Jump to content

Planned Battle Rating changes, November 2022


Stona
 Share

Planned%20BR%20changes_84dec1e4fc8e70755

 

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 November 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 1
  • Haha 3
  • Confused 42
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Editing As I Go.

R2Y2 TO 8.0?!?!?  

I'm Genuinely Losing My Mind - Why - How - For What Reason?! It Has No Air Spawn, Flies Like A Brick And Get Labeled As A Fighter.

(Ps. R2Y2; R For Land-based Recon - At This Point You Can Just Rename It To R2Y2-J Or The Likes As Land-based Fighter/Interceptor.)

The Excuse Of 7.3 => 7.7 For "Line-Up With ST-B" Is An Absolute Joke For Warranty To Uptier, And Now The Rug Got Pulled On 7.7 Japan Which No Longer Exists, And Rather Than Actually Putting The R2Y2 Back To Where It Should Be (And Honestly Lower 7.0) It Faces 9.0? 

 

And Do I Have To Remind Everyone That, You Can Bring A Vehicle Up In BR? It Doesn't Limit Its Choice If You Play A Tank 8.0 Game, To Bring A 7.3 Jet - Why Does It Have To Allign Its BR To "Suit A Line-Up" - Line-Ups Are What Players Create Themselves...

 

Anyway, With The Few Vehicles That Get Listed Here.. There's Not Much Else To Really Comment About Other Than:

  • Good!:
    • E.B.Rs - Well Deserved, Very Nimble Vehicles While Being Lower To Their Tech Tree (Worse) Counterpart, The 1954 Should Honestly Be 7.0 As I Don't See A Reason To Spawn An AMX-13 Over It.
      • The EBR Mle. 1951 Might Be Stretching It Too Far For A Short 75 - Playing Like A More Mobile M24 - At An Absurdly Higher BR. 4.7 - 5.0 Should Suffice
    • Ikv 91 - The Combination Of Laser Rangefinding HEAT-FS Slinging Light Vehicle Finally Gets What It Deserves
    • Naval Separation Of AB & RB BRs
  • Neutral:
    • Anything I Haven't Mentioned I Don't Really Have A Comment On Or Want To Comment On
    • Sturmtiger Is Just A Very Finnicky Vehicle, I Can Use It At 6.3 And Up, But I Understand That It Shouldn't Be Equalized To A Tiger II (P) With How Vulnerable It Is. And Not To Mention The Ages It Takes To Reload The "Gun"
  • Bad!:
    • R2Y2 - I'm Actually Malding About This - Why Would I Take This Over A Kikka If I Want To Bomb, Or A J7W When I Wanna Shoot Down Literally Anything, An R2Y2 Isn't Gonna Outdogfight Or Speed Anything At Its BR, Atleast I Can Maneuver My Plane With The J7W.
  • Missing!:
    • Naval Separation Of AB & RB BRs
      • Japanese Destroyers Suffer From This Lack - There's No Single Reason I, Shimakaze Should Be 5.0 Facing Very Potent, Fast Loading USN Destroyers With 127 mm SAP and Base Fuse Ontop Of Having Fragemention Armour - While The Only Thing I Can't Even Rely On In RB Are A Meagre 15 Torpedoes That Come And Go.
      • FOR RB:
        • Shimakaze - 5.0 => 4.3
        • Kiyoshimo - 4.7 => 4.3
        • Akizuki - 4.7 => 4.3
        • Yuugumo - 4.3~
        • Yuudachi - 4.7 => 4.3 ~ 4.0
      • Hatsuharu - 4.3 => 4.0 ~ 3.7  ALL Modes (SHE'S IN HER PRE-COMMISION FIT - With The Worst Turrets Available And Very Lacklustre Torpedoes)
        • If You Want To Keep Hatsuharu In Her Pre-Fit - Make Her A Tier I Before Or After The Ayanami - It's The Biggest Joke Of A DD In The Japanese Tree As Of Current.
        • In My Full Opinion She Should Be In Her Regular Commision Fit - Pretty Much Being A Tech-Tree Equivalent Of The Yuudachi.
    • M4A3 (105) (All): 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
 
Quote

 

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:

- Sweden / Finland I Don't Even Wanna Start About It - Finland Fought Both Sides And Bought From Both Sides - The Swedes Didn't Even Fight A War (Atleast They're Rather Clear In Aligning Towards Allied / NATO) - Only Drawback Being The Strv m/41 Being A Solid Copy Of The Pz. 38(t) With APDS At Its BR (Which Is A Whole Different Topic)

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
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 16
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 24
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame the Tortoise is not being lowered too.

 

Of the two (FV4005) the Tortoise was worse and hardly played at all, but hey if a 40 sec reload German with strong armour and decent speed can drop to 5.7 instantly I'm sure a much weaker, 40 sec reload, no armor, no speed, (that has been asking for a small drop for YEARS) should be OK at 6.3 (finally).

 

Tortoise can be penned by anything, uses solid shot, and is one of slowest in game (has severe weakspots from every angle from normal vehicles much lower).

 

Surely if a new Premium spammed by all can instantly drop so can both the vehicles that are still stuck in 6.7 limbo (JT and Tort).

 

 

Edited by CoffeeBean100
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 8
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harrier GR3 is very much the same plane as US AV8A and AV8C. Those planes should be uptiered too in Air RB.

 

Su25 should have also gone up. All aspect missiles that cannot realistically be dodged have no place at 9.7. How can planes like Sabre deal with them? The only option seems to be to leave the game in uptiers, or play like a passive rat.

 

To this is connected the Mig19s downtier. This is a bandaid to the missile mobiles ruining that whole BR. However, the flight performance of Mig19s is so good that it absolutely shouldnt be 9.3. The real solution here is decompression (adding at least 1BR extra, so 12.3) and uptiering of all undodgeable without flares missiles. The second step would be balancing the decompressed game.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 50
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R2Y2s going to 8.0?? They shouldn't be that high. They were already not that good in 7.7 after the engine nerf.

 

And please stop nerfing I-16s. They shouldn't be facing Bf 109 G-2 or P-51D. Also I-16 type 17 has very underpowered engine compared to type 27 and type 28, but getting nerfed with other 2? Why?

Edited by stuka2689
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 34
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ShimakazeChan said:

R2Y2 TO 8.0?!?!? I'm Genuinely Losing My Mind - Why - How - For What Reason?!

Guns just like Ta152C3

 

F7F-1 and F7F-3:

With the gun nerf they will keep underperforming at 6.3, please rework their engine and give them a historical buff:

 

F7F-1:

  1. WEP Power at High Ram  676kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2650HP at SL-3400 feet / Power drops from 2650HP at 3400 feet to 1850HP at 12000 feet
    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1850HP at 12000-18000 feet / Power drops higher
  2. WEP Power at Zero Ram 0kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2370HP at SL to 1850HP at 6000 feet 
    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1850HP at 6000-13000 feet / Power drops higher
  3. 100% Power at High Ram 660kph-700kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2300HP at SL-7500 feet / Power drops from 2300HP at 7500 feet to 1600HP at 16500 feet

    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1600HP at 16500-23500 feet / Power drops higher

  4. 100% Power at Zero Ram 0kph:

    1. LOW BLOWER: 2300HP SL-700 feet / Power drops from 2300HP at 700 feet to 1600HP at 11000 feet

    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1600HP at 11500-17500 feet / Power drops higher

 

For in game implementation taking in count some game limitations:

F7F-1 corrected to match AEL-999 and fuel 115/145.

Afterburning boost = 1.155

image.png

image.png

 

 

F7F-3:

  1. WEP Power at High Ram  676kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2650HP at SL-3400 feet / Power drops from 2650HP at 3400 feet to 2270HP at 8000 feet
    2. HIGH BLOWER: 2270HP at 8000-13000 feet / Power drops higher
  2. WEP Power at Zero Ram 0kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2370HP SL to 2270HP at 1000 feet
    2. HIGH BLOWER: 2270HP at 1000-6400 feet / Power drops higher
  3. 100% Power at High Ram 660kph-700kph:
    1. LOW BLOWER: 2300HP at SL-7500 feet / Power drops from 2300HP at 7500 feet to 1700HP at 15000 feet

    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1700HP at 15000-22000 feet / Power drops higher

  4. 100% Power at Zero Ram 0kph:

    1. LOW BLOWER: 2300HP at SL-700 feet / Power drops from 2300HP at 700 feet to 1700HP at 10500 feet

    2. HIGH BLOWER: 1700HP at 10500-16500 feet / Power drops higher

 

For in game implementation taking in count some game limitations:

F7F-3 corrected to match AEL-999 and fuel 115/145.

Afterburning boost = 1.155

1965HP at 100% High Blower for 2270HP WEP High Blower

Spoiler

image.png

image.png

image.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

And make them cool better as it was in real life: 5 minutes below 260C at 100% with closed cowl flaps.

unknown.png

 

Edited by Metrallaroja
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 23
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it's a godsend that the A model Starfighters are going down in BR yet curious why not the C model as well? As it ain't got much going for it but a few ground attack stores and a weaker engine. 

 

I'd wish the devs would focus more on vessel BR changes as there's so little changed with these posts yet many vessels should have BR's dropped and raised so to aviod the issues some suffer notably frigates. 

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 6
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

17 minutes ago, Metrallaroja said:

Guns just like Ta152C3

 

Ok And? What Kind Of Argument Is That? It Doesn't Have A Platform To Make Use Of Them?

And Doesn't Even Get AP Like The Ta 152's AP & HVAP

 

It's Among The Worst Comparisons You Can Make For The R2Y2 - Not Even In The Same BR Bracket Or Comparable Playstyle? An Me 262 Would've Sufficed To Be Compared To.

 

  • If I Want The Guns - I Play The J7W1. (Which I Rather Play At 11.0 Than Play An R2Y2 At 8.0) - And Again, Doesn't Come With Any Kind Of AP
  • If I Want The Platform (Let's Say For The Bomb Or Just Jet Engines) - I Play The Kikka, Being Arguably A Much Better Plane At The Cost Of Limited Ammo
Edited by ShimakazeChan
  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EBR series endlessly being nefed....

1. 1951 version being 5.3 with short 75mm(Not even APCR)is just absurd. It shouldn't be facing the Tiger 2 with short 75mm!

2. 1954 version was fine at 6.3. It also doesn't even have APCBC shell compared to AMX 13.

3.1963 version going 7.3 is not unacceptable but I see no reason to nerf it when similar AML-90 is 7.0 and better Ru 251 is 7.3.

Edited by stuka2689
  • Upvote 24
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB feedback (updated)

 

Air:

 

R2Y2 (all) --> stay 7.7

8.0? 

They are slow, compress badly and have to take off from the runway.

8.0 is in no way justified, 7.7 was already stretching it for the V1 and V2.

 

P-47D-16-RE: 4.0 --> 3.7

Objectively the worst P-47 in game, D-22 with a worse propeller and thus inferiour flight performance in every metric by a few %.

If the D-22 goes 3.7, so should the overall worse D-16.

 

Ta 152 C-3: stay 6.0

This plane is already overtiered.

Bad climbrate (airspawn not enough) and basically the worst turnrate of any single seat fighter in the entire game.

Not fast enough to run away from the majority of its opponents either.

 

Me 262 A-1a/U1: 7.3 --> 7.0

Heavier and thus worse performing than the regular 262 which is already significantly outclassed at 7.0

 

Cl-13 Mk.4: 8.7 --> 8.3

Objectively the worst Sabre in the game, same engine as the Mk.5 but worse agility (missing leading edge slats)

 

Cl-13A Mk.5: 9.0 --> 8.7

A whole 6-7% thrust increase over the F-25 and F-35 Sabres, otherwise completely identical.

No missiles, better wings or better armament (F-2 and F-40) to warrant a higher BR.

 

Cl-13 Mk.6: 9.3 --> 9.0

While it's the best Sabre in game performance wise, it still only has .50 cals and AIM-9B which are basically useless at this BR, especially since Mach 2 jets with much better missiles and flares are the same BR!

 

Su-11: 7.0 --> 7.7

Absurd performance.

It is (significantly) superiour to every 7.0, 7.3 and even some 7.7 and 8.0 jets.

There is absolutely no justification for this things current BR.

 

Su-25 (both): 9.7 --> 10.0

Should not be lower than the A-10s, they are simply superiour.

Significantly better flight performance and more and better armament options.

Also, all aspect missiles should not be anywhere close to 9.7.

 

Ground:

 

Radkampfwagen 90: 9.7 --> 9.3

It has nothing going for it, even in its own tech tree TAM 2C and Leopard 2AV/2K/PT-16 are way more competitive.

Comparable light tanks at or even below it's BR have autoloaders, gen 2 thermals, better gun handling, better mobility or even a combination of those.

The mobility is only average for a light tank at 9.7 but it has none of the other key features comparable vehicles have.

The Rooikat 105, Centauro and Type 16 the same firepower, better gun handling, thermals but a bit worse mobilty at a lot lower BR.

 

Ferdinand / Elefant: 6.7 --> 6.3

They were fine at 6.3.

At 6.7 basically every opponent has over 200mm of pen and that even with APHE, not speaking of the large amount of HEAT-FS and APDS.

They are very slow and since they don't even have a ueable armor advantage over the Tiger II and also the Jagdtiger, it completely negates the point of losing the turret but getting thicker armor in return.

 

BMP-2M: 9.3 --> 10.3

Best IFV in the game, fast firing gun with APFSDS, excellent mobilty and gun handling, best ground based ATGMs in the entire game with four ready to fire on the move with a stabilized launcher.

Gen 2 thermals as well.

 

2S38: 9.7 --> 10.3

Extremely powerful with aircraft tracking, proxy fuse, high firerate, high pen APFSDS and good accuracy + gen 3 thermals

 

Rooikat 105: 8.7 --> 9.0

All comparable armored cars (Centauro, Type 16, ZLT 11) are 9.0.

RKW 90 is 9.7 and doesn't even have thermals.

 

WMA301: 8.3 --> 8.7

Good firepower with thermals.

Once again other armored cars are way higher im BR.

 

Balance suggestions (soft stats/ammunition):

 

Maus/E-100: reload time 23,6 sec --> 20,5 sec (IS-6)

With the Maus still being 7.7, it could really need a slight buff in firepower since unlike other heavy tanks like the IS-3, IS-4, M103 or Conqueror it really is a "heavy" tank without any tactical mobility (similarly to the T95).

 

Jagdtiger: reload time 23,6 sec --> 19,4 sec (T34, Sturer Emil)

The Jagdtiger has two dedicated loaders for its two-piece ammo, because of this the reload should be faster than the Maus/E-100 and significantly faster than IS-3 and IS-4 with their cramped turrets and only a single loader.

The Sturer Emil loads the exact same ammo into a nearly identical gun in 19,4 sec with just a single loader!

 

Tiger II 10,5cm: reload time 20 sec --> 16,2 sec (T29)

Two loaders for 105mm two-piece ammunition, same as on the T29 yet slower for some reason

 

Marder 1A1: add DM63

20mm HVAP is not even able to kill most light tanks from the front.

It already has the worst ground based ATGMs in the game and only four of them with relatively long reload and very limited launch angles.

It should at least have some firepower, the BMP-1 not only has far superiour missiles but also a gun capable of engaging every other tank frontally.

 

Marder 1A3: add MILAN 2

Same as above, MILAN is basically the worst ground based ATGM in game and it has quite a bit below average mobility as well.

The gun is also sub par so it should at least have the slightly improved missiles.

Edited by NoodleCup31
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 6
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 62
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

moving up the Harrier GR.3 and not the av8A/C is an absolute joke, the aircraft are all virtually identical except a few minor differences.
while it cant be compared to the av8A due to the premium bonuses the TT av8C has: a lower repair cost that the GR.3, better SL and RP modifiers than the GR.3, unnoticeably different flight performance, and the av8s get better payload options.

in what regard can you justify up-tiering one of these planes without the rest?
unless the av8A/C are planned to go up as well and have yet to be implemented on this list for whatever reason (even though I believe all the current 9.7 harriers should stay at 9.7, considering the Su-25 along with other select aircraft are allowed to continue to ruin the 9.7 BR range) there is no justifiably reason for only the GR.3 to move up to 10.0
seems like a case of pandering to US mains and showing no regard to a minor nation again.

 

Edited by mrbin2468
typos
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 15
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive got to say all EBR moving up at once I very much disagree with.

 

M41D should go down in RB too

Su25 should go up to 10.0 in RB too.

 

Still nothing to the dreaded Su-11.

 

The L-62 ANTI-II at rank III and BR 2.7 is grossly overpowered and I have been abusing it for my dailies and I honestly think it should change to 3.3 or to rank II. ( or both )

 

 

  • Upvote 8
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Air RB, these changes are unnecessary and some of them are unreasonable.

1. The players really need a BR decompression for 9.0-11.3 rather than lowering some supersonic jets. The ideal top BR should be 12.0 now.

2. La9 should be 5.7, certainly its performance cannot match f4u4b or ta152, la-11 should be 5.0, just like 190d9.

3. All R2Y2 keep 7.7. Su11 should be at least 7.7, it is too overpowered at 7.0.

Edited by Magician_Yang
  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F8U-2, F-8E -> Foldered

 

OR

 

F-8E -> 10.7 (recieves RWR)

 

I would like to suggest that the F8U-2 and F-8E be foldered at the end of rank VI, and the F-8E's repair cost be reduced to reflect such, unless the F-8E recieves RWR (Would be a giga chad move, and would warrant a 10.7 BR Jump and holding its position as the first rank VII, as it both has better wings, an engine power edge, and weapons edge over the F8U-2, which could warrant such a change to occur).

The F-8's are both 10.3's, and are neigh identical in flight perfomance and find themselves being overlooked by grinders looking to get the F-14, making researching the F-8E a complete waste of time for those not willing to play the beast of a plane that it is. This is the same case as found in the F-86A-5 and F-25 Sabres in rank V, where there is almost no change in performance to warrant the other being placed next in line in the tree.

Edited by littleleeches
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 4
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should raise the top br again, to either 11.7 or 12.0. That way anything between 9.0 and top can be spaced. We have the F-14 dominating 10.3-11.3, making 10.3 planes not that usefull. Yet, 10.3 planes in a downtier dominate it. 

 

EBR's going up again, yet the 1954 is still a rank 3? Could be a rank 4 at this point.

 

Where are the Su-25's? They should be 10.0 or 10.3 at least. 

 

Harrier GR3 going up is good, did you forget about the AV8's. You see more of them anyway.

 

Jaguar GR1A would be useless at 10.3, as it would not have a good lineup in GRB. Its not that good in Air RB either. Britain has no 10.3 tanks, just the Stormer SPAA. So unless the top BR's for all game modes goes up to 11.7 it should not go up. 

 

Sturmtiger going down is not bad, don't see it as game-breaking. Does make for more fun line-ups.

 

Maybe move the Maus and IS-4 down? to 7.3? theres a lot of APDS and HEAT(FS) at 6.7-7.3 so why not. Armor doesn't really matter then. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 15
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GR.3 same as AV-8A / AV-8C, why is GR.3 only going up?

Put them all up or leave it as it is.

 

H8K3 (4.0), should be moved from tier 2 to tier 3, It has a higher battle ratting than over half of tier 3 bombers.

  • Upvote 10
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some changes that I can't understand

 

Aircraft 

Harrier GR.3-What is the difference between AV-8A/C and Harrier GR.3? Cancel the nerf of the Harrier GR.3 or also nerf the AV-8A/C

R2Y2 Kai series->These airplanes loose the competitveness when they loose the air spawn. I think 7.7 is enough, and also they are important airplane in japan's 7.7 ground realistic battle.

 

Ground Vehicle

EBR series-Why nerf the EBR again? They nerfed enough already.

AMX-50 (TOA100)-In 7.7, there is T-54 series, M60, M103, Centurion mk10, OF-40. I cannot understand why  AMX-50 (TOA100) should be same br with them. Even Leopard 1 is 7.3. nerf is not reasonable.

 

BR change suggestion

 

Ground Vehicle

BMP-2M 9.3->more than 10.3

BMP-2M is the best IFV of the game. It can shoot 30mm APFSDS very fast and 9M133 Kornet can kill the top tier rank tanks. It should be nerf the more than 10.3

 

2S38 9.7->10.0

2S38 can shoot the APFSDS, APCBC, HE-VT very flexibly. And 57mm HE-VT with Tracking and 57mm APFSDS make the 2S38 as Anti All vehicle not a light tank or SPAA. So, I think they should be nerfed.

 

Ariete/Ariete PSO 10.7->10.3

Now Merkava 3 series shoot the M322 in 10.0 and their mobility and sight is also good. So, I think Ariete and Ariete PSO can go to lower BR

 

OTOMATIC 10.7->10.3? 10.0?
OTOMATIC do not have much advantages compared with 2S38 or other 10.7 vehicles. Fast reloading speed 76mm gun is pretty attractive but that is also limited because of 12 rounds APFSDS. So, I think 10.3 or 10.0 is appropriate BR.

 

M60A3 TTS(US)-Give the M833

Other nation's 9.0 tanks now use the powerful APFSDS M426(DM63) such as Olifant Mk2, Magach 6C and CM11. If we compare these tanks with M60A3 TTS (US), M774 is not enough ammunition. So, if you guys give the M833 to M60A3 TTS (US), that tank will get more competitiveness in 9.0 battle.

 

Chieftain Mk.10-Give the L26 

When the Chieftain Mk.10 released, it have not bad APFSDS and good turret armor. But now, because of low performance of L23 APFSDS and low mobilty, Chieftain Mk.10 loose its competitiveness in the 8.7~9.7 battle. So, If Cheiftain Mk.10 got L26, it's competitive ness will recovered slightly.

 

Air Vehicle

A-5C 10.0->10,3

It is time to nerf the A-5C. The only weakness of A-5C was lack of the CCIP or LGB, but now A-5C got the CCIP and also Jaguar GR.1A  is going to nerf to 10.3. So I think it is time to nerf the A-5C.

 

MiG-23MLD/MLA-Give the R-60M

When the MiG-23MLD/MLA released, They did not get the R-60M because of balance. But, after the F-14A Early and Mirage 2000C released. They are not a powerful aircraft anymore in the 11.3 air battle. So, If they get a R-60M, it will be much better than now.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by nanawo_akari_
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 25
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to feel like I'm being trolled.

 

For ages, the community has been calling for a decompression of the battle ratings so that aircraft that are far apart in time and/or technology don't have to compete against each other.

However, these BR changes, especially in the air tree, are hard to understand because in many ways it reinforces the compression problem.

 

With the F104A, we now have another supersonic aircraft that can play cat-and-mouse with 8.7 aircraft. Worse, due to its immense climb rate, it can only be effectively countered if the pilot makes serious mistakes.

 

The Su-25k with its all-aspect missiles (R60MK) remains at 9.7 in RB? R60MK... which otherwise only exist on BR 11.x aircrafts? You can't be serious. 

 

R2Y2... why on 8.0? How is it supposed to compete against 9.0 aircraft in a full uptier, where almost all of which have air-to-air missiles and some of which are more than twice as fast and have at least double to triple the climb rate?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 20
medal 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

BMP-2M 9.3→10.0 and above (RB)

There's already some discussion on how absurdly strong this thing with multi guidance missile with fire-on-move capacity is. Here's another side of BMP-2M being too overpowered to stay 9.3:

The 9M133FM-3 with effective range of 10km and proximity fuze is lethal to even the most advanced helicopter, not to mention in 9.3 the BMP-2M is mostly fighting against unity choppers like UH-1. Things go even wilder with the addition of aerial target tracking FCS, turning the BMP-2M into sort of mini-ADATS. Moving it to 10.0 would save other 8.3-9.3 vehicles for their own good.

FYI: most opposing helicopter you might encounter in 9.3 battles would be UH-1 with I-TOW, Bo-105 with HOT (3.75 and 4 km range), or even Alouette with AS.11.

 

2S38 9.7→10.0 (All game mode)

The overall efficiency of 2S38 is too overwhelming to be bear. Just make a simple comparison with the Strf 9040C or Lvkv 9040C and you will see where the problem is:

2S38 punches harder: 3UBM22 has more penetration, better ballistic characteristics and after-pen effect than poor 40mm sabots, while 3UO8 is way more powerful against aerial targets as well thanks to the caliber (radar helps, but not helping much against helicopter hovering at tree level).

2S38 maneuvers faster: The power-to-ton ratio of 2S38 is 23.3 hp/t while the Lvkv got 19.3 hp/t, not to mention the 2S38 is a premium vehicle with every part installed upon purchase.

2S38 is more survivable: the unmanned turret layout and LWS significantly increased the general survivability of the vehicle while the Swedish counterpart could be easily taken out by drones and other threats.

(Funny enough, the 2S38 is only 0.4 above the Begleitpanzer 57 while getting a whole brunch of fancy stuff like APFSDS, LWS, Gen II thermal and target tracking FCS.)

 

The 2S38 is a balance breaker and trouble maker in its current BR range with extremely superior capacity whether used as light tank or SPAA. It moves faster, punch harder and be way more survivable against helicopter and drones. The SIDAM 25 (Misteral) and Lvkv 9040C are like innocent kids compared with it. Things goes only worse when combined with BMP2M, making Russian 9.7 lineup a truly flesh mill for CAS and helicopter of other faction. The power creep must be suppressed.

 

XM8 9.3→10.0 with M833 added (RB)

The logic is simple, if the experimental CCVL can get M833 rounds, there's no excuse prevent the latter XM8 gain access to it. The C76A1 is neither historical for the vehicle nor being any good in terms of penetration and after-pen effect.

 

M60A3 TTS (China) 8.7→9.0 with DM63 added or 8.7→8.3

Once again, this thing dose not suit 8.7, better given full capacity and join the 9.0/9.3 lineup.

 

Type 69 IIA add domestic APFSDS

Making it as competitive as T-55A

 

Su-25 / Su-25K 9.7→10.0 (RB)

Please, no all-aspect missile spam against other 9.0-9.7. The sabre series are not capable of handling enemies like this.

 

Jaguar GR.1A stay 10.0

Lift the Jaguar to 10.3 not only would ruin the British 10.0 lineup but would make it get uptiered into top tier battles more frequently. It performs no better than A-5C in terms of aerial battle in any way.

 

Harrier GR.3 stay 9.7

There's no point in making it 10.0 if AV-8A, generally the same aircraft but with MORE flares, stay 9.7. It just doesn't make any sense.

 

Harrier GR.7 stay 11.0

The only advantage of the aircraft is AIM-9L, literally every other aspect of the plane are inferior to real top tier fighters. What's the point of making it 11.3 if it can be easily outmatched by a good old F-5C?

(Separate ground BR from air battle ones would be another solution. Like 10.7 in air and 11.3 in ground RB.)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 42

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...