Jump to content

Planned Battle Rating changes, September 2022


OrsonES
 Share

Best answer

Thank you all for your feedback. 

 

We have now passed on all feedback for the devs to review :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cover_facebook_answers_developers_07a5fc

 

We continue to monitor the Battle Ratings of vehicles and their competitive capabilities. Below you will find a list of the changes we want to make in September 2022.

 

To open the Battle Rating changes list in a new tab, click here!

 

If you think we should make some additional changes or do not agree with listed changes, please support your suggestions with arguments!
We read all your feedback, so it can take some time to approve your post. Please be sure to stay on topic.

Thanks!

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 48
  • Sad 7
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • OrsonES changed the title to Planned Battle Rating changes, September 2022

Lets start with feedback to your BR changes in SB:

 

Seems like you forgot these :dntknw:

 

My suggestions for BR changes in SB for the next update:

 

Vehicle: MB.5

Mode: SB

Suggested Change: 4.7 to 5.0 (SB EC3 to SB EC4)

Reason for change: 

Post-war Super Prop with way too good flying performance for EC3

 

Vehicle: Wyvern

Mode: SB

Suggested Change: 4.7 to 5.0 (SB EC3 to SB EC4)

Reason for change: 

Post-war Super Prop with way too good flying performance for EC3

 

Vehicle: Mörkö-Morane

Mode: SB

Suggested Change: 1.7 to 2.3 (SB EC1 to SB EC2)

Reason for change: With the upgraded engine it has way too good flying performance for EC1

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 21
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • CL-13A Mk.5: should move down to 9.0BR from 9.3BR in ARB
  • F-86F-40/F-86F-40(ROCAF)/F-86F-40(JASDF): should move down to 9.0BR from 9.3BR in ARB

The reasons why the BR should be lowered on both aircraft are almost the same, but before I get to that, I need to touch on why the transition to 9.3 was made. The issue goes back to around 2018.

 

Jet RB MM was changed in the spring or summer of 2018 from being divided into NATO(US/Great Britain/Japan/Italy/France) vs Eastrn nations(Germany/USSR) to Allies(US/USSR/Great Britain/France) vs Axis(Germany/Japan/Italy) from WW2 for somehow.

 

At first glance, this may not seem like a problem to players who have never experienced this MM. However, instead of the Allies having "almost" useless bombers (B-57/Camberra/IL-28/Tu-4/Tu-14T/Vautour IIB), the Axis did not have a single bomber between 8.0BR and 9.0BR, so Jet RB players at that time were effectively playing at 8 vs 12. Of course, there were occasional German-Soviet matches/USA-Japan matches and fully mixed MMs in Jet RB, but most matches were Allies vs. Axis, and due to the difference in numbers of Allies teams and the M3 50cals problem described below, the top dog of the Allies teams at the time (F-86F-2/Hunter F.1/russian MiG-15bis and MiG-17) suffered.

 

Also, another problem occurred when all the aircraft of the enemy and friendly teams were BR 9.0 jets. First, look at the lineup of BR9.0 aircraft at the time.

 

USA(Allies)

  • F-86A-5
  • F-86F-25
  • F-86F-2
  • F9F-5
  • F9F-8
  • FJ-4B
  • FJ-4B VMF-232

USSR(Allies)

  • MiG-15
  • MiG-15bis
  • MiG-17

Great Britain(Allies)

  • Venom FB.4
  • Hunter F.1

France(Allies)

  • Vautour IIA
  • Vautour IIB

 

Germany(Axis)

  • CL-13A Mk.5
  • MiG-15bis(GDR)

Japan(Axis)

  • F-86F-30
  • F-86F-40

Italy(Axis)

  • Nothing because both G.91s weren't 9.0 at that time

 

The aircraft highlighted in bold and italic type are what were called top dogs at the time. If we focus on the allies 9.0 BR jets of the time, the F-2 Sabre, F-25 Sabre, Hunter F.1, MiG-15bis, and MiG-17 were top dogs, but the A-5 Sabre, F9Fs, and Venom were not their equal. However, the Axis team had the CL-13A Mk.5, which was the fastest Sabre in the game at the time, and the most maneuverable F-40 Sabre, plus the MiG-15bis and F-30 Sabre which is copy and paste. This means that there was not a single underpowered 9.0BR aircraft like the A-5 Sabre or F9F in the Axis teams at that time.  So, The Axis team's top dog back then, the CL-13A Mk.5, had a winrate of over 80% in the Thunder Skill.

 

Statistics of CL-13A Mk.5s from Thunder skill an  around January or February 2018(Pre MM switched to Allies vs. Axis)

Spoiler

Screenshot_20220828_134114.jpg


Statistics after MM was switched to Allies vs. Axis(September 2018 iirc)

Spoiler

Screenshot_20220828_134103.jpg


Also, the M3 50cals was very overpowered at the time, and instead, large caliber guns such as the 20mm (T-160, Hispano Mk.5), 23mm (NS-23, NR-23), and 30mm (ADEN, DEFA)/37mm (N-37D) were quite often sparked because of bug, thus added to the problem of the Axis team's tendency to win. If you want to know more about those days, I recommend you watch this video and topic.

 

 

Although months have passed since then and supersonic aircraft were implemented, the power creep was not as bad as it is now, and other than the F-100D, MiG-19s,T-2, and Javelin Mk.9, no supersonic aircraft had yet been implemented, so the CL-13A Mk.5 statistics were still good, so its BR was changed from 9.0 to 9.3. Around the same time (3 or 4 months ago from at that time, to be exact), Gaijin had the 2x AIM-9B loadout implemented for the F-40 Sabre, so its BR was changed from 9.0 to 9.3 as well. Up to this point, there were not many supersonic aircraft yet, and AIM-9B and R-3S were the predominant AAMs in the ARB, and the Shafrir that the Vautour IIA/IDF had was considered slightly "better", so the F-40 Sabre's move from 9.0 to 9.3 was still made sense. Also, since the F-25 Sabre and F-30 Sabre were 9.0 BR at the time, it made sense to move up the CL-13A Mk.5 to 9.3 BR, even though it would have raised another issue of having the same BR as the CL-13B Mk.6 (9.3) of the time. 

 

However, their BR problems slowly began to happen when the BRs of the A-5 Sabre and F-25 Sabre and F-30 Sabre moved down to 8.7BR. It still made sense for the A-5 Sabre to move to 8.7 BR itself, since it should not have had the same BR as the MiG-17 and F-2 Sabre, except for the problem of getting the F-84G and Sabre to face. However, since the BR of the F-25 and F-30 Sabre, which have exactly the same airframe as the CL-13A, has moved to 8.7 and has been sitting at 8.7 for a long time, even though it moved to 8.3 for a while, the CL-13A Mk.5 has a slightly "better" engine and a different BR of 0.7 should not be a reason. Also, there should be no reason for the F-40 Sabre to continue to sit at 9.3 BR in the same way, since the MiG-17AS, which could carry R-3S later, was implemented at 9.0 and continues to sit there currently with the BR unchanged for a long time. Also, power creep today has made the CL-13A Mk.5 and F-40 Sabre almost unplayable, as they are faced against MiG-21SMT/MF with R-60s, which are almost impossible to dodge without a flares, and F-5C spam quite often.

 

So... Why are they still sitting on 9.3BR??? Their performance is literally on par with the aircraft sitting at 9.0 BR and they should still be able to compete well with each other currently. Their BR was changed due to the unbalanced MM created by Gaijin, NOT because they were tremendously overpowered. Also, the current MM is virtually a fully mixed bag, and the problems that existed in the Allied vs. Axis MM have already been tossed out the window. Without what has happened in the past, they should have absolutely no reason to continue to sit on 9.3BR.

 

Of course, I am not suggesting that the CL-13A and F-40 Sabre be lowered to 8.7BR. If the BR were to be lowered they would be OP again. However, 9.3BR is just patently absurd.

 
  • MiG-21bis(RU): should move up to 11.3 from 11.0BR with R-60M in ARB

 

It is litearlly pointless to play it at the moment because German MiG-21bis has R-60M. It made sense, at least at the time, that the reason the R-60M was given for the MiG-21bis-SAU was because Germany did not have an aircraft equivalent to the MiG-23MLD or Phantom FGR.2. However, Germany now have MiG-23MLA  which is almost same as MiG-23MLD in the russian TT. Why russian MiG-21bis still not have R-60Ms?


Also, no 11.7BR even gen4 jets came out in the game??? Really?

Edited by Ayy_LMFAO
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4
  • Confused 5
  • Upvote 28
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here We Go Again...

Editing As I Go.

 

Undertiered (RB):

  • M4A3 (105): 2.7 => 3.0
  • Wyvern: 4.0 => 5.0 | Why Even Is It Down At 4.0 To Start With?? 600 km/h Turbo-Prop, Crapload Of Ordinance & 4x 20 mm's Shouldn't At All Be Facing Anything Lower Than 4.0
  • IJN Kako: 4.7 => 5.0 | It's Kinda Screwed Up How Kako's The Lowest Heavy Cruiser In The Whole Game, Dishing Out 203mm's At 4.7 Is Insane

Overtiered (RB):

  • IJN Hatsuharu: 4.3 => 4.0 / 3.7 + Place Before Yugumo | (It's About Equal / Worse Than Ayanami) Why In God Name Was The Hatsuharu Added In Her PRE-COMMISION Refit, Her Turrets Slowest As They Can Get, Barely Any More Firepower Than Any Japanese DD And Lacklustre Type 90 Torpedoes. 
  • IJN Shimakaze: 5.0 => 4.7 | Torpedoes, Isn't, Everything. The Moment These Torpedoes Are In The Water, The Only Thing I Can Rely On Is The Speed To Run Away From Combat, The 127mms Don't Hold A Candle At 5.0 And Get Outmatched By Faster Firing Cannons Like Those On American Destroyers, And Lack The Damage Carried By Being Limited To Pure HE. To Further Pull On The Torpedo Argument; Japanese Destroyers Come With An Average Total Of 16 Torpedoes (In 2 Salvos) Instead Of Shimakaze's Single Load 15, Yet Get Treated Differently (Yugumo At 4.3).
  • IJN Isuzu: 5.0 => 4.7 | She's Loaded With 3x Twin 12.7cm Guns And A Boat Load Of 25s, While Decent At Close Range Anti-Air, She Doesn't Provide Much Damage Output As A Cruiser, Equalling That Of Average Destroyers At This BR
  • F-86F-40: 9.3 => 9.0 | How Do 2x AIM-9Bs Warrant 0.7 More BR Over The Regular F-86F-30? It's Simply Insane.
 

Different Balancing Issues:

1. (Naval AB/RB) Frigates & End-Tier Coastal:

(Coastal End-Tier Isn't Even Consistent Across Nations, Where Italy Offers The Saetta (4.7 + Missles), Other Nations Offer Lacklustre Frigates (3.7-4.0 + Some High Fire-Rate <100mm), With BRs Colliding With Mid Tier Bluewater Even Though Not Being Able To Do Much Against DDs, Any Coastal Above 4.0 Just Doesn't Work As A Coastal Vessel As It Will Be Very Unlikely To See People Use Coastal From 3.7+, Being Able To Capture A Single Zone And Do No Significant Damage To Larger Vessels)
 

Frigates & End Tier Coastal Is Such A Mess And I Don't Get Any Of Its Reasoning Behind, As A Japanese Main, I'll Be Bringing Up These Vehicles, But This Drags On Into Other Nations Aswel, And Will Be The Further We Go Down More Vehicles For All.

1. End Tier Coastal Just Ends Up Becoming Starting Tier Bluewater AT THE RP COST OF BATTLESHIPS. 

  • Chidori: A Torpedo Boat (Just Like T-Class German Destroyers (Torpedoboat)), Misplaced Into The Coastal Tree Rather Than Blue Water
  • Shonan: A Coastal Defense Vessel (2x 120 mm And A Good Amount Of 25mm), With The Spawn Of A Destroyer, At Coastal Slow Speeds

Ps. To Unpopular Opinion: I Genuinely Think Shonan & Chidori Should Just Become Tier I Bluewater, With JDS Yugure & JDS Harukaze Taking The End Of The Line For Coastal Making The Coastal Tree Evolve Into The JMSDF, While Keeping The Bluewater Fleet IJN 

 

2. The Other End Of The Coastal Spectrum Is Frigates & Destroyer Escorts Which Don't Play Exactly Like Bluewater, But Still Gets A Way Too Far Spawn To Be Called Coastal

  • Chikugo, Akebono, Isuzu: At Best Get 2x 76 mm's But Come As A Destroyer Escort / Frigate, So Unrightfully Get Destroyer Spawn, Which They Can't Full Fill Their Duties As, Lacking Behind In Speed, And Getting Out Ranged & Gunned By Larger 120mm+ Guns At Long Range Without Much Counter Play
  • (Italian) Albatross, (Russian) Groza, (German) K2, FGS Köln, FGS Lübeck, ...: All These "Gunboats" Have The Same Issues, And Should Be Relabled And Rebalanced To Better Suit Bluewater - Coastal Balance.

 

My Suggestion Is To Add A Intermediate Naval Spawn, For All Larger Vessels, Other Vessels That Shouldn't Spawn Here Get Free Reign Over Defenseless Patrol Boats Just As Gunboats Did In The Past, These Ships Are (Among The Few:) (Main Concern; High Survival Damage Model)

  • USS Cyclone, USS Hoquiam (For Some Reason Gets Destroyer-Like Damage Model With PT Spawn - Extremely Resistant To Small Gun Fire)
  • LCS(L)(3)
  • Pr.206 (All)
  • MZ1, M-17, M-803
  • RN Gabbiano
  • Flower-Class
  • ...

 

2. (Simulator Ground) Differing Operating Countries From Alliance

As An Avid War Criminal Myself, Painting My Italian Sherman With American Tank Division Emblems & Flags, It's Irresponsible To Not Atleast Bring It Up. The Fact That Allied Italy & Fascist Italy Stay In The Same Axis Side With Both Vehicles Is Ridiculous, Captured Tanks Such As German/Finnish KV-1 Or Russian Pz.III (T-3) I Don't Mind, As They're In Fact, CAPTURED. But Lend-Lease Post-Axis Factions Simply Don't Fit The Bill In The Match Making And Make Simulator Ground A Chore To Play And By No Means Is It "Simulator".

To List Up The Problems:

Low Tier Sim Brackets (Allied x Axis | WWII)

  • (Allied / Post-Axis) Italy: M3A3, M24, M4A4, M4 Hybrid, M4 Firefly, M4 Tip, M36B1, M26, FIAT XXX, R3 XXX...
  • (Occupied / JSDF) Japan: M24, M16, M19, M42, M4A3E8, M36B2, ST-A1-3, Type 61, Type 60 SPRG, ...
  • (West) Germany: leKpz M41, Ru 251, JPz 4-5 (These Shouldn't Even Be Playable In Low Bracket Imo)

High Tier Sim Brackets (NATO x Warsaw | Cold-War)

  • (ROC) China: M48A1, M41D, M113A1, M60A3 (TTS), CM11, CM25
  • (GDR) Germany: BMP-1, MiG-15 / 21 / 23, Mi-24

 

Limiting The Decals You Can Place On Vehicles Is Honestly A Bad Solution As It Doesn't Really Solve Anything, Just More Loopholes To Jump Through To Commit To War Crimes. Just Placing Vehicles On The Right Alliance Would Solve Most Of These Problems.

Edited by ShimakazeChan

Smin1080p (Posted )

Please remember to spesifcally state which modes your reffering too when giving BR feedback.
  • Like 6
  • Upvote 22
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Merkava 2D battle rating change, since I have an unhealthy amount of battles using it, I feel like it is unreasonable. Its current firepower is way too lacking to face opponents at its new battle rating, especially in uptiers. I recommend the addition of M426 as a new type of ammunition to the vehicle to boost its firepower so it can be on-par with other vehicles of similar battle rating.

 

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 66
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question:

Yeah, we know that IS-2 with a 122mm gun kicks at 5.7; but why only PLAGF(PVA)'s IS-2 1943s are included in the change but not the OG Soviet ones? :017:

 

Edit: ah heck, misreading, IS-2 1943 of USSR included; my bad

Edited by MO_Blahajman
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fine with the changes except for 2:

 

Realistic Battles:

IS-2 should stay 5.7:

They are the counterweight to the German Big Cats and need to stay on the same BR as Tiger I E and Panthers G/A.

 

SK60B should stay at 7.3:

It carries 2x ATGMs which shouldnt be lowered to prevent those being used at BR 6.0 tanks - it quite low even on BR 7.3.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 6
  • Upvote 42
medal medal 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

  • Game Master

It is a welcome change for the most part. However...

 

Su-25/Su-25K

9.7→10.0

Personally the BR of Su-25 series need a rise as well, the all-aspect missile spam against other 9.0-9.7 should be suppressed.

 

IS-2 (1943) & Obj.248

Remain their current BR

The IS-2 (1943) and Obj 248 should stay where they were, the rise of stats partly credit to the BP challenge, not meaning the vehicles themselves getting any better.

 

XM8 AGS

9.3→9.7 with M774 added / 9.3→10.0 with M833 added

Why should XM8 stick to C76A1 round that it might never use while CCVL get M833?

 

M1A1

Changes of M1A1 is a bit weird, for it's still inferior to M1A1HC even with M829A1 added, better let it stay where it was and no new shell needed.

 

Skink

Remain 4.7

It's just a Wirbelwind with better turret protection and firepower endurance, is it really too good to stay at 4.7?

 

Merkava Mk2D

Go to 9.3 but with M413 (105mm DM33) or M426 (105mm DM63) round added

The Israeli can't fight TRUMS-T with DM23. The difference between Mk2D and Mk1 is quite minor, additional armor pack can't save it from modern APFSDS.

 

Type 59

A long waited change... finally! If only type 69 can get downtiered to 7.7 as well.

 

M60A3TTS (China)

8.7→8.3 / 8.7→9.0 with DM63 (TC84) added

Its role in Chinese 8.7 lineup is quite embarrassing, the constant uptier lead to a quite apparent conclusion that M735 is just not good enough against 9.3 and 9.7 beasts. It would be a decent addition to 8.3 lineup or given full capacity and join the 9.0 lineup with CM11 .

 

M41D

8.0→7.7

The 76mm APFSDS is pure pain due to horrible afterpen effect. The advantage of thermal sight and laser rangefinder won't be overwhelming over other 7.7 but would unquestionably be a decent addition to 7.7 lineup and enhance its performance.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the most of the changes.

 

Now, i going leave some suggestions for Realistic Battles ONLY:

 

T25

Suggested change: 6.3 to 5.7

After lose the stabilizer his performing drop significally, is not 6.3 material anymore.

 

Sherman M4A276 and M4A376.

Suggested change: 5.7 and 5.3 to 5.3 and 5.0.

Completely outclassed by his other nations counterparts like T-34 or Panthers, average armor with mediocre mobility a small downtier is well needed.

 

M47/KPZ M47.

Suggested change: 7.3 to 7.0

Those tanks are not much better than M46 and worse than M48, decreasing to 7.0 give the possibility of create a proper lineup for Germany and strong option to weakers M46 for US, moving to 7.0 is good for both nations.
 

Panzer 4H.

Suggested change: 3.7 to 4.0 and move again to rank 3.

Good armor, movility and fire power, this tank can perfectly do fine in 4.0 and Germany need a mediun tank in rank 3 becuase the only option is much worse J premiun version only. 

 

Leopard 1.

Suggested change: 7.3 to 7.7.

Very good firepower and mobility for 7.3 , another tank perfom extremly well in his old BR.

 

Jagdtiger.

Suggested changes: 6.7 to 6.3 or stay in 6.7 with reload speed change.

Terrible outdated tankdestroyer, his main adventage is his thick armor but due the compression lose this adventage practically in every battle, with HEATFS or even mouase guide ATGM in his BR there is no reason for stay in 6.7. The only way for stay in 6.7 is buff his reload speed.

 

Maus.

Suggested change: 7.7 to 7.3.

The great forgoten, this tank is just a old dinosaur is incompresible why stay in 7.7 when the are a lot of tank in lower BR can easy deal with his armor, there is no reason for leave in 7.7 anymore, specially whn similar tanks like IS3 or IS6 are in lower BR since long time ago.

 

VK45.01

Suggested change: 5.3 to 5.0.

Worse than Henschell Tiger in practically everything, very rare and much worse armor and turret rotation. In 5.0 this thank is far from be a problem, 80mm of flat armor are easly beat for anything at that BR.

 

T-34 mod 41.

Suggested change: 3.7 to 4.0.

This is overperforming since one year ago, near and over 70% win ratio since volumetirc armor change, this tank is a low rank clubber and need go up.

 

T-34 mod 40.

Suggested change: 3.3 to 3.7.

Right now this tank have 81% win ratio, lower ranks are completely dominated by soviets since volumetric armor changes and need some adjust now. If much worse panzer 3M (35% win ratio) can move to 3.3 this tank of course too.

 

KV-220.

Suggested change: 5.7 to 6.0.

This tank is one of the most and older clubber in WT, is blatantly undertiered since long time ago. 6.0 material, excelent armor, mobility and firepower. Stop this p2w please.

 

M26/ M26 Ariete/ M26A1

Suggested Change: 6.3 to 6.0

Reason for change: Very obsolete tank in comparission with another 6.3 M26E1 or Tiger 2 P, moving down to 6.0 those tanks more than probably they dont gonna create any balance issue and that BR they can breath a bit from constant 7.3 uptiers where are obsolete.

 

Churchill MK3/ Captured version.

Suggested Change: 4.3 to 4.0.

Is ridiculous move this tank to 4.3 when the overperforming KVs stay in 4.0. This vehicle is very overtired need go back to 4.0 where his armor and poor speed perform more better.
 

Edited by War_child85
  • Like 4
  • Confused 27
  • Upvote 26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that most of the changes are positive, but I would like to include the Chinese/Taiwanese M41D as a vehicle that should have its BR changed.

Very few people play the M41D which is likely why it hasn't happened yet (skewed statistics).

 

It is functionally comparable to the leKpz M41 which is BR 6.3 in RB. The APFSDS is inferior to the HEATFS and its stock engine power is 358hp instead of 442hp.

The only real advantage that the M41D at 8.0 in GRB has over the leKpz at 6.3 in GRB are thermals and LR, but it's also noticeably slower - while being a light tank, this is a massive detriment. It should ideally go down to at least BR 7.3 in RB, as it is overall inferior in-game to the ZBD86, which is BR 7.3 in RB.

 

It has no stabilizer, nor does it have a fast reload. The APFSDS is likely to penetrate but has very low damage which is a chronic issue with 76mm subcaliber rounds, and HEATFS will be used instead by most players with higher efficiency. Youtube videos have been made on the topic, as well. Such as the Spookston "The New Worst Tank In The Game" video.

 

Edited by Renamed82737
Forgot the LR.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 5
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G.91Y [RB]

9.3 -> 9.0

Reason: no countermeasures, no AAMs, no AGMs, no ballistic computer, subsonic;

G.91YS [RB]

9.7 -> 9.3

Reason: completely outmatched especially by relatively new planes, no countermeasures (literally 0), no AGMs, subsonic, bad AAMs (2 AIM-9B);

SIDAM-25 [RB]

8.3 -> 8.0

Reason: poor power-to-weight ratio (can't climb even a little), low amount of ammo, low range, no search radar, very low amount of apds shells (60 at max), no ap shells in stock belt (Not even SAPHEI-T), large profile, no armor, no NVD.

PS please do smth to Moffets/Helenas afk players spam in naval RB, idk maybe reduce multipliers or just make something to stop it...

 

 

Edited by _Condottiero_
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 52
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the SU-11 still the same BR? while ur nerfing planes like the a-10 which are fine and used mostly for the Brrrrt gun memes? Get your priorities straight the XP-50, Wyvern and SU-11 are blatantly overpowered up Br those and not planes that don't deserve. Also the SK60B had no problem in 7.3 the only thing it struggles with is the high repair cost. 

With kind regards

  • Like 2
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, seeing as M1A1 is receiving M829A1 and that CR 1 Mk.3 already has L26 at 10.0

 

- Leopard 2A4 and Strv 121: should receive DM33 as they're currently being left behind in the game's "meta" due to insufficient penetration as well as post penetration spall. The tank's armour is already underperforming, DM33 would at the very least give it a fighting chance in uptiers.

 

- Leopard 2PL: With M1A1 receiving M829A1 and with M1A1 AIM and HC both having M829A1/KE-W respectively plus T-90A and T-72B3 having 3BM-60 at 10.7, there is no reason to withhold DM53/63 from this vehicle at all now, it is also performing really badly due to DM43 grossly underperforming.

 

- Panther A (Soviet, French, etc): Lower their HP's to 600 since they are to be identical in that regard to the German one; otherwise, return 700hp engine back to the German one.

Edited by Columbina
  • Like 2
  • Confused 10
  • Upvote 23
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ShimakazeChan said:

Wyvern: 4.0 => 5.0 | Why Even Is It Down At 4.0 To Start With?? 600 km/h Turbo-Prop, Crapload Of Ordinance & 4x 20 mm's Shouldn't At All Be Facing Anything Lower Than 4.0

 

I will second this

Mode: Air RB

Vehicle: Westland Wyvern

Current BR: 4.0

Suggested BR: 5.0

 

Reasoning: Speed advantage in level flight over pretty much any aircraft at that BR or higher coupled with hefty external ordnance carrying capabilities plus 4x20mm Hispano Mk.5 cannons.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 13
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Type 59 and ZTZ59A to 7.7 are welcomed changes but I am a little surprised not to seee the 7.7 unstabilised ones such as the Tiran 4, the T-54(1947) and 1951 not go down too. at 7.3 the centurions mk 3 are powerhouses that can deal with them in my opinion.

All IS-2 to 6.0 is going to break some line ups but okay, Obj 248 at 6.7 is also understandable its really strong right now.

T-34s going up in BR when we all know the problem at this BR is the up armored KV-1s

 

Tons of 9.7s jets without flares except G-91YS and MiG-19s going down are probably getting mauled by AIM-9Ls and R-60Ms but somehow its not the Su-25 regular goint to 10.0 just like the A-10 does ( and its fine )

 

Overall not too bad from the ground side of things, 9.7 US line up justs stay as strong at 10.0. having some 7.7 in China ground is also good because 7.3 only BMP and M48 was rough and complementary to a 7.7 line up they are better than complementary to a 8.0line up.

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can agree with uptiering of A-10s only if you give the tech tree variant access to previous AGM-65 models.

The optics on D version are horrbile and I'd rather have the B version available.

 

And why are F-5As going down in BR but not F-5C? They almost identical.

Edited by CrossEyedN00b
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IS-2 changes shouldn't be happening, it's balanced at the br. Big gun with nice punching power but very long reload, armor which can be trolly at times but is mostly average and crew placement which means most of the time they're shot it's a 1-shot.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nice that the A-10 is going up now that the AIM-9L missile is fixed but how about moving the A-7D and A-7E down in BR a bit? they are worthless in air battles compared to the competition. The 7d deserves a 10.0 BR and the A-7E 10.3 simply because it has the thermal pod for ground battles. (in RB of course)

Edited by Knaagdier
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A10 Late should not be above 10.0, out of the pure fact that it would be constantly uptiered to fight 11.3 (F14 included)
Meanwhile the PTL02, WMA, AMX30RC and AMX-30B2 Brenus are 8.0-8.3 and should be 9.3 or at the very least 8.7 like the Roikat

All with laser range finders, thermal sights and APFSDS rounds, fighting 7.0-7.7 vehicles..

  • Haha 7
  • Confused 32
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see so many nice changes . 

and I am adding more. 

Realistic Battles:

A7D should go to 10.0

it somewhat is a su-25 with the same max speed and climb performance but with worse AA capability and it is also not that punishable as A-10 which is 10.3 now too .

other option is to give it the B variant of the Maverick .

 

Su-25 /k:

for air RB sake , only thing that keeps it at its leash is the F-5C spam at 10.3 ( I am the user come on) .

 

remove the air to air missiles from Z9E and move to 8.7:

so the best air to air missiles are in this things hands .the absolute lock range on 4 km of anything that flies, and anything that flies at that BR is a 90% kill . moving it up also does not help because it will question the 9.7 version .

EDIT

M1A1 stays at 10.3 and with no added round.

so I can't stand why go guys want to bring up US winrates so much while not giving it a new M1A2 . M1A1 with better ammo is outclassed by anything out there with armor being new to useless while having no good thermals over the new M1A1 AIM or M1A1 HC. let it be where it is.

Edited by ACOMETS
  • Like 1
  • Confused 5
  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add M413 or even M426 APFSDS to merkava mk2d,M111 is one of the worst AP round for BR 9.3,and without any competitiveness with other 9.3 MBT or even LT. It will be the worst rank VI premium pack vehicle in the game.

Edited by imgaijined
  • Upvote 18
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...