Jump to content

Planned Battle Rating changes - January 2021


my take on this:

 

Hawk H-75A-2 should go down to 2.0 seeing as it has the same flightmodel and wepons as the a4 for france which is currently at 2.0. this one is clearly being tilted by the few number of people playing it and should be looked at in isolation.

 

F2G-1 a welcome change though in truth it could probs go down to 6.0 with no real issue as it has the same issue the 50 cal bear cat has

 

M48A2C should go back to 7.3 seeing as it is quite literally a better version of the american m48 which is currently at 7.3 as it has smoke grenades. 

 

 

object 120, panther f and t44-100 should all stay where they are as in the down tier they will now get they will club, especially the t44 where its armour is incredibly trolly.

 

the emil and the ebr are good changes as on is trash in current meta well the other just a lower tier amx 13 which currently lives at 6.3

 

T-80B, not sure about this, i just know i dont want to fight it in my stock 8.7s 

 

On a side note the yuudachi is getting moved up, but it currently still has the mod rp cost when it was a high end destroyer, putting it out of line with the other dds in the game by a large margin as it has heavy crusiser mod cost. 

Edited by nathanclawfish
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB

E.B.R. - stay on 4.7 untill wheels are fixed

M48A2C - stay on 7.0 and move M48A1 to 7.0

Obj 120 - stay on 7.7 

Maus/E-100 - move to 7.3

Panther F - stay on 6.0

KW-220 - to 5.3

 

Edited by ULQ_LOVER
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so somebody want to make 5.7 unplayable finally? ww2 m4 shermans, t-34-85 etc face with german patton?  when now is 5.7 br with 1.0 uptier most time unplayable?so you can put is-3, t-54 1947 to 6.7 too.....

Edited by Onovo
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 10
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB.

JPZ 4-5 should stay at its BR. Or go back up to 7.0.

M48A2C to 6.7? like wtf? How about no. And beside. If you lower that.

You need to lower every M46/47/48 with same/similar guns.

We need DEcompression. Not more compression.

 

Centurion Mk1 to 6.0? Why. It wont have any good vehicles to use in a lineup now.

Sure the Black Prince is 6.0. But its far from a good backup.

 

So many bad changes. But i did not expect anything else :/

Edited by Wolf_89
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 15
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold the phone. This is saying that an identical tank is doing so much worse than the same tank in another nation's tree that it somehow deserves to be an entire BR lower. At what point do you consider to stop making battlerating changes and instead actually investigate why the vehicle is performing so poorly relative to the other tree contemporary?

 

I would take a guess based on available information that the lower winrate and kdr is being caused by the vehicle being newer, so more of the statistics are made up of stock/unspaded players using the atrocious APCR round, that the wider arrangement of the German tree causes players to use it as a backup to a 7.7 tank in games that are already an effective loss as a last ditch option, and that the playstyle of the tank is a jarring change from the Tiger II preceding it so anyone going directly to it is forced to relearn all their strategies else perform poorly.

None of this reflects that the vehicle itself is a weaker vehicle, or could be placed lower. It shows that the underlying mechanics of progression and general gameplay need addressing - lowering it will raise the stats at some point yes, but it will do so since the vehicle finally overmatches those vehicles it is facing so extremely that there is no contest between them. And that will only get worse as the wider playerbase catches on and those who are currently struggling with it develop an understanding of how to play it to its strengths.

  • Like 16
  • Thanks 4
  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T20: No need to push it 6.0. He already struggle to fight Tiger II and some other uptier ennemies. Good mobility but nearly non existent armor and the 76mm gun is not that good since volumetric. 

We could compare with Germany (Panthers / Tigers )  who can pen nearly anything with better armor decent mobility being at 5.3 or 6.3. 

M48 GER:  Just NO. 6.7? For an M48? Same as a Tiger II? Same tank as their counterparts from the US them being 7.3 for reasons no one knows why? I'm sorry but this don't even need argument. I guess stats shows it's not "good" because , it's the only 7.0 German tank maybe thats why. This is against all the concept of balance itself, sorry but it makes no sense. 

EBR: 5.0 why not. Even though I don't think he needs it. Mobility is good only on road, canon is good but pen less than a M4A4 SA50, reload is god tier of course, but no armor, and back to mobility it's worse than any tank if on mud / snow / sand.  And this is at least 3/4 maps. Also 5.0 BR is inexistent for french, Jumbo at 5.3 and ARL 44 are not "enough" to make it a decent line up. Basically killing the EBR. 

Panther F: Was absolutely fine at 6.0. No need for it to be 5.7. 5.7 line up is already mega strong anyway. 



 

  • Confused 5
  • Upvote 27
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how you ignore dreadnoughts playing against starter cruisers, and starter cruisers playing against starter destroyers. Naval still needs 6.7

 

 

 

Also why do you think J32 Lansen and G.91YS are better than the MiG-21PFM and the CL Sabre Mk.6 as strong as all the MiG-19s? Oops, I forgot about the F3H-2, that aircraft is even worse than F-86F-40 on the Japanese/Taiwanese tree. 

Edited by efetenekeci
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 25
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you extend the aircraft Br to 11.0 ? instead of stuffing everything that isn't competitive at top tier at 9.7

Especially when I see that only USSR, Chinese and German plane are put at this br, wich will completly unbalanced the teams, allies are going to be destroy with so much supersonic fighter against them

 

People have been asking for br decompression since ages, yet you stuff even more supersonic jet in 9.7, ruining the experience for 9.0 jets, while adding a 11.0 bracket would solve the issue without penalizing an entire range of aircraft aka 9.0 - 9.3 ...

 

This should not happened, this is a bad change and it will ruin (again) 9.0 / 9.3 experience

 

Etendard IVM, F86K or F86F have no chance against Mig 19, Mig 21 ... this is a terrible change

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 14
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mode: Simulator Battle

Nation: USA

Vehicle: P-51

BR: From 4.0 to 3.7

Reason: Bad climb rate, terrible energy retention at maneuver, bad acceleration, worse than XP-55, P-38, Bf 109 F4, A7M1

 

Mode: Simulator Battle

Nation: USA

Vehicle: P-51 D5

BR: From 5.0 to 4.7

Reason: Terrible climb rate, too sluggish, terrible energy retention at maneuver, worse of  5.0 such as Ki-84 ko, La-7, Bf 109 G14, F4U-4

 

Edited by AdelWolf
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 2
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that not many ppl care about arcade but i'm going to ask anyway. Why are vautours still going up? Now they are at same br as for example mig21. I would somehow understand rising A versions, but unarmed B? Is this because ppl climb very high and drop bombs whole game leaving them with good score/deaths ratio? Am I understanding it right?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German 5.7 and 6.7 lineup is too powerful, so stop dropping more vehicle to these battle rates.

Also stop nerfing the US and British 5.7, which are already struggling in fighting with the German lineup.

 

Air top tier needs  BR expansion, not dropping more supersonic planes to 9.7.

  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 29
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the good changes, I won't list them but I believe at least 60% of the adjustments can be justified. I will focus on the bad ones which is PURELY DAMAGING to the existing gameplay.

 

I main Ground AB/RB, Air RB, and Naval RB.

 

MiG-19s and more "early MiG-21s" going 9.7 is a very bad game design choice.

 

While they can theoritically be opponents of say, Lightning F.1 and Harriers, it is the Lightning and Harriers that should be upped, not them. The jet BR has to be decompressed if you want to make these MiGs and uptiered Harriers ever competitive.

 

MiG-21s in general are the lesser evil - However, any MiG-21 later than F-13 benefits a lot from firepower upgrade and engine upgrade, which make them more competitive than the 9.7 MiG-21 itself. However, like all 9.7 Mach 2s, they are capable of ruining a match by over-relying on its speed and outspeed its opponents. Only downside is they run out of fuel fast with afterburner, and cannot go Mach Speed without it. Not that it should be a problem at atitude against non-missile opponents.

 

The true evil is MiG-19 with its sheer amount of engine power and energy. It is a much more versitale airframe than MiG-21s and does not lose as much energy in a turn compared to the MiG-21s. To be fair, MiG-19 is a competitor to the likes of T-2 and should be stayed at 10.0 against its peer.

 

F3H-2 is not a 9.7 material. No, not for now.

 

It's redeeming abilities is, perhaps, its ability to turn well compared to other jets. Other than that, it is still merely a subsonic and it is roughly on the tier of Shenyang F-5 and MiG-17s. It can compete well against F-86s in that BR.

 

T20 to 6.0

 

A terrible choice using the mentality of "high pen APCR can justify its BR increase". Not even T25, its spiritual successor, is 6.0. T20 is a tank that is good only because people know its 76mm gun well enough. It shoots fast and has enough mobility for a flank, plus a stabilizer. If anything, it is the M26 series that should go down.

 

Sturer Emil to 4.3, Object 120 to 7.3

 

Glass cannon theory much? While I can somehow get behind the Emil change (Dicker Max is probably better at that BR due to smaller caliber and good enough pen values), Object 120 has a lolpen APFSDS that requires almost no aim, plus an autoloader than can make its reload catch up Tiger II's. We all know how that ended back then, with a lot of Obj 120 players murdering King Tigers. It is certainly not a good choice for Object 120. 

 

Centurion Mk 1 to 6.0

 

British has almost no lineup there, not to mention Cent. Mk 1 is never a 6.0 material. It might have armor, but its armor is traded from the mobility of A30 Challenger and A34 Comet. It's not the troll one you can find in Centurion Mk 3. If anything, 5.7 is a very suitable BR for it along with a downtiered Black Prince. 

 

M48A2C to 6.7

 

If anything, it is the American Patton that needs to be 7.0 so it can suit in a T29/T34 lineup. Why give Germans an EXTREMELY VIABLE backup vehicle at 6.7, after the King Tigers? 

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 25
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(RB)

Some nice changes here, but:

 

M48A2 and M48A1 cant be 2 BRs apart, thats unfair.

 

M60A1 RISE and M60A3 TTS are outclassed at their own BRs, and are clearly worse in every apartmant compared to i.e. the leopards. (M60A3 TTS and Leopard 1A5 is compared below)

Spoiler

M60A3 TTS compared to Leopard 1A5:

- Worse Penetration (M774 = 357 flat pen, DM33 = 408 flat pen)

- Worse speed (48 kph / 9 kph reverse vs 65 kph / 28 kph reverse)

- Worse hp/t (15,8 vs 19,5 )

- Worse turret traverse (22,5 vs 24 degree/sec)

- Worse zoom (8.0x vs 4.0x-12.0x)

- Bigger target

 

M60A3 TTS has better:

- Armor against Heat, but 90% uses apfsds, which goes through like nothing.

M60A1 Rise vs Leopard A1A1 is the same story.

Something has to be done here, because its fairly imbalanced to have these in the same tiers.

 

UDES 33 should not be higher than any BMP-1. It has worse penetration, is slower, has an exposed gunner, dont have a gun like the BMP, and has slow reload. BMP-1 is better in every way, but is at a BR lower.

 

Strf 9040C is a light tank, but probably one of the slowest vehicles at its tier. It doesn't have any penetration or any other great features. Should not be higher than Strf 9040 BILL, which is faster, has commander thermals and a great top-attack missile. Also, Lvkv 9040C is at 9.7, and its the same vehicle, just with tracking radar for planes. 30mm extra penetration isnt really ever needed, as side shots often are the only option.

  • Upvote 9
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just edit this instead of making new post.

Tanks > Realistic Battles.


T-80B: 10.0 -> 9.7
No. Just no. 8.7s should not fight T-80Bs. It's already bad enough with T-72 TURMS-T spam, no need to add another one.

T20: 5.7 -> 6.0
That's too high right? T20 is unequal to T25. It's nowhere near it.

 

M48A2 C: 7.0 -> 6.7
Why's US and TW M48A1 still on 7.3?

Edited by KaedeP
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 13
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are sure some odd choices among some good updates to certain vehicles. I like that the Fairmiles are going down as those are some really awful boats to play and spade. Maybe lower some of the rank V subchasers and frigates also? Those have no armor and no business at larger maps. Anyway: ↓ 

 

 

GROUND REALISTIC BATTLE:

 

ITALY

 

Spoiler

 

P.40 and P.40 "G.C. Leoncello"  3.3 --> 3.0

Reason: Terrible mobility, absolutely useless gun with barely usable HEAT-shell and armor that leaves something to desire for. It is not comparable to other 3.3 mediums.

 

 

Semovente 75/46 M43   4.7 --> 4.3

Reason: Most of the Semoventes have been going down in their BR as their gun, mobility and armor is something that barely makes them to qualify as a tank. No idea why this "discount" Jagdpanzer IV was thrown to 4.7. Yes it carries a great gun, but it is still a casemate SPG with inadequate armor  of 25mm+75mm that doesn't seem to work even on long range engagement against lower BR mediums.

 

R3 T20 FA-HS  4.0 --> 4.3

Reason: I'm not sure is this necessary change, but hull break got reworked and that Semovente is going to be lonely at 4.3. Here is a friend for him.

 

 

 

 

GERMANY

 

Spoiler

 

Sdk.Fz 234/4   3.0 -->  3.7

Reason: Just to make it rank III so I we can grind events with it and to be honest, it's pretty darn too good at 3.0 in right hands. 

 

Panther D  5.3  --> 5.7

Reason: I see no point why this thing was lowered to 5.3 originally. It's a medium with high pen, decent mobility and excellent armor.

 

leKPz M41  6.3 --> 6.7

Reason: Bulldog with HEAT-FS at 6.3. The mobility isn't that great but it is far more superior tank than the regular M41.

 

M48A2C  KEEP IT AT 7.0

Reason: It doesn't differ from regular M48 a much. It's just bad players causing bad stats. Keep it at 7.0 or put it at 7.3 like rest of the M48s.

 

 

 

 

USSR

 

Spoiler

 

Type 65  (Phong Kong T-34) 5.7 --> 5.3

Reason: It is really not that good of an anti-air and as an anti-tank it's pretty situational. The high profile and crew layout in the turret makes it really susceptible to enemy fire.

 

Object 120  KEEP IT AT 7.7

Reason: It suffers from same issue as the German M48 for example. People who don't know how to play it and refuse to learn to play it, cause the bad stats for this vehicle. It has good mobility, super deadly gun and solid reload speed. It's absolutely going to murder the armor meta of heavies (and everything else) at 6.3.

 

 

SWEDEN

 

Spoiler

 

Lvkv 42   5.0 --> 4.7 (also in AB)

Reason: 10mm all around and hull break. It's just a worse AMX DCA and that thing sits in 4.7. Otherwise raise AMX to 5.0. Also the ammo count in Lvkv 42 is really scarce.

 

Delat Torn  5.0 --> 4.7

Reason: This thing has bit more armor than a Scania snowplow and the ready rack is just measly 5 rounds. Like Chi-Ri II, the main issue with this thing is it's armor and auto-loader that loses it's potentiality quite fast.

 

Strv 103A  (including the premium one) 7.7  -->  7.0

Reason: This thing is pretty much unplayable currently. Just lower it to 7.0 until hull aiming have been fixed. APDS barely does any damage and the twitchy movement makes it hard to "pixel-hunt" weak spots even in a slight uptier. Most of the AP-based projectiles also chew through this tank's lower plate with ease and it can't even defend itself after the transmission it out.

 

 

 

USA

 

Spoiler

 

Shermans equipped with 76mm gun (all models including the Russian and Japanese) X.X --> Lower all of them with 0.3 from current

Reason: One update bumped up these things up for no reason. They have never been that big of a threat to anyone.

 

M4A2 (105)  2.7 --> 3.3

Reason: First this. Get rid of the stock HE-round and make HEAT it's default round and Smoke as a researchable one. HE is just a joke and barely kills anything besides trucks at 2.7. Now to the point; this thing clubs way too hard in it's battle rating. Make it 3.3 as an alternative for the regular M4. You get one with great gun, little armor and fast reload or the one with great gun, superior armor and slow reload.

 

M18 (including the Italian one) 5.7 -->  5.3

Reason: M18 got thrown into 5.7 because German teams couldn't keep their eyes on the flank or use C-key. M18 is one of the easiest tanks to be dealt in it's battle rating.

 

 

 

 

FRANCE

 

Spoiler

 

M4A4 SA(50)  4.7 --> 5.3

Reason: Long ago A.C IV was butchered and thrown into 5.3. It is way worse in my opinion than this railgun wielding monstrosity. M4A4 hull have become quite trolly and somewhat a chore to deal with nowadays and the gun is just way too insane for a 4.7 medium.

 

M4 FL(10)  4.7  --> 5.0

Reason: FL(10) carries a powerful gun armed with an actual auto-loader. It's far superior when compared to Chi-Ri II and Delat Torn. Now EBR sits at 5.0 also so they'll make a great pair.

 

AMX-13 DCA  4.7 --> 5.0

Reason: It is just a way better Lvkv 42. Also is it just me, but do the self-destroying HE-shells seem to be always on the point and explode always near the enemy planes?

 

 

 

UK/GREAT BRITAIN


 

Spoiler

 

Tortoise   6.7 --> 6.3

Reason: Tortoise have fallen out of meta long ago, just like Jagdtiger for example. Cupola is a massive weak spot for APHE round and vehicles with HEAT-FS and APDS are chewing through this slowpoke with ease. 

 

Black Prince  6.0 --> 5.7

Reason: It's just not that good of a heavy tank even with APDS and also at 6.0 it lacks a lineup.

 

Centurion Mk.1  KEEP IT AT 5.7

Reason: No stabilizer and lower plate is a sure weak spot and with the recent updates and shift of meta - it is not 6.0 material.

 


 

JAPAN

 

Spoiler

 

Chi-To  4.7  -->  4.0

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating. Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor.

 

Chi-To Late  4.7 -->  4.3

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating. Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor.

 

Chi-Ri II   5.0 -->  4.7

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating.  Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor. Puny secondary 37mm is not a justified cause to make this mammoth a 5.0. Auto-loading mechanism doesn't work and loses it's purpose after the first two shots. After that Chi-Ri II becomes just larger Chi-To with juicy profile to aim your gun at. It really struggles against 5.7 as it starts to meet slopes which against the capless APHE is useless.

 

ST-A1/A2    6.3  -->  6.0

Reason: The only good thing about the vehicle is access to the HEAT-FS round, otherwise both vehicles are most non versatile medium tank in their battle rating (I'd say in whole game). Lack of even somewhat reliable armor and cramped crew makes the vehicle easy to one-shot. Speed and overall mobility is also inferior to the most of the vehicles they have to fight among and against. Then there is the "claustrophobic" optics/zoom. It feels more like playing Brummbär. This eats the effectiveness of the HEAT-FS, as sniping anything beyond 600m becomes quite a chore. Count in also that most of the time target is moving.

 

ST-A3   6.7  -->  6.3

Reason: You call this skyscraper a medium tank? 6 seconds an auto-loader? Please, this thing with it's subpar mobility and armor compared to other mediums at it's BR makes the ST-A3 look like a joke. Although these things are good things to farm RP out of as they can be knocked out by a crowbar or by throwing rocks at it :D

 

Type 61   6.7  -->  6.3

Reason: It's more like a bigger M41 Bulldog, but with same armor and no scouting. Lack of stabilizer and lack of mobility makes it an awful 6.7 to play. Although I run it with my 7.0 lineup and do well with it, I find that new and grinding players could use some ease with this vehicle.

 

Type 60 ATM   7.0  -->  6.7

Reason: Yes, I am totally serious with this one. The ATGM must be controlled with WASD and everybody knows what kind of a "brainfarts" the inverted W-S cause. Also the ATGM is slowest in the game 85 m/s. It can be easily machine gunned down (Yes, this have happened to me more than enough). As most of the early ATGM vehicles it lacks armor, but also the mobility. And overall Type 60 ATM is not a very good vehicle.

 

Ho-Ri Prototype  KEEP IT AT 6.0

Reason: It's not that well armored and even Panzer 4 can punch through it's non-sloped structure and it already meets APDS and some of the powerful 90mm guns around it's BR that chew through it with ease.

 

Ho-Ri Production  7.0 --> 6.7

Reason: Another really debatable change, but meta shifts and the game lives on. Volumetric ammo made this vehicle even worse to use. It have started to suffer from "Jumbo syndrome". It has a shell that lacks a cap which helps against angled armor and around 6.7-7.7 there is lot of angles. Tank itself is hard to pen for some, but Ho-Ri is suffering from this also as the gun is just awful and inaccurate for longer ranges.

 

 

 

 

AIR AB/RB

 

CHINA

 

CW-21  AB  1.7 --> 2.3

             RB  2.0 --> 2.7

Reason: It still has really odd flight model. It behaves like an UFO by out-climbing, out-turning and all in all it just dominates most of the planes in it's BR.

 

 

USA

 

F-82 Twin Mustang in RB  5.0 --> 5.3

Reason: It gets air spawn, has ridiculously high speed and acceleration and insane armament. I can see that this plane is here to deal with certain German bombers that can be real pain in the **** most of the time, but in good hands this plane is able to deal with everything it sees due to it's good performance and early game advantage.

Edited by Rieskaruisku
Spoilered most of the stuff to prevent this post being bloated as a dead whale on a shore.
  • Haha 5
  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 the difference with T-62M ),doesn't have Thermal and it's slow. 

 

 

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. Type 75 is going 6.3 too. 

 

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.

 

M48A2C : Stay in 7.0 :

 

reason : M46 is 7.0 is weaker and M47s/M48A1 are 7.3. They're similar to the German version, why germany got lower battle rating ? No sense and make some favoristism for Specific Tech tree, less others tech tree behind.

 

 

Centurion mk.1 : Stay in 5.7  

 

reason : Centurion is correct in 5.7, why changing ?  Black Prince need help and raise the Battle Rating of the Centurion isn't the help we need. 

 

 

Black Prince : 6.0 to 5.7 :

reason  : Just like others times.. Slower tank, Similair to Is-2 and Tiger H1/E. BP needs to go down. Why Tiger and IS-2 are 5.3/5.7 and Black Prince is 6.0  ? Just like the Tiger 1 (P)... 

Edited by Whisky_077
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 19
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nation: Japan

Gamemode: Realistic

Vehicles:

* Ro-Go 1.3 -> 1.0

* Chi-Ha LG 2.7 -> 2.3

* Chi-To 4.7 -> 4.0

* Chi-To Late 4.7 -> 4.3

* Chi-Ri 5.0 -> 4.7

* Ho-Ri Prototype keep it at 6.0, anyone can pen the upper part at its BR, stupid BR increase for no reason.

Reason:

Compared to the others nation these tanks are lackbuster, have 0 mobility and lack armour.

Germany have similar stuff at even lower BR and Japan lack ballistac cap.

 

@~Rieskaruisk

These changes as well

Hide contents

 

Chi-To  4.7  -->  4.0

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating. Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor.

 

Chi-To Late  4.7 -->  4.3

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating. Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor.

 

Chi-Ri II   5.0 -->  4.7

Reason: High profile and large target. Lack of ballistic cap in the round. Lacking armor for it's battle rating.  Super slow turret traverse and overall mobility is poor. Puny secondary 37mm is not a justified cause to make this mammoth a 5.0. Auto-loading mechanism doesn't work and loses it's purpose after the first two shots. After that Chi-Ri II becomes just larger Chi-To with juicy profile to aim your gun at. It really struggles against 5.7 as it starts to meet slopes which against the capless APHE is useless.

 

ST-A1/A2    6.3  -->  6.0

Reason: The only good thing about the vehicle is access to the HEAT-FS round, otherwise both vehicles are most non versatile medium tank in their battle rating (I'd say in whole game). Lack of even somewhat reliable armor and cramped crew makes the vehicle easy to one-shot. Speed and overall mobility is also inferior to the most of the vehicles they have to fight among and against. Then there is the "claustrophobic" optics/zoom. It feels more like playing Brummbär. This eats the effectiveness of the HEAT-FS, as sniping anything beyond 600m becomes quite a chore. Count in also that most of the time target is moving.

 

ST-A3   6.7  -->  6.3

Reason: You call this skyscraper a medium tank? 6 seconds an auto-loader? Please, this thing with it's subpar mobility and armor compared to other mediums at it's BR makes the ST-A3 look like a joke. Although these things are good things to farm RP out of as they can be knocked out by a crowbar or by throwing rocks at it :D

 

Type 61   6.7  -->  6.3

Reason: It's more like a bigger M41 Bulldog, but with same armor and no scouting. Lack of stabilizer and lack of mobility makes it an awful 6.7 to play. Although I run it with my 7.0 lineup and do well with it, I find that new and grinding players could use some ease with this vehicle.

 

Type 60 ATM   7.0  -->  6.7

Reason: Yes, I am totally serious with this one. The ATGM must be controlled with WASD and everybody knows what kind of a "brainfarts" the inverted W-S cause. Also the ATGM is slowest in the game 85 m/s. It can be easily machine gunned down (Yes, this have happened to me more than enough). As most of the early ATGM vehicles it lacks armor, but also the mobility. And overall Type 60 ATM is not a very good vehicle.

 

Ho-Ri Prototype  KEEP IT AT 6.0

Reason: It's not that well armored and even Panzer 4 can punch through it's non-sloped structure and it already meets APDS and some of the powerful 90mm guns around it's BR that chew through it with ease.

 

Ho-Ri Production  7.0 --> 6.7

Reason: Another really debatable change, but meta shifts and the game lives on. Volumetric ammo made this vehicle even worse to use. It have started to suffer from "Jumbo syndrome". It has a shell that lacks a cap which helps against angled armor and around 6.7-7.7 there is lot of angles. Tank itself is hard to pen for some, but Ho-Ri is suffering from this also as the gun is just awful and inaccurate for longer ranges.

 

Edited by xXGaijinedXx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no sense to make german m48 a 6.7 vehicle while US one sits and 7.3 - they are the same tanks! Both of these should have 7.0 BR imo. There is no reason to buff german 6.7 lineup.

Panther F at 5.7 is kinda stupid too. It's better vehicle than Centurion 1 and T25 while both of these go to 6.0. 

Not to mention that Panther A is better than all of these 3 vehicles which i mentioned above (and it's 5.7). 

 

 

When it comes to moving MiGs to 9.7...i think that it's kinda good change, but at the same time some lower BR vehicles will suffer. We need 11.0.

I'd like to also point out that J-32B Lansen sits at 10.0 while being significantly worse than all of the MiG-19 variants. Same comes to G.91 YS.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 6
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, joten70 said:

I just want to point out that the J32B has a higher BR than: 

• all Mig-19 variants

• multiple Mig-21 variants

• all? F-100 variants

• EE lightning

• A7D

This despite it only having aim9b, being sub/transsonic, has low/average acceleration and lack-luster manouverability. And a high repair cost to top it off. Please lower the J32B (or decompress the jet br-brackets)

Same for the G91YS sadly, Both of these planes should be 9.7, 

-Subsonic 
-Aim-9B's 
-No RWR or flares (Looking at you GR.3 and AV8C at 9.7) 
-Can only turnfight in the case of the G91YS
-Lansen can do? ... straight line maybe?
 

It's just weird that the Mig19's can be 9.7 while these 2 planes are 10.0, They are pretty much worse then the mig 19

Edit : Also A7D still 9.7? Aim-9J's at 9.7 ))))))))

Edited by AhappyFluffyCow
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Country: Japan

Gamemode: Realistic 

Vehicle: Ro-Go

BR: from 1.3 to 1.0

Reasons: Armor is too thin to be effective

               70mm gun lacks range

               37mm gun lacks penetration

               Mobility is bad compared to other vehicles 

               No frontal MG

               Turrets rotate extremely slow

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest that the T20 remain at 5.7. The Panther A, a vehicle which is arguably much better than the T20, now sits comfortably at 5.7 having superior firepower, armor, and decent mobility. The T20 has mediocre armor, mediocre gun, and good mobility. It is not an equal to the Jumbo 76. It is not equal to many 6.0 vehicles.

  • Upvote 4
medal medal 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...