Jump to content

Planned Battle Rating changes - December 2020


cover_facebook_answers_developers_07a5fc

 

Planned Battle Rating changes - December 2020

 

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!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 26
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This feedback is for air SB

BI in EC4? Please do not lower rocket plane to 6.3 - it will mean, it will end up in EC4 facing only props.


Other than that - my previous feddback remains unchanged:

 

Country: USA

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: P-51H-5

BR Change: 6.3->6.7

Reason: moving F7F to EC5 (6.7) suggest that idea of prop planes in EC5 is being re-introduced. P-51H is by far best propeller fighter in game with huge performance margin over any other 6.3 or lower planes.

 

Country: USA

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: P-51C

BR Change: 4.0 > 5.0

Reason: performance-wise it's better in every aspect to P-51D-5 while having 4 instead of 6 guns. Lower firepower do not handicap it enough to offset superior performance.

 

Country: UK

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: MB5

BR Change: 4.7 > 6.3

Reason: This is by far strongest propeller plane available to UK. It climbs and manoeuvre not that bad and it can out-pace any axis propeller plane in game with ease giving it distinct edge over them

 

Country: US

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: F-82

BR Change: 5.0 > 6.3

Reason: This thing is extremely fast and at speed surprisingly agile (for a twin engine fighter) it's much faster than any fighter enemy have and can remain totally untouchable

 

Country: GE

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: Me-264

BR Change: 4.0 > 5.3

Reason: This heavily armed bomber while not a game breaker when facing US is certainly way too strong for soviets. It's actually faster than many soviet EC3 fighters. Also strong armament + mouse aim means that you have to have very big speed advantage + strong guns to deal with it and survive. Soviet fighters at this rank have neither. Most are barely 100km/h faster than 264 (even in dive since they fall apart at higher speed) and are not very well armed to deal with heavy bombers.

 

Country: USA

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: F4U-4

BR Change: 5.0 > 5.3

Reason: It's agility, speed and armament are often better than those of 5.3 or even some 5.7 planes. It cause imbalance mostly because being spammable and in hands of decent pilots they are extremely hard to deal with. Especially if enemy flies soviet planes which is far more frequent than games US vs GE

 

Country: USA

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: P-51 D10

BR Change: 5.0 > 5.3

Reason: it's 72"Hg variant with performance much closer to P-51D-30

 

Country: GE

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: 109K4

BR Change: 5.7 -> 6.0

Reason: technically plane is not terribly out of balance at 5.7 but right now GE have all top prop fighters at 5.7 and losing one locks them all (crew lock). 109K4 is one of those planes that are strong enough to not suck at 6.0 and it will allow greater flexibility to Germans

 

Country: GE

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: Ta-152H

BR Change: 5.7->6.0

Reason: same as with 109K4. Nothing wrong with 152H being 5.7 but some planes have to move since now if you lose one - you lose all.

 

Country: Japan

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: A7M2

BR Change: 4.7->5.0

Reason: plane constantly gets higher and higher spawn cost which shows it's doing extremely well. With it's power-2-weight ratio and wing loading combined with very good dive speeds it can easily compete in EC4. In EC 3 it's just too strong

 

Country: US

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: F4U-1a/1aUSMC/1d

BR Change: 3.3->UP (ideally 5.0)

Reason: any change up will help. This 1944 have no place in EC2. In fact putting it there only will make i stats go lower and lower because this heavy and fast bird is more suited to facing EC4 enemies than EC2 nimble ones.

 

Country: SWE

Vehicle: Pyörremyrsky

Mode: SB

BR Change: 3.7 -> 4.7

Reason: to quote

Quote

You initially lowered this planes BR only because it was the only way to allow people play it before rest of the tree came available. Now that Sweden has also other airplanes you should put it back to a BR where it belongs performance wise isnetad of being a EC3 "starter" without any timer penalty.

 

Country: US

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: P-59

BR Change: 5.7->6.7

Reason: It is a super agile jet. Might be slow for a jet but it's still faster than any plane it currently meets (only props) while being at least as agile as them (often turns better than many late-war props).
 

Country: US

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: XP-55

BR Change: 3.3->4.7

Reason: Performance wise it's much faster, retains energy much better and (at speed) turns much better than most planes at 4.7 or below. It's armament is also very decent even compared to other 4.7s

 

Country: Japan

Game Mode: SB

Vehicle: Ki-84ko

BR Change: 5.0->5.3

Reason: Performance wise it's comparable to 5.3 and 5.7 planes. It certainly do not deserve to be spammable even if some (not me) might consider it's armament to be rather weak.

 

 

Edited by przybysz86
  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 13
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USS Pensacola, USS Portland, USS Northampton, and Trento need buffs, but not like this. They need accuracy buffs so they have consistent damage output, not BR drops. Their current accuracy makes no sense both gameplay-wise and historically, so why not just make their guns more accurate and see how they perform rather than dropping their BRs and potentially causing more balance issues?

Also, I'm incredibly disappointed to see no BR 6.3 for Dreadnoughts. The entire 5.0-6.0 range is in shambles right now, and Gaijin's answer is to just move more Cruisers down to where they constantly face Destroyers and even some reserve ships like the Type 1924 Leopard? We need BR decompression, not even more BR compression!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 28
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soukou-Tei (1927)   1.3  -> 1.0   1.3-> 1.0
Soukou-Tei (1940)   1.7  -> 1.3   1.7 ->1.3

 

This is good, too anemic firepower.

I predict they will do good now.  Not easy, but should be nearly balanced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here We Go Again.

First Off:
4th Time Asking For The Ki-10-II Commander To Go To The ARMY Line Or In The Ki-10 Group, And Not  In The NAVY Line.

unknown.png

 

Regarding The Changes Presented:

Ah Yes, T-90A Going To 10.3?
Why? How Is It In Anyway Not Better Or Even Comparable To The Current Vehicles At 10.3? Like, I Really Don't Understand At All How This Is Goin' Down? Is It Because It's Not Comparable To The Leopard 2A6?? Put The Leopard 2A6 Up Then!

USS Cruisers To 5.3
Thanks For Hammering Yet Another Nail In The Coffin For Non US / German Naval Players, How Am I Supposed To Take Naval Serious With Mogami At 5.7 While American Cruisers Are Lower In BR Yet Better In Every Regard? I'm Actually Disgusted By This Change, Why Is This Done? They Don't Compare To Battleships And Need To Stay Away Or Something? Something ALL Cruisers Should Do? How About Again, PUTTING BC's/BB's HIGHER INSTEAD?
 

T-38 To 2.0
Yes, T-38 Is A Fun Vessel To Sail Around With, The Single 25 mm Is The Bread And Butter Of Said Vessel, But Why To 2.0?? It's More Than Fine At 1.7? It's Better Than The T-14 Mod. 1, But Doesn't Have The Versatility Of Other 2.0 PT's, Just Let It Remain At 1.7.

Regarding Non Mentioned Changes

This Will Be A Section Of Vehicle Changes I've Been Trying To Portray For 2 BR Changes Already:
 

Quote

WHY DO THE PZ.IV'S GO DOWN???

 

unknown.png

 

This Is Not Ok, By Any Regard. You Either Put Down All Long 75 mm's And Please The People Who Don't Know How To Play This Game OR You Actually Put These Vehicles At A Respectable BR

Why Should The Pz.IV's Be Lower Than The Chi-To's? Among The Many German Players I Encounter, They All Consider It Either Equal Or Better Than The Chi-To's
Lower Profile, Samish Power To Weight Ratio, Faster Reload (Which Makes No Sense, As The Japanese Turrets Are Larger And Spacier) , More Shell Choice, Smoke, Etc

This Is Totally Not Ok, I No Longer Can Stand By The Pz.IV's Going This Low.

 

Pz.IV F2 - 3.7 => 4.0 / 4.3
Pz.IV G - 4.0 => 4.7

Pz.IV H - 4.3 => 4.7
(Pz.IV J - 4.0 => 4.3)

(Pz.Bef.Wg.IV J - 4.0 => 4.3)

 

OR (Something I Myself Find Totally Bonkers To Just Think About)

Chi-To - 4.7 => 4.0
Chi-To L - 4.7 => 4.0
Chi-Ri - 5.0 => 4.3

 

 

French Heavies & M4 Minimum BR

Why Exactly Does Nothing In The Stats Gaijin Has Depict The B1 Bis & B1 Ter As Clubbing At Their BRs? These Tanks Are Not Ok And Shouldn't Be At The Same BR As The M3 Lee / Grant, 

This Together With The M4A3 (105) At A Line-Up Of 2.7 Is Simply Beyond Me. No Single Sherman Should Be Allowed Under 3.0.

 

B1 Bis - 2.3 => 2.7 
B1 Ter - 2.3 => 2.7 / 3.0 (More Crew, Unimpenetrable Side Armor At Its BR, Front Armor Is Much Better To The B1 Bis)
M4A3 (105) (All) - 2.7 => 3.0 / 3.3

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
  • Confused 5
  • Upvote 12
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T90A Stay at 10.7

It's someone laughable that this would ever be considered to be moved down to 10.3, if it it suffering that much maybe you shouldn't have added the 2a6 with DM53, but there's no reason to burden every other nation with this at 10.3. 

 

Type 93 9.7 -> 9.0

This vehicle is useless against anything but dumbfire rocket equipped helis, so it could at least be placed into a br where it faces them regularly. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 29
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And we go again

All change proposes are for Ground Forces in Realistic battle. 
 

Chieftain mk10 : 9.0 to 8.7.

 

reason : As the same problem of T-62m-1, affected by speed and less penetration ( reload is only différence with T-62M ), can’t face leopard 2 and T-80B/T-72B 1989.

 

 

Chieftain mk3 : 8.3 to 8.0 

 

Reason : slower that Chieftain mk5 and british tree needs a MBT at 8.0 to support the Warrior and the Maskman.

 


Tortoise : 6.7 to 6.3

 

reason : same as Ferdinand, it loses its neutral steering and doesn’t have its APDS. 
 

 

Fv4005 : 6.7 to 6.3 

 

 

Reason : Yes it's the Doom star, also, like the Kv-2 and Isu/Su-152, it’s a big reload and the capacity to be hullbreak make it more difficult to play without count ennemy CAS.

 

sherman II : 3.7 to 3.3 

 

reason : it’s the M4A1 version in british tree, adding Sherman V ( M4A4 ) in the british in the futur could resolve the reason in 3.7 battle rating

 

 

Centurion mk10 : 7.7 to 7.3

 

Reason : Centurion mk10 is a slow tank, still missing Trunion armor and it doesn’t have HEAT-FS. Their avantage is only the STAB, also STB-1 haves it too with ability to shot HEAT-FS.
 

 

Black Prince: 6.0 to 5.7

ReasonRare is this tank in battle, and probably for good reason. It's lacking a lineup at it's current BR, for one, but it also has the armour of a 4.7 and the gun of a 5.3, so it's a change that is long overdue in my opinion. It would also help to give the Centurion Mark I a decent lineup. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Whisky_077
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 8
  • Upvote 10
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least I have learned some imaginary stuff like my starter Cruiser USS Trenton is better than some heavy cruisers. And you can see my opinion down. 

 

 

 

6.7 List :   All dreadnoughts

6.3 List :   Admiral Hipper, Prinz Eugen (Germany)

                USS Pensacola, USS Portland, USS Northampton, USS New Orleans (USA)

                HMS York, HMS Kent, HMS London (Great Britain)

                IJN Tone, IJN Mogami (Japan)

                Trento, Zara (Italy)

 

6.0 List:   USS Cleveland, USS Brooklyn, USS Helena (USA)

                Chapayev, Sverdlov (USSR)

                HMS Southampton, HMS Belfast (Great Britain)

                IJN Suzuya, IJN Mikuma, IJN Furutaka (Japan)

 

5.7 List :  HMS Hawkins (Great Britain)

                IJN Kako (Japan)

Edited by efetenekeci
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ground RB

 

VFM5 9.0 -> 8.7

 

The VFM5 doesn't compare well against similar 9.0 vehicles, and has far more in common with 8.7s. Many 9.0 Light tanks feature better penetrating apfsds, and thermal imaging systems. The VFM5's top APFSDS has similar characteristics to those found on 8.7 light and medium tanks (MBTs). Compared to competing german tanks the VFM5 is not BRed fairly. At 8.7s the germans have a similar vehicle in the TAM, although the VFM5 does have improved mobility; at 9.0 the germans have the Rad 90, which whiled wheeled has similar if not improved mobility over the VFM5 with thicker armour and better ammunition; at 9.3 the germans get the TAM2C which is vastly superior to the VFM5 in every metric except mobility including multiple thermal views and ammo 2 generations ahead.

 

Alternatively the VFM5 could be given its optional thermal imaging system and improved ammo - which brings it to a similar capability level as 9.0 MBTs (1A5, AMX-30 Super) while still being a light tank.

 

  • Upvote 11
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad list of changes, although the tank list is quite short. Personally, I think that the maximum BR should be raised to 11.0 or 11.3 so that decompression can be made, and which would also leave room for more Rank 6 premiums or Rank 7 event vehicles to be added as well as more tech tree vehicles.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see how the T-90A is being considered on par with the Type-90's. I also find it slightly questionable that the harrier is not being touched despite its absolute dominance in Air RB.

 

In terms of things I'd like to see implemented, I'll post it in every one of these threads:

The Chieftain MK.10 needs to be brought down to 8.7, as it stands it is outclassed by everything in its BR range.

I would also like to see the Type-69 IIG be brought down to 8.3, as it is pretty mediocre at best, awful at worst.

Edited by TheCheshireCat
  • Upvote 22
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was honestly expecting something more akin to BR 11.0 for Leo2A6 but oh well.

 

I do understand and support decision about T-90A moving down as it is actually worse than T-72B3 and T-80U.

Can you advise if this means T-90A will change position in tech tree as well?

  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ground RB: Ariete

10.3 --> 10.7

Let's compare the Ariete and Ariete PSO real quick. First off, the Ariete is 10.3, while the Ariete PSO is 10.7. In this comparison, I will compare spaded vehicles with add-on armor equipped.

 

Mobility

Both Arietes have the exact same mobility, with a hp/t ratio of 24.16 for both with the add-on armor.

Firepower

These two tanks have the same firepower. They have the same main gun, same ammunition, and same machine guns. The thermal optics are the same as well.

Armor

Again, these two tanks have the exact same base armor. The difference here is the secondary armor. The Ariete PSO has additional armor on the hull and turret sides, which is useful. The Ariete get extra armor on the turret front with the WAR package. The WAR package is easily more beneficial than the PSO package, due to the fact that it increases frontal protection, while the PSO only increases side protection, but not enough to protect from 105 mm, 120 mm, or 125 mm tank guns.

 

Conclusion

Overall, these two tanks are nearly identical in all aspects other than armor. The Ariete actually has better armor than the Ariete PSO (when both are spaded), so the Ariete should be 10.7 along with the Ariete PSO.

 

Thank you for your time. :salute:

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 6
  • Upvote 3
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ka-29
9.7 -> 9.0/9.3

Does not even have air to air missiles or loadout options as Mi-24V/P, more of a downgrade from Mi-24V/P and should not be 9.7 


AH-1F
9.7 -> 9.3

does not get TOW II and has a range of 3km max atgm

T-34-57
4.7 -> 4.3
If it had the same rounds as the T-34-57(1943), the APCR round then it would be understandable being 4.7 but no only the normal shells 

 

  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 3
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Country: Germany

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: RU251

BR Change: 6.7->7.0

Reason: Stronger than any 6.7 light tank considering it's ammunition.

 

Country: Germany

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: M48A2C

BR Change: 7.0->7.3

Reason: Pretty much the same as US contemporary but at lower BR. Additionally, together with HEATFS it's a decent vehicle even in uptiers since nobody has strong composite there anyway.

 

Country: Germany

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: M48A2GA2

BR Change: 8.3->8.0

Reason: Lacking stabiliser at 8.3 and without other general handy appliances, like thermals or laser rangefinder, would benefit a lot from downtier and wouldn't become gamebreakingly OP. As I understand the vehicle isn't played much.

 

Country: Germany

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: Radkampfwagen 90

BR Change: 9.0->9.3

Reason: Very strong for it's BR with unrivalled speed and now with no hullbreak.

 

Country: Germany

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: Leopard 2A6

BR Change: 10.7->11.0

Reason: 150+mm of pen and no increase in BR?

 

Country: Soviet Union

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: T55AM1

BR Change: 8.3->8.7

Reason: It's too OP at 8.3 having stabilised gun with decent early APFSDS and has composite armour to be reasonably well protected against lower BR HEATFS.

 

Country: Soviet Union

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: T62M1

BR Change: 8.7->9.0

Reason: Like T55AM1 but better.

 

Country: Soviet Union

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: T72TURMS-T

BR Change: 9.7->10.0 OR remove 3BM42

Reason: That's not balance, you don't get data within 2 days to come to a conclusion it's underperforming, especially with a lot of new "green" people without much of a lineup flocking to it in the first days. That said, it was balanced with 3BM22 at 9.7.

 

Country: Soviet Union

Game Mode: RB

Vehicle: T72B and T64B

BR Change: 9.7->10.0 OR replace 3BM42 with a slightly weaker round that's slightly better than 3BM22.

Reason: Too strong at 9.7 with that armour and round.

 

And finally

Country: All

Game Mode: All

Vehicle: All

BR Change: All

Reason: Decompression.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 15
medal

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.

×
×
  • Create New...