, and MARS 15 which lacks stabilizers. It has pretty much similar speed to the PTL-02 while also having more rounds options like a tandem warhead ATGM with more penetration than most ATGM at its BR alone and an HE-VT round in case it needs to kill a helicopter that wants to rocket rush it since it does have to face the US AH-1G often. It doesn’t make sense with all of these benefits that it doesn’t have a higher BR than 8.3 at all since it was released. Rooikat 105: 8.7 to 9.0 With it now having DM33, it should be placed at 9.0 like the rest of the LAVs that has DM33 or its equivalent (Centauro ROMOR, Type-16). While it does lack the protection than those two, the protection difference barely matters considering they’re all lightly armored for any gun at that BR range anyways. So, it comes down to speed and the kit it has, which doesn’t really fall far from either of those two, it speed is comparable, and it also has Thermals like both the Centauro ROMOR and Type-16 which is why it being 8.7 this long (at least after the DM33 addition), doesn’t make any sense. Vickers Mk. 3: 8.0 to 7.7 The Vickers Mk. 3 doesn’t really offer that much over the Mk. 1 apart from the round changes which most players that has played to reach that vehicle could live without, especially if they played the Mk. 1 already. The Tank itself offers barely any protection improvement, and only a minor speed upgrade over the Mk. 1. And while it gets the M728 which has better angled penetration performance and M456 HEATFS, it’s not really worth trading for a lower BR and assisted loading over the L28A1/DM13 the Mk. 1 has which still does its job, nearly as good as the M728 which loses a decent chunk of the flat angle penetration value for its angled penetration value. And it’s also still Rank V so there’s barely any value of playing it over the Mk. 1 which can be placed up with Centurion Mk. 10 and Conqueror without having the need to face 9.0 vehicles. Chieftain Mk. 5: 8.7 to 8.3 (or stays at 8.7 but gets L23 shot) I will suggest the Chieftain Mk. 5 going back to 8.3 again because of the whole OF-40 Mk. 2 and OF-40 (MTCA) debacle, which was a problem of the MTCA being only an OF-40 Mk. 2 that has a slightly better engine power, so it makes it unfair to be a higher BR than it, which led to both vehicles now sit at the same BR. Now, I think the devs forgot that that’s literally the whole thing with Chieftain Mk. 3 and Mk. 5 problem which that the Mk. 5 is pretty much a Mk. 3 with better engine, which doesn’t even help it in the slightest considering it goes only nearly as fast as a Soviet Late Heavy Tank like the T-10M which max speed is at 50kph, Chief Mk. 3 has 41kph with 660hp while the Chief Mk. 5 has 48kph with 760hp. The Mk. 5 being 8.7 is genuinely absurd and absolutely overmatched by its peers so putting it at 8.3 with the Mk. 5 is not going to break the whole 8.3 meta for the British, at all. Now my other suggestion is just giving it the L23 shot and make it stay at 8.7 so all become “fair” for it and it became a sort of middle ground between the Mk. 3 and the Mk.10. Giving it the L23 shot won’t make it overpowering considering the fact that it may have better flat angle penetration, its angled penetration is still only on par with DM23, it’s also slower than most of its MBT at its BR, lacks thermals, and its armor, being the good part only on the turret, is only troublesome if its in a hull down position and pretty far away. Putting it at 8.7 with the L23 shot also helps to make 8.7 British more viable since right now, there’re barely anything usable at that BR apart from both of the Rooikats. Air RB: A29B: 8.0 to 7.7 Probably one of the most unnecessary BR change that we got to the Swedish Aviation tree. I fail to see how the A29B having pretty much identical performance to the J29A (which is at 7.7) and its only benefits being that it has CAS options and more minimum fuel (which makes it heavier) make it deserve having a different BR to the J29A. And yet, French has Ouragan and Barougan that is also in an identical situation like the J29A and A29B and they’re both still at the same BR? See the inconsistency here? It doesn’t make sense that Ouragan/Barougan can be allowed to be at 7.7 but not A29B with J29A Buccaneer S.2: 9.3 to 9.0 With the increasing amount of better, high end AAMs user (especially Attackers) entering its BR range, it’s fair to say that the Buccaneer S.2 is starting to not looking too great at 9.3. Despite having countermeasures to spare, the Buccaneer S.2 is still a subsonic (unlike the Yak-28B which is a supersonic and also has flares). The speed disadvantage makes the vehicle very hard to grind through, especially when it’s competing with other supersonics vehicles that are also trying to bomb bases or ground targets. Not to mention lacking any offensive armament like cannons and its best one being AIM-9Bs and the lack of air spawn unlike the Vautours (which are also subsonic Attacker/Bomber) made using this thing in RB very, very hard. I doubt that making it 9.0 would make a huge difference but, it’s better than no changes at all. A-5C: 10.0 to 10.3 Another vehicle that I am surprised, still has not get its BR raised considering what it brings to the table. A plane that can carry 2x Magic 1s and a lot of bombs/rockets, has countermeasures, very good engine performance and guns that are basically carried by most fighters at its BR range at that point is somehow still lower in BR than the Mirage 5F and the F-8E (FN) which are punished for having engine power and 2x Magic 1s to 10.3. I don’t see how the A-5C should be 10.0 considering even F-5C with a better flight performance with AIM-9Es are at 10.3. The plane is long overdue for this BR increase. Su-7BKL: 9.7 to 9.3 or Su-7BMK: 9.3 to 9.7 This can be either way (preferably the Su-7BMK to 9.7), but the reasoning for this change is how these two vehicles are practically identical in usage yet somehow has different BR than each other. Same Flight Performance, same avionic kit, same loadout. There is no reason for them to be different in BR at all other than the fact one is a Premium Vehicle and another a researchable vehicle. Naval RB (Bluewater): Because of the lack of Naval Bluewater changes, I will only focus on Bluewater: Raimondo Montecuccoli: 5.7 to 5.3 or Kerch: 5.3 to 5.7 The Raimondo Montecuccoli has more armor than the Bartolomeo Colleoni but less armor than Eugenio di Savoia. Yes, both the Raimondo and Eugenio has similar equipment unlike with the Bartolomeo, but the problem is the inconsistency of it having to be at the same BR as the Eugenio for having the same armaments load despite having less armor, but the Kerch gets to be 5.3 still despite having nearly the same armor as the Eugenio (which is at 5.7) being a Duca d’Aosta-class hull. THe Kerch also has better secondary and AA armaments with the twin 100mm having base fuze HE that helps a lot fighting lightly armored opponents and post-war twin 37mm autocannons AA that’s used on USSR 1950’s cruisers. The Raimondo either need to be at 5.3 due to having a worse hull than the Eugenio and Kerch or Kerch needs to be at 5.7 as well with Raimondo and Eugenio as it isn’t fair that the Kerch somehow gets to go as low at 4.3 having the protection level of Eugenio while Raimondo only to 4.7 at the lowest. Isuzu: 5.0 to 4.7 Isuzu shouldn’t have been 5.0 from the start for a good number of reasons. Main Armament, being pretty much as armed as their average Destroyers (3x Twin Mount 127mm gun with HE that has 1.96kg TNTe explosives and HE-TF). Average Speed for a Cruiser. Barely any protection, only 26mm RHA on the deck and 38.1mm covering the engine rooms. And the only pros it has over the other 5.0 Cruisers in Japan being Kuma/Sendai is the fact that it has a lot of AA guns and it gets Type 93 torpedoes. Considering now much comparable ships at 4.7 exist for Cruisers like Isuzu, such as the Attilio Regolo and Etna in Italy, making it not face 6.0 Cruisers that it will clearly be absolutely outmatched against would help people that’s trying out Japan a lot, especially one that’s grinding at 4.7 which Japan so far, only has 2 options of if we exclude Premiums. HMS Kent: 6.0 to 5.7 The HMS Kent honestly doesn’t deserve to be at 6.0 as it’s quite inferior between its sister ships, other than having the same amount of main guns. To the HMS Norfolk, it has more secondaries Twin 4 inch cannons (2 more than it) but far less AA guns, it has similar armor thickness but less area are protected compared to Norfolk, not only that, Norfolk also gets a tracking radar. To the HMS London, it also has 2 more secondary twin 4 inch cannons but it’s vastly overperformed in the AA department with how much AA guns the London has over it, not only that, but the armor on London is also significantly better being 88,9mm on the citadel armor belt compared to the 25,4mm on the Kent. With these facts said, the HMS London deserves the 6.0 spot far more than Kent ever did. While Kent is far more comparable to Norfolk which sits at 5.7. HMS York : 5.7 to 5.3 Now the HMS York is definitely NOT comparable to 5.7 of the British tree alone being either the Norfolk, London, Liverpool, and Belfast. It has less amount of guns compared to the Norfolk and London, being a total of 6x 8 inch cannons to the Norfolk/London 8x 8 inch cannons. Same amount of secondaries being 4x Twin 4 inch cannons and very sub-par AA guns. The armor, while having better citadel belt armor than the Norfolk/Kent, is still less protected than Belfast/Liverpool and also Rate of Fire. In a sense, the HMS York is quite comparable to the British versions of the Americans Northampton/Portland which also both sits at 5.3 so it just right to make it as a 5.3 for the British as they lacked those.
    12 points
  39. M36 - Stay at 5.3 but replace M77 with T33 and add late M82 at 2800 fps. Both are WWII service rounds and should be available. T25 - Lower BR to 5.7 or 6.0. The loss of its stabilizer should be addressed in its BR. T20 - Add M93 APCR or lower BR to 5.7. M26 - Add late M82 at 2800 fps. T32 - Lower BR to 7.0, or increase rate of fire for main gun. T32E1 - Lower BR to 7.3, or increase rate of fire for main gun. Consider addition of HEATFS if it will be left at 7.7. M60A1 RISE P - Allow removal of ERA armor. Add M774. Consider adding M833. M60A3 TTS - Allow removal of ERA armor. Add M833. M1 Abrams - Add M833 C76A1 should be removed from all US tanks in game. US ammunition should be prioritized for US tanks.
    12 points
  40. I'm gonna try my own fantasy list for Air RB. Starting from the top. F-14a / 11.3 -> 12.0 The br NEED to be decompressed and it's BY FAR the best plane in game. Mirage 2000 / 11.3 -> 11.7 With the F14 going UP it should follow. Mig 23 MLD/A / 11.3 -> 11.7 It should have been done a long time ago. Most F-4 that are not already at 11.3 should go to 11.3 (except the F-4C of course). J-7E / 11.0 -> 11.3 Insane performance, insane IR missiles. JA37C / 11.0 -> 11.3 To decompress, 10.0 shouldnt face this beast. Mig 21 SMT/MF / 10.3 -> 10.7 4 very good IR missiles with very good performance. F-5C / 10.3 -> 10.7 Insane performance, insane guns. I'll stop here. I think u got the trend. A lot of lower planes should also go up, like the A-5C or the Su-25. But it'll never happen anyway so why waste more of my time.
    11 points
  41. RB Leopard 2PL: 10.7 --> 11.0, add DM53 It has no lineup at 10.7, DM43 is kinda sub par for it as well since it has absolutely no hull armor and a turret with huge weakspots. The M1A1 AIM not only has better armor but also a much better round while the T-80U has much better armor and a comparable round.
    11 points
  42. AGS add m833 goes to BR10.0 or add M900 goes to BR10.3 XM8 add M833 and stay at BR9.3 or add M900 goest to BR10.0 CCVL --- BR9.7 VFM5 ---BR8.7 If these suggestions can't pass, pls consider about the new CV90105, DM33, GEN3, 5s reload time, what a great joke for those light tanks, TAM 2ip has dm33 and better armor in BR8.7, but VFM5 in BR 9.3???? P2W need reason? M1A1 stay at 10.3 and don't give it M829a1.Have you remember few years ago,when you said because leopard PL has worse armor, so it can't get DM53???? ZTZ99A---10.7, I don't know how it could fight with strv122 or t80bvm, it just close to m1a1hc or M1A1AIM, even it has worse ammo and reload time F5A---10.7 or delete 9J to 10.3, no other reason, can you believe it is in same br with F5E????? Object 248 stay at 6.3, pls gaijin, before rise its BR, comparing with Tiger 2 or panther 2, even tiger2p, any advantages that object 248 better than these tanks??? is7 and t10m ----8.0, they need face apfsds, worse reload time, no stab for is7, how could they fight with heats or apfsds at this br Cheiftain3/5 ---8.0 same reason J8B and Kfir c.7 add PL8/Python-3, as F14 and mirage 2000 in this game, pls consider these planes, they only have 9G or PL5B...
    11 points
  43. I don't agree with Merkava's 2D battle rating change, I have about 600 battles with him and he is constantly uptiers, fighting T-72AV (TURMS-T) and others with much more powerful ammo. Its current firepower is very weak and only by giving it the M426 ammo I admit it can go up in the rating up to BR 9.3 and even then it's an average tank.
    11 points
  44. Seafire F III in RB should move down to 4.3, it's flight performance is much closer and in most cases worse than the Spitfire F Mk IX.
    11 points
  45. so sad all these years for waiting and i got nothing im not mad life is fair
    10 points
  46. 30 day premium and a free title. "DDoS Attack Survivor"
    10 points
  47. Heavy tanks between 7.0 and 8.7 are hopelessly outplayed due to the large amount of Heat-FS and APDS shells being used. So I have put forth a few suggestions for realistic battles. T-32 7.3 to 7.0 After the IS-3 had been moved down, the T-32 does not belong at 7.3 either. They have roughly the same amount of pen and effective armour, but the T-32 has a rather large lower plate weakspot which can be penetrated by most APHE in and around it's Battle rating and which usually leads to destruction of the vehicle. T-32E1 7.7 to 7.3 In the current Meta this tank really just doesn't belong at it's battle rating any more. The lower plate weakspot has been removed, but it's still a T-32 so it has a long reload and it's top APHE shell isn't really on par with what other tanks fire in and around it's battle rating. M103 7.7 to 7.3 The armour is nigh useless against most shells it faces and the Heat-FS shell it can fire, is rather impractical due to the long reload it has. Maus 7.7 to 7.3 Armour works only against conventional shells and the mobility is really awful making it unfit at it's current battle rating. The newly added APHEDS shell has just slightly helped the vehicle, but it's not worthy of staying at it's current battle rating. E-100 7.7 to 7.3 Same reason as above. IS-4M 7.7 to 7.3 Basically on par with the T-32E1 besides having a way longer reload and slightly better mobility. The tank has a huge frontal driver's hatch weakspot and the armour in general is ineffective against most APDS and Heat-FS and the considerably long reload makes it impractical in the fast paced engagements in and around that battle rating. T-10M 8.3 to 8.0 Despite having access to a two plane stabilizer, this heavy has it at a battle rating where almost every single tank has access to one, making it not really special. The long reload combined with the poor choice of shells makes this tank undeserving of it's current battle rating. IS-7 8.3 to 8.0 Eventhough this vehicle has 10 second autoloader for a 130mm cannon, it still uses conventional APHE and most opponents have the same penetration if not higher, but with APFSDS shells, making it rather obsolete. The armour is also not to be relied on due to the sheer number of Long rod penetrators being used near it's battle rating. Object 279 8.7 to 8.3 The Object 279 has outlived it's usefullness due to previous data. The battle rating was only moved up due to extensive usage after people have grinded the vehicle in the event. It's armour is relatively effective against most kinetic shells it faces, but chemical energy shells prove the armour to be ineffective against them. Bombers are performing very poor at high battle ratings in the current air realistic environment and nearly all of them need their battle ratings changed. B-57A 8.3 to 7.3 This vehicle has access to no defensive armaments nor offensive cannons, so it can only rely on it's speed to stay safe and 8.3 is way too high for a bomber which can only carry bombs. B-57B 8.3 to 7.7 It's basically a normal canberra but with some frontal facing .50 cals and with access to more secondary loadouts. 7.7 will be fine for this thing considering it's rather large and it's speed is average. IL-28 (both the East German and the Soviet version) and H-5 8.0 to 7.7 or perhaps 7.3 These planes are slower than the B-57's, lack airbrakes, but have a defensive turret in addition to frontal facing 23mm cannons with 100 ammo each. The turret could make it 7.7 instead of 7.3 due to the large aiming cone it has. Il-28SH 8.0 to 7.7 or perhaps 7.3 It's just an IL-28 but with access to rockets which replace your bomb load. Virtually identical to the standard IL-28. If it gets it's mixed loadouts which were talked about on this QA https://warthunder.com/en/news/6890-qa-answers-from-the-developers-en , it would be fine at 7.7 Tu-14T 8.0 to 7.7 or perhaps 7.3 This vehicle plays nearly identical to the IL-28's, but it has slightly less forwards facing 23mm ammo and a redesigned back turret and has access to an airbrake. Current environment is too hostile for it to perform well in. Yak-28B 9.3 to 8.7 This newly added plane excited many people until it was known that it lacked air to air missiles and is very prone to ripping . It's forward facing 23mm cannon only has 50 rounds of ammo. It's bombload is also slightly worse than the Il-28's, but the plane has flares, airbrake and a good top speed with afterburning engines. 9.3 is too high of battle rating for plane with no AAM's, let alone a jet bomber. Canberra B Mk 2 8.3 to 7.3 or perhaps 7.0 This canberra has way weaker engines compared to the American B-57A and thus also has a lower top speed. Around 100 km/h less when stock and around 60 when spaded. This Canberra also lacks any frontal facing armaments and has to rely on it's speed to save itself. Only the bombload is marginally better. Canberra B (I) Mk 6 8.3 to 7.3 This Canberra could be compared to the American B-57B, since both of these have guns as opposed to their earlier counterparts, but the British Canberra has a worse bombload than it's american counterpart while also lacking rockets. Tu-4 (both the Soviet and the Chinese version) 8.0 to 7.7 Despite having access to 10 23mm cannons as defensive armaments, these propeller driven planes have no business being able to see 9.0 planes. While it could be argued that these planes could perhaps even go down to 7.3, they would be nigh impossible to kill when it's in a full downtier then. S.O. 4050 Vautour IIB 9.0 to 8.3 It has no forwards facing armaments, prone to ripping at high G manoeuvres. It does however have access to good bomb load with which it can destroy two bases and damage another. It's high top speed makes it able to escape enemies reliably at 8.3. S.O. 4050 Vautour IIA 9.0 to 8.7 This Vautour should be designated as a "Strike Aircraft" since the A in it's designation stands for Attacker. Compared to the first Vautour it has access to rockets and 4 forwards facing 30mm cannons making it a heavy fighter after it has dispatched of it's load. A lot of early jet fighters have legacy battle ratings from times where the meta was very different and they need their battle ratings adjusted to make fighting them more fair. F-80C-10 7.7 to 7.3 This Shooting star has a slightly more powerful engine compared to A model and limited water methanol injection for marginally better engine performance. This requires an increased battle rating compared to the A model, but not as significant as to be put at the same battle rating as the F-84G A-4E (early) 8.7 to 9.0 Compared to it's tech tree counterpart, the A-4B, the E variant has access to more loadouts, flares and a more powerful engine. This warrants for an increased battle rating. Me-262 A-1a 7.0 to 6.7 What was once the king of air combat in war thunder is now but a husk of it's former self. The meta has changed and this 262 with it's hard to aim weapons and awful acceleration needs to be lowered in battle rating to be effective again. Me-262 A-1a/U1 7.3 to7.0 This is the squadron vehicle schwalbe. It now has 2x30mm Mk103, 2x30mm Mk108 and 2x20mm MG-151/20 which makes it better armed than the 4x30mm Mk108 262's. This however makes the plane quite a bit heavier in the nose. A good trade off between manoeuvrability and firepower makes this thing a good contender for 7.0 Me-262 C-2b 8.0 to 7.7 With planes the like of the La-15 at it's same battle rating this 262 is horribly outmatched. At 7.7 it would have more fair fights against adverseries like the Su-11 and F-84. Yak-15/17 6.7 to 6.0 These planes are only at such a high battle rating due to them mostly being taken out by elite players which drives up the repair cost and keeps them at a high battle rating. They have nothing going for them. The have very little ammo and accelerate slowly. Most superprops near 6.3 and 6.0 easily win fights against these planes. Yak-15P 6.3 to 5.7 The same goes for this Yak jet, except that it has one gun less making you even less able to get kills. At least pilots can count on their speed to get away at this battle rating when they're out of ammo. MiG-9 7.3 to 7.0 This is a well known existance of legacy battle ratings. The quite recently added Su-9 is better in nearly every way to the MiG-9 while also able to carry 1x500KG or 2x250KG bombs, yet it's at a lower battle rating than the MiG-9.The MiG-9 Late has engines that are quite a bit powerful at the same battle rating and it can't really move up so the normal MiG-9 should go down. The MiG-9 is a great equivalent of the Me-262 A-1a/U1 and the F-80A-5 at 7.0. Su-9 7.0 to 7.3 Compared to the MiG-9 Late this plane has access to an airbrake, bombs and better turning capability at the cost of weaker engines and lower top speed. The MiG-9 late is more easily played as a boom and zoomer, while the Su-9 is better for upclose fighting. Su-11 7.0 to 7.7 This plane is way better than the Su-9 because it has 50% extra thrust at the cost of just missing an airbrake. The plane features all the other pros and cons of the Su-9 as they are quite alike. But the extra engine thrust makes it a good adversary to the F-84G's and Me-262 C-2b's. Yak-15/17 6.7 to 6.0 These planes are only at such a high battle rating due to them mostly being taken out by elite players which drives up the repair cost and keeps them at a high battle rating. They have nothing going for them. The have very little ammo and accelerate slowly. Most superprops near 6.3 and 6.0 easily win fights against these planes. Yak-15P 6.3 to 5.7 The same goes for this Yak jet, except that it has one gun less making you even less able to get kills. At least pilots can count on their speed to get away at this battle rating when they're out of ammo. Yak-23 8.7 to 8.0 This plane has been subject of many battle rating increases due to skewed results from the few people playing it. This plane trades slightly more engine power and better acceleration for slightly less ammo and no airbrake compared to the La-15. Yak-30D 8.7 to 8.3 This plane looks and plays like a slightly better MiG-15. But is in no way comparable to the MiG-15bis which is also at 8.7. I can't talk about other early jets since I haven't experienced them. Here are some other random vehicles that could get their battle ratings changed in Realistic Battles. Leopard 1 7.3 to 7.7 The leopard should honestly go back to 7.7. It has great mobility and an amazing gun which doesn't belong it 7.3 with the likes of M48A1's and T-54 (1949)'s La-9 (Chinese and Soviet version) 6.0 to 5.3 Eventhough this plane has great armaments. It still has an engine found on 3.7 planes and is fitted to an even heavier airframe. WEP also cuts off at around 3KM altitude and it performs poorly when you fly higher than that. Ikv 91 7.0 to 7.7 This Swedish light tank performs quite well at it's battle rating because it has a laser rangefinder and a HEAT-FS shell which penetrate 400mm of armour. This is too good for any 7.0 tank. So 7.7 would be more sufficient. Gepard 8.0 to 8.7 This vehicle is the best radar gun SPAA's in the game. The gepard is well armoured to survive .50 cals and has great mobility. Besides this the vehicle has a very potent radar set and with it's twin 35mm cannons this thing is a menace to any plane at it's battle rating with "dumb" weapons.
    10 points
  48. All of these suggestions are related to RB mode. BMP-1 7.3 -> 7.7 The BMP-1 having great mobility with both a mouse aimed atgm+ a fast reloading heat slinger is a bit much for 7.3, Either it should go up a bit or split the 1p upgrade into a different vehicle and folder it with the other one. Leopard 1 7.3 ->7.7 Comparable to other mediums at 7.7, It has fantastic optics,mobility, and a great gun. M48A2 C 7.0->7.3 Exactly identical to the American M48A1, The slight difference in speed/accel has no practical impact on the performance of either. M41(all) 6.0->6.3 LeKPz M41 6.3->6.7 The M41's bring quite a lot of firepower, Mobility and the ability to respond quickly to threats thanks to their fast turret speeds, They have firepower on par with tank destroyers for their br. The LeKPz in particular is straight up a better tank than the T92, The T92 is a little shorter and has 1 second quicker reload, But has worse top speed, Worse acceleration, Worse vertical&horizontal aim speed, And worse reverse. Sd.Kfz 234/2 2.7->3.3 Comparable to the EBR 1951 that sits at 5.0, 90kmh top speed with great acceleration, Same pen as the Sherman, And can climb over map objects with ease to reach spots no one would expect to get shot from(Even can climb out of bounds on many maps) It is good in any lineup up to 5.3, Even then its great at getting CAS early with next to no effort. Panther A 5.7->6.0 (without the horsepower nerf) Most meta tank at its tier, Heavy tank armor and firepower with great mobility and optics, The only weakspot is a small rectangle on the turret face surrounded by 2 100mm plates and one side with a mg that likes to eat even Is-2 rounds like you threw wet toilet paper at it. T25 6.3->5.7 This thing crawled up from 5.7 all the way to 6.3 all because of its gun stab, It has worse armor and gun pen than the Panther A at 5.7 with only slightly better mobility. M4A3E2 (76) 6.3->6.0 Its gun is far too weak and its mobility is far too slow to be facing 7.3 tanks, Its armor is useless agaisnt anything 6.0+ and only helps in full downtiers, Every tank from 5.0-5.7 can front pen it minus the Chi-Ri and the Tiger 1 if its not right up in its face. It is in no way comparable to the Tiger 2p. T26E1 6.7->6.3 Actually comparable to the Tiger 2P, Similar armor, while the Tiger has more pen, Faster reload, And better reverse speed, The extra HE filler in the shells is hardly a upside when every APHE shell from 76mm+ can oneshot most of the time anyway. M1128-(Stay at 9.7) This thing has bad mobility with the spaced armor screens that does not help its survivalbility at all, It is just a slow glass cannon for its br. LAV-AD 10.0->9.7 No search radar, Stingers have sub par performance and its armor is so paper thin(12/6/6 lol) that any mg can pen it, The gun also takes a lifetime to restock on points assuming you manage to survive long enough to even run out. TAM 2IP 8.7->9.0 Same gun and ammo as the Leopard 1A5 with better armor. Far better than the tech tree TAM that shares its br. G6 7.0->6.7 Bad mobility and several nations get a equivalent to it at 6.3 Kv-1B(And E) 4.0->4.3 Russian&German bias by their powers combined. CW-21 2.7->3.7(Perhaps 4.0) The plane everyone in squadron battles chooses at the end of every season when its 3.7 week, It performs well agaisnt anything up to 4.7, It being 2.7 with near XP-50 flight performance is insane. P-51H-NA 6.3->6.7 The best super prop in the game, It can handle fighting most early jets, Near impossible for 5.3's to deal with it unless the P-51 pilot is incompetent. Spitfire Mk24 7.0->6.7 Comparable to the P-51H but slower in exchange for better turnrate and climb, Has no buisness fighting 8.0 jets. Su-11 7.0->7.7 Has the flight performance of 8.0 planes, Even some 8.0's struggle to fight it, No reason it should stay at 7.0. F89B-(Stay at 7.3 or maybe go to 7.7) This thing out accelerates basically any plane it fights with very strong guns and turns well. CAS drones(MQ-1, Orion, Wing long) minimum BR 9.7->10.7 or remove their high airspawn and make them takeoff&rearm at the helipads. There are no AA's in the 8.7-9.7 range that can fight drones spawning high over the map, Even 10.0 AA cant even see them due to them spawning over the radar's scan range.
    10 points
  49. Oh my God, here is it ! they finally unveiled the next-generation wheeled infantry fighting vehicle ! I'm so excited for this !
    10 points
×
×
  • Create New...