Stona

Feedback for planned changes for Battle Ratings, February 2017

Just now, julhocesar2015 said:

Conqueror in 7.3?, Excuse me but the gaijin went crazy?

 

Ok, you convinced us! Amount of arguments in your post is overwhelming...

julhocesar2015, please if you want to have any influence on changes, you need to support your thoughts with something more than "Gaijin went crazy" :crazy:

  • Upvote 19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

M42 still 6.7 tho, practically identical to the M19, 1.7 BR higher. feel like this is an oversight from when USA did not have the M163 VADS.

 

Exactly... At least moving it to 6.3 (both US and JP) would help the newly created Japanese 6.3 lineup...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly good changes. What i still dont understand is the following

 

J2M5 still at 5.7 BR. last time i tried to play it... was horrible. the thing flies like brick and has repair cost of a golden toilet. even the J2M2 would do better at 5.7 BR

Sherman jumbo with 76mm. with the IS2 changes its even more useless as its armor works even less in slight uptiers. could perhaps use a downtier.

KTH... Panther 2 got moved up but KTH didnt? with IS2 losing its D series shell its less capable of fighting against KTH and would have better chances against a panther2.

Type 61 at 7.0 looks bit silly to me but maybe thats just me. Its arguably better than M47 with easier grind.

conqueror Mk2 at 7.3? Cant say anything about it... Sure the armor is not a maus or IS4 but the gun is arguably even better... and it doesent look too slow too. might be bit too good at 7.3... we will see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really have to agree with the others that this is the first BR change where I really dont have any complaints! 

 

all the changes seems resonable and it seems there are not all statistics based and more comunity´s oppinion based (just a feeling):good:

Edited by DonHornegger
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, julhocesar2015 said:

Conqueror in 7.3?, Excuse me but the gaijin went crazy?

 

No is not, if you think that the IS-3 and T-54 1947, both with excellent armor and capable gun are at 7.3 as well

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a tanker I like Ground changes a lot.

Especially T32 back at 7.0 - won't dust in mah garage no longer.

Conqueror on 7.3 - IS3 has something to fear now when top tiered.

 

I am not sure how I feel about air - as far as I know Spitmk24 will be constantly matched against Me262s?

 

But that yakovlew on 6.3 will be a nice intro for me into USSR high end planes.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The T-34-85 at 5.7 will get obliterated now just like it did before..

 

It's going to get uptiered to 6.7 most of the time, and be completely useless

That's what made you guys make it 5.3 before 

 

 

Why do you guys think the t-34-85 should be at the same battle rating as the panther D..

It's superior in every way but reverse speed and turret rotation speed

Edited by GhostProdigy
  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading this through a couple of times, the only things I want to complain about is the is-2 and mod 44 going down, I dont see the reason, and I would say they are fine just were they are. 

And im missing the T29, Tiger IIH and Tiger 10.5. They should go up 0.3 respectivly, since the Panther II is going up to 7.0.

Other than that, great changes, will make many people happy! 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if You want Spitfire Mk 24 fight with jets exclusively (wow, seems it's even better than Yak-15) I want historical performance aka 25lb boost for it now. :017:
Anyway thanks for Firefly, Avenger and Crusader (still more 4.3 for me).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks brilliant guys!

 

I've been waiting for a lot of these changes for a while. Glad to see the T32 and Jackson finally getting some love, as well as the Firefly Shermans. The Kugel and Coelian switch made me chuckle a bit, because I said that as a joke many months back when I had finally gotten and used both of them. A very welcomed change imo. The IS-2 downtier will bring some interesting changes too, while I'm a bit apprehensive on the Mod 44 being at a 6.3, I'm glad to see the 230mm pen shells removed with this change

 

Can't wait to see it implemented guys!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, GhostProdigy said:

The T-34-85 at 5.7 will get obliterated now just like it did before..

 

It's going to get uptiered to 6.7 most of the time, and be completely useless

That's what made you guys make it 5.3 before 

 

 

Why do you guys think the t-34-85 should be at the same battle rating as the panther D..

It's superior in every way but reverse speed and turret rotation speed

except at 5.7 it is ok and 6.7 argument is wrong, I was playing in January a lot USSR 5.7 and you don't see 6.7 tanks too often ~2/10 battles (of course it is random)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great BR changes for the tanks! I only think the Jumbo 76 should also go down to 5.7...

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, GhostProdigy said:

The T-34-85 at 5.7 will get obliterated now just like it did before..

 

It's going to get uptiered to 6.7 most of the time, and be completely useless

That's what made you guys make it 5.3 before 

 

 

Why do you guys think the t-34-85 should be at the same battle rating as the panther D..

It's superior in every way but reverse speed and turret rotation speed

 

Because the T-34-85 fits in to the WT meta almost perfectly maybe?     It's a great tank that fights all the time higher just fine.     It could be running at a BR at 5.7 and it would still perform better than the Shermans.

 

There is a reason it's used so much and encountered constantly.

 

 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very nice changes on the br's for ground forces. will there be any refunds for the loss of BR-471D round ?

Stona (Posted )

I think so, same as on every change with modules.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CokeSpray said:

After having read through all of the planned changes, it's hard to find something to disagree on. Great work! :good:


BR compression is real.


T-34-85 facing KT and not having any ammo that is able to effectively kill it.

GL to 6.0 and 6.3 tanks facing the T32 now since the T29 was not hard enough to kill with the flash repair speed and with a crew size of a battalion.
Spitfire Mk 24 to 6.7 is stupid, take off the new fuel and bring it back to 6.3.

T32 need some love but that is not the right way to do it, compression is not the solution.

I just wished that they would stop compressing stuff and raise the br cap, since they are changing stuff then why not raise the br cap and do it right? The community is asking for soo long for a raise in the br cap, countless topics about it, gigantic amount of support and we still dont have a new br cap. The result is clear specially in tanks, the compression is real.

Edited by shadowaffles
  • Upvote 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If IS-2 1944 is now 6.3,

 

Why is the Super Pershing still sitting duck at 6.7?

It should have come along with IS-2 1944, looking at its current armor, mobility, gun, & its whole tank.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, Japan no longer has an E-3, they have an E-7, remember?

 

But I'm excited. I think the Yak-15 being at 6.3 and the SpitF 24 being at 6.7 means its the first jet fighter to be at a lower battle rating than a prop fighter. The IS-2 going down to 5.7, as well as the T-34/85 going up there will finally mean I can make a 5.7 lineup with the KV-220/IS-2/T-3485. And the PT-76 and ISU-152 going down to 5.3?!

 

I'm really excited ahhhhhH

Edited by PoIikarpov
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why is IS-2 1943 lower than Sherman Jumbo 76?

It should have been even lower than it instead of the opposite.

Somewhere around 5.3 - 5.7 would have been better for a Sherman (76) at best.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.