Planned Battle Rating changes - November 2021

[Stona 72,538]

 

We continue to monitor the Battle Ratings of vehicles and their competitive capabilities. In the next update of Battle Ratings, we will raise the BR bar to 11.3 for the extremely effective MiG-23MLD and F-4J Kai aircraft to avoid or reduce the possibility of encountering aircraft of the lower BRs. 

 

We also are considering a BR rise to 11.3 for certain combat helicopters, such as the Ka-52, Mi-28NM, and AH Mk.1 Apache to exclude them from BR 10.0 battles.

 

Other planned changes

Balance changes in the fire rate (shots per minute)

• Ikv 103     6 → 7.5
• SU-57B 12 → 14
• ASU-85 7 → 8.4
• Sturmpanzer II 4 → 4.5
• Marder III 8,4 → 10
• SU-5-1    12 → 14
• Ho-Ro    3 → 4.5

 

New ammunition added

• T-90A — 3BМ60
• M1A2 — M829A2
• Leopard 2PL — DM53
• Leopard 2A5 — DM53
   

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!

[DaweN [email protected] 169]

buccaneer s1 sometimes can't do its job at 8.7 because of airspawn attackers, why it will be 9.0? it hasn't any weapon or flares

[島風 2,394]

Here We Go Again....

We're Moving Up The Bar To 11.3... But Still Too Slow. We Should Be At 13.0 ~ 14.0

 

Previous Feedback

Current Feedback

 

The Good: 

• The Small Step To A Higher Bar.. It's A Small Step, But A Step Regardless.
• Yubari Finally Getting Some Justice In BR.
• EBR Finally Getting Closer To Where It Belongs. 
  • 1954 Should Be 6.7, But We're Getting There.

The Bad:

• P-51C (US) Gets Moved Down, But I Don't See A Mention About The Japanese P-51C.
• Some SAMs Are Still Missing Their Mark, Anything With Roland Missiles, Anything With Manual Controlled Missiles In General, Should Be Considered Higher, Roland Especially Should Hit That 11.0 No Matter What. I Like Having Air Cover, But SAM Sites Are Currently Too Strong For The BR's They Get.
• Chi-Nu II Moving Up.... WITHOUT ANY MOVING OF PZ.IV's. You Can't Tell Me With A Straight Face The Pz.IV F2+ Is Worse Than The Chi-Nu II, No Shot, I Don't Understand How This Higher Profile Tank, With Slower Fire Rate, Worse Top Shell Gets Moved Up, Yet Pz.IV's Still Reign Upon 3.7-4.0 Range.
• Japanese DD's Still Getting Overtiered Just For Their Long Lances, Yes, They're Very Strong, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT JAPANESE DD's Aren't Up To Par To Anything They Get Matched At The Same BR.
• Cruisers Balancing Is Still Off, Even With 0.7 Increase Of Roofing, Cruisers On Cruisers Still Aren't Correct, But Atleast Not All Cruisers Face BB's Anymore. Same For Destoyers On Destroyer / Cruiser Balance.
  • Destoyers Should Be More Than Just 4.3 - 5.0 (Earlier Destoyers Are Fine, Especially Now)
  • Cruisers Should Be More Than Just 5.0 - 6.0

The Ugly:

This Is Gonna Be Alot Of Venting So I'm Trying Keep It As Clean As Possible.

• What Is Happening To Air? How, Who Greenlit The Algorithm? Why Are We Compressing Even More? How Am I Not Seeing MiG-21's Go Up But The Exact Opposite? How Is This Even A Thing?
  • Anything Above 6.7 Doesn't Make Sense And The BR Roof Should Be At 14.0 Minimum Already For The Generation Of Jets & Missiles We Have ... How Are Any Of The MiG-19's, MiG-21's, Yak-38's, Sea Vixen, ...
  • Chinese MiG-19's? A-5C Stays Where It's At? Being Blatantly P2W?
  • A6M's Getting The Short End Of The Stick Again? Being Way Too Overtiered Already, It's Only Capability Is Turning..
    • Yes, Japanese Bias Speaking Here, But It Doesn't Take Away From It Not Supposed To See Super Props, Fighting 1945+ Prop Planes And Be Fine With It?
    • Like How Is It Supposed To Fair Against Other End Of The Line Props It Can't Even Catch At All? It Was Already An Issue At Lower BR's. Only Thing That Got It To Where It Is At Is The People Using The Plane On The Recieving End Of A 20 mm Burst That Turns With A Zero, For No Good Reason.

 

My Own Takes:

Shouting And Crying At Vehicles In The BR List Don't Get Changed So I'll Just Pull Some Other Vehicles From Under The Rug.

• B1 Bis & Ter - A Menace At 2.3, Should Be 2.7 & 3.0 Respectively
• M4A3 (105) - Hello? This Vehicle Has Been Neglected In BR For Way Too Long, Any Sherman Should Be A Minimum Of 3.3. With The Armour It Gets At 2.7 It's Ridiculous Together With Overpressure This Thing Has Become A Nightmare To Face And A Cake Walk To Play.
• Did The Algorithm Not Notice The Falcon? It Should Be Higher. It's Both An Effective Tank Destroyer & Plane Remover, I Don't Get Its BR.

Edited November 25, 2021 by ShimakazeChan

[vascolopes 380]

Overall the plane changes seems to be nice with a few changes.

Watching more decompression to 11.3 is good and I salute the change that will bring more QoL for everyone, bringing more planes to the table that were beeing avoided due to meta/compression back to the table.

ITP(M1) overperforms in every way at the current BR should go up as well.

On the ground forces my thoughts are:

If EBR 1954 keeps going up, its alraidy due to recieve it's top ammo, otherwise it's a joke of a machine and by the looks we will end up with the EBR at max br because of "statistics".

The new EBR of 1951 should not go up in br, it's cannon is weak in all metrics, no firepower, no reload speed, it only has mobility.

The remaining changes I have no issue with them.

[KilianL 853]

First of all :

Good to see 11.3 being added to the game. 

 

I am surprised not to see the A5-C moved to 10.3 considering the Mirage III are going there and have also 2 Magics but less bombs but over all for planes nothing seems too out of place to me.

 

 

Ground wise : 

T26E5 at 6.7, also fine this thing is awesome great armor and decent gun

Ozelot and Wiesel 1A2 at 9.3 should also be fine. 

LVT at 3.0, we had it coming this thing is a monster, but skipping 2 br steps ( like the RCV did, after it moved up I tried once and hated the BR bracket ) is too much and moving 1 up and monitoring the effect would be better IN MY OPINION only

Likewise for the Strf9040B, no line up at 9.0 except the premium TML105.

Char 25t with the good shells going up doesnt surprise me.

EBR 54 going up fine but consider giving it the better shells too at some point.

 

Ho ri Prod going up, fine, great survivability but only if repair cost goes way down, as of right now its cost is prohibitive, good to see it gets a line up with the M47 tho

 

All in all, really decent BR propositions. 

 

2nd edit : Okay about the shells changes but why arent the Leclercs getting any ? they lost their CITV ( historical ) but they have not received anything since then. 

Edited November 25, 2021 by KilianL
added arguments or clarified ( the best I could )

[KryoK 209]

Finally a increase to top BR, this is gonna fix a lot of problems in one move.

Bravo!

 

A couple more 11.0 jets moved to 11.3 would be preferable. Especially the 10km Fox 1 variety.

[SlowHandClap 510]

Glad to see 11.3, but somewhat amazed that the A-5C has managed to stay at 10.0. 

[Vonarian aka Ardeshir 2,879]

J35A "Draken" For SB:

9.7 --> 9.3

Reasons:

1. No RWR: This means a lot at top-tier where you can at least get a clue where the enemies are and from where they are approaching, this plane lacks this self-defense feature.
2. No Countermeasures: Either be at 900-1000 kph or all missiles will hit you as you don't have the needed maneuverability at other speeds, this plane also lacks this very important self-defense feature.
3. Not fast enough: One single turn can make you a completely easy kill, and as you don't have RWR, you have no clue from where the enemies are coming towards you, you lose the opportunity for a defensive maneuver.
4. Low fuel: 21 Minutes maximum fuel capacity if you don't use afterburner (WEP), you can't stay up for long and you also can't stay slow at this BR.
5. Useless missiles: AIM-9B's, only useful if enemy is stalling, and at this BR you meet enemies with very powerful engines with lower chance of a stall
6. Lacking anti-ground armament: This makes this plane useless in Ground SB mode, only 12 Rockets without CCIP.

Cheers.

[WheelchairGamer 1,396]

First of all, decompressing the BR from 11.0 to 11.3 in ARB is a good things because toptier was really compressed like hell. At least that's not enough yet, but I think it's a big step.
 

• CL-13A Mk.5 9.3→9.0(ARB):I still rember it was pretty overpowerd jets when top tier was 9.0meta however, There are several aircraft in 9.3 that are faster than CL-13A, such as MiG-21F-13 and Yak-38, and the speed difference between them is very large. Also, when comparing the CL-13A with the 9.3 subsonic jet, it has no advantage over Shenyang F-5 except for roll performance and manoeuvrability at high speed. Also, their armament is still 50 cals so, they can't send enemy players back to the hangar in an instant like F-86K and F-2 Sabre can. They are not like the F-40 Sabre, which is beatable MiG-17/15s at turnfighting as well. At the very least, they are technically comparable aircraft to the F-2 Sabre and MiG-17, and should not have same BR as Shenyang F-5 and Su-7.
   
• AV-8A 9.7→10.0(ARB):They finally moved to 9.7 about few month ago but they got C/F pods at major update. They were good 9.7 aircraft aircraft even without the C/F pods, so why it is still 9.7? I have own AV-8A but no problem for moving up to 10.0.
   
• A-5C 10.0→10.3(ARB):The current A-5C is a P2W due to its missiles and MiG-19-like climb performance also, air spawn. If almost all 9.0-9.7 aircraft had flares, 10.0 is fine but, they doesn't so, they should go for 10.3.
   
• Su-7B 9.3→9.7 or A32A 9.3→9.0(ARB):Their BRs should be different and attackers with different performance should not have same BR. Even the move of the A32A from 9.0 to 9.3 was nonsense.
   
• F-4C 10.0→10.3(ARB): They can carry the AIM-9J and AIM-7E, and their historical reports have already been forwarded to the developers. It makes more sense to give them better armament and push them to a higher BR than to have them face 9.0 aircraft, and it balances things out. Nobody wants to experience the Vietnam War while flying a 1st gen fighters.
   
• F-84F 8.3→8.0(ARB):Only the top speed is good, but due to an inefficient engine and poor energy retention, it never quite reaches that speed. At least it should not be rated the same as F-86A and may even be inferior to F-84G.The last time Gaijin tried to change the BR of the F-84F was the only good change at the time, but it was cancelled.  However, this opinion is ONLY focused on the ARB, so if they are good CAS in the GRB, the BR should not be changed.
   
• F4U-4B VMF-214 5.7→6.0(ARB):They are literally C&P of F4U-4B in TT so, They should have same BR.

Edited November 26, 2021 by ReleaseTheMiG17

[TenPoundsOfSalt 630]

The increase in the BR ceiling is good, however here are some other changes that would be necessary in my opinion.

 

EBR 1954 : from 6.0 to 6.7

Give it the PCOT-51P and see how it performs there, it's been constantly moving up by .3/4 since it was added, and i believe everybody knew that it would end up at the same BR as the AMX-13, maybe spare us the waiting of yet another round of BR change.

 

Leopard I : fomr 7.3 to 7.7

All of it's equivalent are at 7.7, there is no reason to have it lower. Moreso since the STB got moved away from 7.7. Also would help with compression, the Jumbo Sherman shouldn't be one uptier away from a leopard.

 

BMP-2M : from 8.7 to 9.0

It's flat out better than the BMP-3, and arguably the BMD-4, it being available for purchase by anyone is tanking it's stats, but it's more than capable to hold it's own in 9.0, and would still be even higher.

 

Yenot&Rosomacha : from 4.0 to 3.7

These two are frigates that are forced to spawn as bluewater flee despite having a worse armament than every single 4.0 destroyer, and even the T22 at 3.7 puts them to shame in term of firepower. They also happen to be slower than anything else. The high BR makes them more often than not uptiered, the poor speed, and weak armament turns them into target practice with no hope of achieving anything. Worth to note that when fully uptiered, they can meet the Emden, Krasny Kavkaz, Northampton, HMS Hawkins, and various other cruisers whose secondary armament alone outclass the Rigas.

Additionally, both Chikugo (an potentially the other Japanese frigates that have one) and the Rigas would benefit by losing their bluewater spawn, these ships are slow, underpowered, and as of right now, largely pointless due to being forced into matches against foes they can't hope to scratch.

[Metrallaroja 1,318]

Kikka finally 7.0, nice!

Su-11 still is 7.0, it should have been 7.3 since May! (after May there was no change in any spreadsheet of the su11) Please fix this issue:

Su-11 is currently overperforming at 7.0, it has the performance of a 7.3-7.7 plane because its engines are a big improvement over the su9 (7.0) in the tech tree.

Spoiler

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQNBSOHIAPvk-i95TdkABNar10NTruR0yZDl71Lddrb0l-_vcwYPublFfeDOaz9OoiB7uvsXjtd-BP-/pubhtml

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Metrallaroja

[Illusionyary 1,428]

Why is the Chi-Nu II being raised to 4.3? The Panzer IV G is 3.3 and is better in nearly every regard. The Panzer IV G has better armour, mobility, crew layout, reload and MGs. The only thing the Chi-Nu II has over it is raw penetrating power, however this is counteracted by uncapped shells, which often bounce off of sloped/rounded surfaces.

 

Please move the Chi-Nu II back to it's original BR of 3.7 and raise the Panzer IV G back up to 3.7, it has no business being 3.3 being a flat upgrade of the Panzer IV F2. The Chi-To's should both come down to 4.0 as they are equal to the Panzer IV H and the Chi-Ri II down to 4.7 as it is worse than the M6A1 occupying this BR.

The Ho-Ri changes are also insane when Germany has the Jagdpanther at 6.0, Ferdinand at 6.3 and the Jagdtiger at 6.7, yet somehow the Japanese equivalent (Ho-Ri Production) is going to the same BR as the Leopard 1? What. The Ho-Ri Prototype was fine at 6.0, especially as the Jagdpanther now sits at this BR, and the Ho-Ri Production should come down to 6.7, the same as the Jagdtiger.

[Stona 72,538]

Quick reminder:

 

If you want to suggest a change, please support it with arguments.

There is no need to ask "why XYZ on X.Y?". Answer is always same and already know. You like it or not, sorry.

[esapekkis 2,659]

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: Corsair F Mk II

Mode: SB

Suggested Change: 3.3 to 3.7 (SB EC2 to SB EC3)

Reason for change: You decided to move all of the F4U-1a (even the japanese premium one) and F4U-1D from 3.3 to 3.7 so it only makes sense to raise Corsair F Mk II too.

 

Vehicle: Me264

Mode: SB

Suggested Change: 4.0 to 5.0 (SB EC3 to SB EC4)

Reason for change: Way too good armament and bombload (combined with fast speed and climbrate) for EC3.

 

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

Edited November 25, 2021 by esapekkis

[TwitchyNGL 588]

I would argue the AH Mk 1 does not need to be 11.3. Starstreaks really aren't that amazing and any KA-50 or 52 with a brain can kill them before AH Mk. 1 gets in range. Not to mention against ground targets you're still coming up short as Hellfires last I used were hitting pretty inconstant. The issue where AH Mk. 1 could carry Starstreaks directly at the start of a match has been fixed which might have been affecting it's performance to a positive tune before. 

 

The Ratels continually moving down in BR shows how ill fitting they are to even be in the game, they're huge targets with no mobility and absolutely awful optics. No amount of lowering them in BR will really help as their weakness's will still be present. I suggest you double check the zoom as surely it should be the same as Elands if they use the same turret. You may as well keep them where they are or higher it's not seriously going to impact them.

 

Keep the Buccaneer S1 and S2 at their current BRs of 8.7 and 9.3 respectively. They're slow for their BR almost completely lack offensive capability and their only saving grace is decent bomb load however you just nerfed the earnings from base bombing and ground striking which doesn't make them profitable (Bucc S1 already was only profitable if you could bomb 2 bases, resupply then bomb 2 more before dying which is not easy).

 

Stormer HVM should be lowered from 10.3 to 10.0, it no longer has such a large advantage in missile velocity, it's accuracy is far nerfed because it's trajectory changes hugely in flight with each stage, it's ADAD is still acting like a radar for some reason, it's got the worst range for SAMs worse than the ones sitting at 10.0 (which all have I'd argue much more effective missiles all things considered). 

 

M4A3 (105)s could be raised to 3.0 or even 3.3, at 2.7 they are currently very strong with their armour and powerful HEAT shells, superior I'd argue to Panzer III N. 

 

Daimler Mk II could be moved up to 1.7 or 2.0, it's fast with good gun handling and a decent gun, it seems strange you treat Crusader Mk II to the 2.7 treatment when a close equivalent with same gun/ammo on wheels (better mobility / worse armour) sits at 1.3. Maybe a more apt comparison is the SARC Mk VI (2Pdr) which has nothing but an extra 2 30. Cals and marginally better speed but is a fair BR 2.3. 

 

In the same way, M8 Greyhound  should be moved from BR 1.0 / Reserve to BR 2.0, acts like a wheeled Stuart (same ammo as M3A3 and M5A1) but with the advantage of a M2 .50 Cal (which makes it already a great AA for 1.0, T17E2 with nothing but 2x M2 .50 Cals is 1.7) while it sits at reserve and Stuarts are (with admittedly better armour) at BR 2.7. 

 

Rate of Fire / Ammo suggestions:

 

Seeing as you're now doing these in balance changes:

Achilles: Has a weirdly long reload for an open topped 17Pdr, make it's reload match the Sherman Firefly or Avenger or Archer, All of these 4 17Pdr armed tanks have different reload speeds but for some reason the open topped Achilles is by far the longest and it makes it's practical damage output poor. 

 

M10: Same issue as Achilles so buff it's reload, strangely longer reload than the M6A1 and T55E1 (all 3 tanks using 3 Inch M7 cannon), though M10 suffers less for it as it's shells do good damage. 

 

Vickers Mk 7: Suggestion to buff either it's reload speed or it's ready rack size as currently it doesn't quite make sense. In a move I assume is to make UK unique Challenger 1s and 2s (using L11 and L30) have a better reload than Rh 120s and equivalents but a very small ready rack so the rate of fire only works for 3 or 4 rounds.Well the Vickers Mk 7 has for some reason the Rh 120s reload speed (using the same L11 as in Challenger 1 and derived from Chieftian mind you) but also has a 3 round ready rack.

 

Chieftain Mk 10: Suggestion for L23A1 and/or improved reload. This vehicle notoriously suffers at 9.0 as it's slow, has bad ammo (L23 has worse sloped pen than 105mm DM23, at 9.0 already the Leo 1A5 is FAR more meta with thermals, great speed and DM33 which is still a superior round to L23A1 plus better reload speed to boot) and no thermals. If you aren't going to make it a Mk 11 and give it Thermals then you may want to consider giving it L23A1 shot (better sloped penetration APFSDS as seen on Challenger Mk 2) or a Challenger 1 style reload speed or both. This would not be super unheard of either, there is something of a switchover at 9.0 area where tanks start getting faster reloads (like CM11 with the fast 105mm reload of 5 seconds AKA 12 rounds per minute). This is at the same time as Chieftain Mk 10 has the Chieftains 8 rounds per minute reload while even early L7 armed tanks it faces have a 9 round per minute reload. I know both sounds like quite a stretch but I have a strong belief that just giving it L23A1 wouldn't make the vehicle good enough to be popular based on some of these reasons.

 

Olifant Mk 2: Suggestion for the faster L7 reload of 12 rounds per minute rather than 9 and an increase in BR to 9.3 minimum. Frankly 9.0 is too low for a MBT with 2nd/3rd Gen CITV and Gunner thermals, the tank is already fairly slow and delicate for what it is so a better ROF might make it's firepower enough to put it back up to where it should be.

 

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by TwitchyTrooper

[MUXIAO 50]

JA37C

RB: from 11.0 to 11.3

Strong air-to-air radar with access to pulse doppler tracking

Edited November 25, 2021 by MUXIAO

[Rieskaruisku 506]

GROUND RB

USA

M18   5.7 -> 5.3

It have never been an issue to deal with. Can be killed easily and only people who have bad situational awareness will have trouble against it.

 

M4A2 105mm  2.7 -> 3.3

HE and HEAT got buffed. It's an armoured behemoth at 2.7 and can mow down most of it's opponents even with .50 cal. Make HEAT it's stock round and HE as alternative shell that can also be used.

It's a good alternative to accompany with the first 3.3 M4. This one just comes with more armor and high caliber "derp gun".

 

GERMANY

Kampfwagen Churchill 4.3 -> 4.0

Flat armor of 89mm and easily pennable lower plate etc. 57mm gun might have punch, but it's armor is somewhat debatable for 4.3 heavy.

 

Panther D  5.3 -> 5.7

German 5.3 could use a medium, but this thing doesn't belong there even with it's slow turret traverse.
 

RUSSIA

T-34 1940 3.3 -> 3.7

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. Reliable armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed these T-34s. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

T-34 1941   3.7 -> 4.0

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. Reliable armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed these T-34s. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

T-34 1942  3.7 -> 4.3

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. Reliable armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed these T-34s. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

T-34E STZ  4.0 -> 4.3

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. God like armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed these T-34s. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

T-34E  4.0 -> 4.7

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. God like armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed these T-34s. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

KV-1 (Zis-5)  4.3 -> 4.7

Excellent mobility, excellent slope modifiers against armor with it's shells. God like armor and versatile. Volumetric armor and shells buffed KV-1 tanks. If some AMX-13, Chi-Nu II etc. goes up, it is time to move these old ones also.

 

UK

Tortoise  6.7 -> 6.3

Slow. Out of meta. Massive cupola begs for APHE to mince it's crew. Literally nobody plays this vehicle anymore.

 

Churchill Mk.III 4.3 -> 4.0

Flat armor of 89mm and easily pennable lower plate etc. 57mm gun might have punch, but it's armor is somewhat debatable for 4.3 heavy.

 

 

JAPAN

Chi-Nu II 4.0 -> 3.7

Do not move it to 4.3 under any circumstance.Th gun starts to become useless around that BR because of all the angled armor it faces.

Slow and sluggish. Paper armor. High profile. Slow turret traverse. Shell lacks cap against targets which makes it bounce against even from slightest angle.

 

Chi-To  4.7 -> 4.3

Slow and sluggish. Paper armor. High profile. Slow turret traverse. Shell lacks cap against targets which makes it bounce against even from slightest angle.

 

Chi-To Late  4.7 -> 4.3

Slow and sluggish. Paper armor. High profile. Slow turret traverse. Shell lacks cap against targets which makes it bounce against even from slightest angle.

 

Chi-Ri II  5.0 -> 4.7

Slow and sluggish. Paper armor. High profile. Slow turret traverse. Shell lacks cap against targets which makes it bounce against even from slightest angle.

Auto-loader is for like what? Two shells? Please... FL10 sits at same BR with actual auto-loader and way more better gun.

 

 

ITALY

P.40 and P.40 "Leoncello"  3.3 -> 3.0

Slow. Unreliable armor. Terrible APCBC shell and it's best ammo is HEAT that pens 100mm. Yeah sure if M4 105mm gets to sit at 2.7, I don't see a problem of this going down.

 

Semovente 75/46 M43  4.7 -> 4.3

It's a "discount" Jagdpanzer IV with flat frontal armor that work on a paper maybe. Also it has only 3 crew.

 

 

SWEDEN
-

 

FRANCE

AMX-13-DCA  4.3 -> 5.0

I wouldn't call it the "IFV of 4.7", but sometimes it feels like a one. It's way too effective vehicle at 4.3. It can kill heavies easily and chew through rest of the enemies with ease. It also comes with ton of ammo.

 

 

AIR RB

Su-11    7.0 -> 7.3

It's just good. Like really good.

 

ITP  3.7 -> 4.0

Excellent armament and good overall performance. Raise it to 4.0 in RB also.

 

TIS MA 3.7 -> 4.3

I have hundreds of games with this plane. It wrecks stuff too easily in ground realistic and gets good climb with attacker spawn in air realistic. It's a force of nature in right hands.

 

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Rieskaruisku
Added some stuff

[nathanclawfish 642]

Could some of the early british jets be looked at please, the  sea venom and later meteors and especially the venom come to mind, as they seem to have been forgotten by the majority of the playerbase and as such their brs have not moved in years even when stuff like the sabres and mig 15s where lowered. 

 

 

Asside from that these br changes are more or less as expected, and for the most part seem like good changes (might as well just give the ebr the p shell and put it at the same br as teh amx-13 at this point and tear off that bandaid), only one that i find a bit odd is the chi nu going up but not the equivilent panzer 4 long 75s, as the panzer 4 is on par if not a little better than its japanese counterpart.  just glad to see the overall br is going up again, jet compression was out of hand so it is nice to see it getting a little bit of release

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by nathanclawfish

[SlowHandClap 510]

15 minutes ago, Stona said:

Quick reminder:

 

If you want to suggest a change, please support it with arguments.

There is no need to ask "why XYZ on X.Y?". Answer is always same and already know. You like it or not, sorry.

 

My reasoning for saying the A-5C should be higher than 10.0 is because of its loadout. It gets access to Matra R550s at 10.0, lower than any French jet (country of origin) whilst having a very strong flight model. These missiles are regarded by most as the best IR/FOX2 missiles currently available in air RB. To top it off it gets an airspawn as a strike aircraft, which further compounds this armament strength - enemy fighters are still low/slow by the time the A-5C is able to begin engaging them from above. I think it should be 10.3 minimum, perhaps even 10.7 considering the strength of its flight model vs the Jaguar A. 

[[email protected] 1,486]

A32A 

From 9.3 to 8.7

The flight performance is perfect for 8.7, and so are the loadouts.

J35D

From 10.7 to 10.3

If the Mirage III's get to go down to 10.3 with very similar performance, so does the Draken WITHOUT countermeasures in rank 7.

[LeChance 921]

For Arcade . . . . seems to be some left off the list - Bf-109 f-4 & F-4/trop to 5.0, Bf-109 F-1 & F-2 to 4.0, German La-5FN to 4.7, same for Russian version, Yak-1 to 3.3, Yak 1B to 4.3, Yak-9 to 4.3, Yak-9B to 3.7
Yak-9T to 4.3, Yak-9K to 4.3, Yak-3 to 5.0, Yak 9U to 5.0, Yak 9P to 5.7, I-185 to 5.3, ALL La-7's to 5.0 . . . . ..  yeah it looks like that when you compare what you play against in those BR ranges and what you see in the tech trees. Most of these planes were alright where they were before the last time they sped the game up, I am assuming that is to accommodate the high tier, high tech modern jet stuff . . . since that is priority over the poor measly prop planes in the game now. Just a tad bit more and we can go ahead and add all those cartoonie planes from the April Fool's Day event . .. .  with little animal faces and stuff. I did see that the ITP is going up one step . . . prolly justified, but I simply cannot understand how I see the above planes I mentioned, game after game after game just flying circles around everything else, and yes I literally mean flying circles with no concerns at all, no energy lose, obscene speeds . ..  it's crazy. They have taken a large part of the "game" out of Arcade air combat . . . .   it's just a head-on fest with spawns so far back(yeah they were moved back yet again on many maps) you now spend 30% of more of your time flying from spawn to the nearest point of action . . .  bye bye decent activity, it's gone on many maps now, regardless of what you do. It's just a shame how making all these moves based off some obscure/skewed player stats and/or other data with little or no regard to actual game play can be so far off what is actually needed to improve and balance the game . . . . . oh well, they never do anything to make the game easier to play it seems . . .  . when I see them LOWERING the BR for ANY SU plane . . . I know they do not consider game play one little bit when making these decisions . . . . pity

[Arakneo 854]

AMX 13 FL11 3.7-3.7 this thing is a m24 that loose its stab and its 12.7 for a lower profile, better  optics for way worse gun balistic it should not be put at an higher br than its counterpart, (and that s coming from my POV with more than 1000 battle with this vehicle

[_Timbs_ 128]

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 9.0 or perhaps 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 at High-G turns. And 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 it 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. 

 

Here are some other random vehicles that could get their battle ratings changed in Realistic Battles.

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.

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. 

 

Edited November 25, 2021 by _Timbs_

[Eila_Deker 123]

For RB

 

CL13A Mk5 from 9.3 to 9.0 reason it often fights jets wich are way better in everyway.

 

CL13B Mk6 in my eyes the most overtiered Jet in War Thunder yes it was the best once but thats long over it should be at 9.3 max because it cant do anything vs 10.7 jets

[Matt_82 1,096]

The Buccaneer S1 going to 9.0 is a bit silly. It has no offensive armament against aircraft. How on earth could it be considered more efficient that the various other 8.7 CAS that we see every match?