Posted January 24 Thanks for you feedback everyone. We have now passed all comments onto the developers for them to check out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Stona 71,101 Report post Posted January 23 Based on collected feedback regarding ground vehicles, we have decided to make additional changes that consist of transferring some of the top and pre-top ranked vehicles to a higher level. This change does not apply to all top ranked vehicles. Based on the results of the change in performance efficiency, further adjustments to the BR (increase or decrease) will be carried out for units affected by the change and also for units that also haven’t changed rating at that time. It has also been decided to abandon some of the points regarding the reduction of BR in AB for vehicles with HEAT shells with high penetration at their rank. Except for the Ikv 103 for which the high penetration of the HEAT shell at a relatively high rate of fire for similar guns is compensated with poor ballistics, insufficient protection and mobility. The alternative to changing the rate of fire of the Type 69-II G was to increase its BR to 8.7, the current efficiency of the unit is much higher than the efficiency of similar vehicles at the same rank (for example it exceeds the efficiency of the Swedish Strv 121). The BR of the Type 69-II G decreased in May from 8.7 to 8.3 and the return of the old BR is currently not advisable as the decrease of fire rate will allow this vehicle to remain at its current BR. Since the game session creation system in aircraft SB is different from other game modes, changes in aircraft SB require additional research and statistical collection. Changes in this game mode will be announced separately. We don’t plan to adjust Battle Ratings for such vehicles as, for example, 2S38 or BMP-2M. Due to the general revisiting of the upper limits of BRs and further possible adjustments via their combat efficiency, massively reported vehicles (2S38, BMP-2M, CV90105, etc.) will be thoroughly monitored before the next session of BR corrections. In addition, we don’t plan to revoke the BR adjustments for the Ariete MBT family, however certain improvements in their combat efficiency are expected in the upcoming game major update. To open the Battle Rating changes list in a new tab, click here! Aircraft rank changes In the “Apex Predators” update, we added several new aircraft of rank VIII and as announced subsequently, we will be moving some rank VII aircraft to rank VIII: F-14A, MiG-23MLA, MiG-23MLD, MiG-27K, Harrier GR.7 and Mirage 2000C-S5. We also will be moving the F-104S from rank VI to rank VII. The aircraft transfer will take place with the release of the planned BR changes. The conditions for opening new aircraft ranks will also be adjusted to comply with the general rule for opening new ranks. Germany - for opening of rank VII aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank VI has been adjusted from 3 to 4. Italy - for opening of rank V aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank IV has been adjusted from 5 to 6. For opening rank VIII aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank VII has been adjusted to 2. Sweden - for opening of rank III aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank II has been adjusted from 4 to 6. For opening rank V aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank IV has been adjusted from 5 to 6. For opening rank VII aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank VI has been adjusted from 3 to 4. 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! 3 3 9 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... RytisLTU1 2,523 Report post Posted January 23 11.3 for ground vehicles is a great change!!! Love seeing Su-11 going up as well. Another great change is finally PTL02 and WMA going up! Also nice to see M48s staying at 7.3, with M48A2C going up to 7.3, could we get stock APHE instead of APCR? 2 11 16 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Ub3rshadow 785 Report post Posted January 23 Incredible thought here, but maybe instead of moving more supersonics down to 9.3 so that they can obliterate Korean war-era jets, you should move the planes carrying all aspect missiles, like the premium Su-25 and premium A-10, up in BR! That sounds wonderful, like it would solve a lot of the problems plaguing this BR that won't be solved by moving a supersonic without flares to 0.3BR below said all aspect missile carriers! The entire playerbase has been complaining about the premiums carrying all aspects since they've been introduced. They've been a persistent plague on the matchmaker, and yet Gaijin keeps acting as if they should be balanced like air superiority fighters and not the strike aircraft that they actually are. You're going up to 12.0 this BR update. All of the 4th gen fighters are going up, moving a Su-25 and A-10 to 10.3 won't let them fight tomcats, mig-29s, f-16s and so on. The worst they'll fight is a phantom, and that's fair. Hell, even 10.0 is a bit better and they won't fight the Phantoms with pulse doppler radars. That's generous. 1 1 38 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Noir89 2,396 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Realistic Battles (suggestion): -> changes from the first suggestion January 2023 in Orange <- In relation to Strela-10M which moves to BR 9.0 + drones which can be enountered on BR 8.7 in a full uptier i recommend following changes: All BR 11.0 SAM´s should stay 11.0, there is no need to raise the BR of those as they are balanced fine around 11.0, and very needed to counter Drones and CAS in general! Japan: Type 93 - 9.0 to 8.7 -> far worse to any Fire n Forget AA USA: XM975 - 10.3 to 10.0 -> to counter drones, no Thermal LAV-AD - 10.0 to 9.7 -> worse missile to strela, but superior mobility combined with high penetration 25mm gun Germany: FlaRakPz1 - 10.3 to 10.0 -> to counter drones, no Thermal Gepard 1A2 - 9.7 to 9.3 -> compare to PGZ04A Ozelot - 9.3 to 9.0 -> far worse to Strela France: Santal - 9.3 to 9.0 -> more or less equal to Strela China : Tor M1 - 11.0 - 10.7 -> it is already the worst Toptier SAM, uptiering it to 11.3 makes no sense without the very needed Thermal and the clunky aimingsystem, it should rather be lowered to BR 10.7 in relation to all other mentioned suggestions. Italy: Otomatic - 10.7 to 10.0 -> low firerate, non meta / hard to use against supersonic high flying jets. Rasing it to BR 11.0 is madness - if the change goes trough it will be useless, at least give it a >30 round APFSDS loadout! Sidam (Mistral) - 10.0 to 9.7 -> better missile than Gepard/PGZ04A so 9.7 seems fair Sweden: Asrad-R - 10.3 to 10.0 -> bad elevation Lvkv 9040C - 10.0 to 9.7 -> Cannon AA with very limited readyrack + only 4km range Lvrbv 701 - 10.0 to 9.7 -> very limited elevation and ammo British: Stormer - 10.3 to 10.0 -> hard to use as direct hit is needed Israel: Machbet - 9.3 to 9.0 -> worse than strela, limited range with gun The goal of the suggestion is that more Lineups are playable without abandoning the very important part of AA or the need to uptier a good Lineup. I am pro CAS, but i also want a good distribution of AA's to all Nations to give Groundforces a fair fightingchance - especially with the problematic addition of Strike-Drones. Depending on the Matchmaking, a lot of times one Team is far superior with their possible selection of AA vehicles - this should help at least a bit. Edited January 23 by Noir89 2 6 71 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... __Witcher__ 154 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Su-22M3 11.0-10.7 (RB), has only 12 countermeasures, worse to other aircraft on BR 11.0, for example, the Su-17M4 on the same BR is armed with 6 all-aspect missiles and 268 countermeasures Edited January 23 by __Witcher__ 2 10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... TheMightySardine 1,365 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Supersonic Starfighters lower than subsonic G.91YS and at same BR as other G.91, just why. Supersonics anihiliating korean jets again lol. TRAM and Su-25 still not going up for some reason. 2S38 staying at 9.7 is ridiculous aswell, just like BMP-2M at 9.3, raise both to 10.0 atleast. Edited January 23 by TheMightySardine 1 26 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Johny404_ 115 Report post Posted January 23 Decompression for tanks is really nice. WMA, PTL and SU-11 going up is great. No moving of SU-25s, A-10A and A-6E to at least 10.3 is sad. 2 12 5 29 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... MDC5000 41 Report post Posted January 23 For sim: 1)Move F14 to 11.3 and introduce 11.0-10.0 bracket,F14 and the F16/MiG23/MiG29 have radars that leaves little margin for the rest of the players to compete. 2)Move J6K1 from 6.3 to 4.7,it turns slower than an A7M,it climbs slower than an A7M and has no speed advantage over A7M.It has no place seing ME262s,SU11s,other superprops,etc. For realistic: 1)F104S to 10.7 it has no all aspect,it has not a good radar,it has no turning capacity.Why would this plane be moved to 11.0 and not the J35XS is ridiculous. 3 11 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Favnirbane 147 Report post Posted January 23 Shouldnt the requirement for opening British rank VIII aviation be 3 vehicles of rank VII? After this update the number of tech tree vehicles is only going to be 3 at rank VII! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... KADARAEL 11 Report post Posted January 23 Good changes but still ..... for the love of GOD move the F-14 at 12.0 .I have a talisman on it and f-16's to grind but is not fun when u destroy the enemy team in 2 minutes. Also lower Isreali Nesher and Mirage 5 BR ..... no CCIP no RWR no Flares, u eat every missile even in downtier because you face Su-25K ,A-10's , A-6 . Not everyone plays this planes just for ground RB . Also G91 YS to 9.3 please . MIG 19's and F104's are 9.3 and u think this aircraft is good fun at 9.7 ? Eating every missile from any plane that even blink at you . 11 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... ___Fatum___ 69 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) PTL02 and WMA301 go to 8.7? Do they have the efficiency in 8.7? Low mobility (compared with other wheeled vehicle), insufficient protection(can be easily killed by 12.7mm gun), poor angle of depression. They are powerful in big field map indeed. But they are useless in city and rough terrain map. PTL02's mobility is very poor in muddy ground and rough terrain as a wheeled vehicle. The reversing speed is poor. In summary, PTL and WMA don't have better mobility than tracked vehicles. If you think their efficiency is much higher than the efficiency of similar vehicles at the same rank, why not reduce the rate of fire? Just like Type 69-II G. In addition, SK-105A2, AMX-30B2 BRENUS and JaPz.K A2 also have similar abilities compared with PTL02 and WMA301 but still in 8.3. Edited January 24 by ___Fatum___ 5 1 2 38 49 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... [email protected] 355 Report post Posted January 23 Strange how all of these changes are mainly high top tier vehicles in the game....and from the looks of things they have hardly made no changes to naval unless they are still going through the lists, but i doubt that as they only tend to update once after the main posted and then a day or two later they change everything. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Major_Shaker 2,541 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Nice decompression! Finally! Still missing few tweaks USSR: BMP-2M from 9.3 to 9.7 2S38 from 9.7 to 10.3 Su-25/SU/25K - from 9.7 to 10.0 Mig-27K from 11.3 to 11.7 Sweden Strf 9040C from 10.0 to 9.7 Lvkv 9040C from 10.0 to 9.7 (it has no missiles or can fire as much ammo as other Spaa) Mi-28A from 10.0 to 10.3 Also I would suggest the strike drones to start at 10.0 BR. There are very few capable SPAA to find small drones and hit them at 8km distance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This should also be considered within this update or the next economy update US Since M1A1 is 10.7 it should switch places with IPM1. Israel Lower Israelis Rank VI research and buying cost requirements for tanks. They are same as for Rank VII and yet there are plenty of them. (Exactly 13 excluding 2 premiums). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regarding helicopters Lower the requirements for their research and buy cost to match Rank VI of aviation forces. Let those 390k RP to be just for Rank VII helicopters. Also how about folding up these since it is just required to research and buy just 1 helicopter to proceed to the next rank: US UH-1B and 1C Germany Bo-105 PAH-1 and 1A1 USSR Mi-24 Hind V and P Edited January 23 by Major_Shaker 1 3 16 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... [email protected] 25 Report post Posted January 23 Naval... HMS Nepal/Kelvin/Jervis keep their drop 4.7>4.3 which is nice. Disappointed Mohawk wasn't added to the list and also moved down a notch alongside the other Tribal class Eskimo. So she will now sit unloved and unplayed with the Armada/Tobruk/Diana trio simply being much better at 4.7 with no room for even a 2nd rate lineup. Still no changes for the Italian and Japanese coastals, especially at lower tiers. They need a big shakeup (and some new options) as most simply can't come close to competing on an even pond (eg the starter T-1 is outclassed in all respects by the LS3 & G5, yet it doesn't even have their reserve status so you pay to be outrun, out gunned, out armoured) 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... GHANA_COMBAT_MAN 65 Report post Posted January 23 Very happy to see finally 11.3 being added, BR decompression is always good. But as always some of the changes are really bad OTOMATIC is now same BR with tunguska. Tunguska has 8 SAMs that can take out ground targets and pull very high Gs. 10 km range Also very cabable 30mm guns Oto has.... A gun with 5km range. Good luck hitting fast movers with that, but IF you hit they are dead Oto also has 12 APFSDS rounds with 300mm of pen for ground targets, but they are largely irrelevant how large of a target you are. Absolutely massive silhouette for ground combat. I challenge a dev to play oto and tungi for 10 games to see if they really belong to the same BR. Insanity. SIDAM 25 Mistral also unchanged. Not surprised but very disapointed to see italy being ignored once again. It's in the same BR range with tunguska, flakbus and roland WITHOUT SEARCH RADAR. Do i need to say more 5 15 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Libarate 18 Report post Posted January 23 A bit disappointed that most of the feedback about Naval BRs has not been included. I see Yūgure isnt going up though which is good as she shouldn't be at the same br as Fletcher or Gearing who have more guns than her. With a similar theme, there are multiple British and Japanese cruisers at BRs where they have equivalents that are almost identical to except that they have an additional turret giving them much superior firepower. York compared to Norfolk and London. Tone compared to Mogami. Furutaka and Aoba compared to Myoko (this is a blatant example of deliberately under-tiering a premium to make it more attractive than the older premium). My recommendations from the previous thread. (Ships with 3 x twin 8" Gun turrets) Move to 5.3 - HMS York, IJN Furuaka, IJN Aoba (Ships with 4 x twin 8" Gun turrets) Move to 5.7 - IJN Tone, HMS Kent (Ships with 5 x twin 8" Gun turrets) Move to 6.0 - IJN Myoko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Einzelwolf 38 Report post Posted January 23 J-7D to 10.7(RB) with the rest of the arguably stronger mig-21 versions that get all aspect options. The J-7d is really just a MF with slightly better thrust but not quite better than the -21bis. It also being limited to just rear aspect missiles puts it at a disadvantage to the rest that get R-60mks and doesn't really warrant it being at 11.0 still. 3 23 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Muody2A7 52 Report post Posted January 23 You could also do something about Mitsubishi F-1. It stays at 10.3 and you have access to four pieces of AIM-9P and a M61 Vulcan gatling gun, but it lacks countermeasures making you a free kill to any 18G+ missile. It does have a very powerful radar, but no radar missiles. I'd consider moving it to 10.0 to atleast let it stay away from commonly used all-aspect missiles at 11.3 (R-60M and AIM-9L) 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... NoodleCup31 8,632 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Now that's how you treat feedback properly! Additional feedback (RB): Tornados (all TT variants): 11.3 --> 11.0 The Tornado has no objective strenghts. Four LBGs is not a lot for this BR and they're also relatively small ones Poor flight performance, less manouverable than an F-104 and only average speed Wing rip problems No stock bombs at all Only 56 CMs Maximum A2A loadout of 2 AIM-9L Fw 190 A-5/A-5 U12: 4.3 --> 4.0 They also received the significant performance nerf of the U2 and for their additional 7.62mm MGs but also weight they shouldn't be higher BR than the U2 imo. Su-25 (all): 9.7 --> 10.0 Decent flight performance and exceptional ground attack loadout + R-60Ms and a lot of CMs A-6E TRAM: 10.0 --> 10.3 Decent flight performance, exceptional ground attack and A2A loadout withthermal targeting pod, 5 LGBs, up to 4 AIM-9L, lots of CMs. F-14A Early: 11.7 --> 12.0 Still some of the best flight performance and the best radar in game, should not face 10.7s anymore now that the top BR is 12.0. F4U-4B: stay 6.0 It has exceptional flight performance that was even buffed very recently. The guns are still very potent despite the nerf, it should not face 4.7s J7W1: 6.0 --> 5.7 Exceptionally poor flight performance but good guns Ta 152 C-3: 6.3 --> 5.7 How is it 6.3? It has good armament but the flight performance is barely 5.0 worthy. It has poor climb, average speed, bad compression problems and gets outturned by medium bombers (!) The H-1 at least has good flight performance if you know how to use your flaps and engine throttle, the C-3 doesn't. Me 262 A-1a/U1: 7.3 --> 7.0 The Me 262s are already highly outclassed in terms of performance at their BR. This one trades better guns in for a good chunk of the already sub par flight performance. Higher BR is not justified because of this. Cl-13 Mk 4: 8.7 --> 8.3 Objeticely the worst Sabre in the game. It's identical to the A-5 but without leading edge slats. Cl-13A Mk 5: 9.0 --> 8.7 A whole 7% more thrust than the regular F Sabres. Doesn't really justify a higher BR. At 9.0 the F-2 has much better guns while the F-40 gets missiles and larger wings for improved manouverability. Ferdinand/Elefant: 6.7 --> 6.3 There is no point in having thick frontal armor on a TD when basically everyone can easily punch through it even with APHE. The Tiger 2 (H) has better effective armor and mobility and the Jagdtiger makes it completely irrelevant as its taking the spot as 6.7 TD but also features a better gun and has strong enough frontal armor to utilize that extra punch effectively. Ho-Ri Prototype: 6.7 --> 6.3 A little bit more mobile than the Ferdinand but much weaker frontal armor and a worse gun with higher reload. This vehicle perfectly fits the phenomenon Smin described recently: Few matches but done by very good players which inflates the statistics Radkampfwagen 90: 9.7 --> 9.3 Only good aspect about it is speed. Bad gun handling, average reload, no thermals. Almost all comparable light / wheeled tanks have thermals, gun handling, firepower, autoloaders or even a combination of those aspects + a 0.3-1.0 lower BR. Marder 1A1: add DM63 MILAN is overall the worst ground based ATGM in the game and with its gun being limited to HVAP it cannot even pen most light tanks from the front and some not even from the side at even the slightest angle. It's autocannon should be capable of reliably destroying other IFVs/LTs/SPAA. Marder 1A3: add MILAN 2 (maybe stay 8.0) MILAN is overall the worst ground based ATGM in the game. The Warrior has double the penetration on its main gun, same thermals, better mobility and SEVEN Milan 2s at 8.0 already. -> The Marder is universally inferiour to the Warrior at the moment except in firerate which is offset by the much better pen on the Warrior Su-22(all): R-60 --> R-60M Why does the Su-17M4 get them but the Su-22s don't? It's already superiour in other aspects. Vs UM3K: Double the CMs (256 vs 128) Better flight performance (stronger engine) Vs M3 A LOT more CMs (256 vs 12) Edited January 23 by NoodleCup31 1 1 4 34 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Kaizhur262 11 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) The positives: Su 11 going up in BR is good but the performance of it still warrants it to at least 7.7, German F4F and J35D going down in BR is good Still want changes: Su 25, A6E tram, A-10 needs to be moved up in BR either all go to 10.3 or 10.7, they carry all aspect missiles, a ton of countermeasures, and they face 8.7s (Su 25s only) and 9.0s (all that have been listed). F-14 should still be moved up to 12.0 And as my other post has stated a lot the swedish jets are rather overtiered even the prop plane j22b, their performance does not warrant them to be at he BRs they are at, moving them all slightly down in BR would help make the grind in Sweden more bearable but also competitive. For example the J29F struggles against all aspect missiles but also against migs and sabres. J32B and A32A are also struggles with all aspect missiles. All the Vampires and also gonna add the german seahawk at 8.0 they are easily outrun by almost everything. I'll admit, the changes right now are a good start, but I'm not going to be satisfied until more is done. Edited January 23 by Kaizhur262 Adding more suggestions and feedback 3 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... _Kolonel_Klink_ 389 Report post Posted January 23 (edited) Good changes from the previous set for the most part. Glad to see some decompression in Ground. However something needs to be done about the strike aircraft like Su-25/Su-25K and A-10 Early/Late slinging all aspect missiles at other aircraft in the same BR bracket that have ZERO countermeasures. Nevermind brackets below where 8.7 aircraft are totally defenceless. The same goes for the A-6E TRAM - 10.0 all aspect slinger Aircraft like the F-4C and Harrier GR.1 have zero defence against all aspects, at similar battle rating (within 9.7-10.3 range) due to lack of any countermeasures. In the case of the F-4C, it should be given countermeasures no questions asked because it is almost certain that it was able to carry them at some point in service history of the aircraft. For the Harrier GR.1, the situation is more difficult because it NEVER carried countermeasures, only illumination flares. Regarding SRAAMs, they are no longer the powerhouse they once were, and I feel this aircraft also needs to be separated from all-aspect carrying strike aircraft. I feel that 9.7 is suitable once again for the GR.1 given that it is still vulnerable to any rear aspect missile. Remember it is a subsonic, poorly turning airframe. The only advantages it really has are acceleration and speed, being able to carry a bombload enough to destroy one base, plus SRAAMs which are not all aspect, but very good rear aspect and good high aspect missiles within 1.2KM distance which is quite short. They are also easily defeated by countermeasures. We also cannot forget the Hunter F.6 which sits at 10.0 because it has SRAAMs as well, and again it has zero countermeasures, which is why you see no one playing it. The harrier is played because it is premium and a good grinder for SL and RP due to base bombing and good guns for ground targets, but has limited ammunition. Consider that at BR 9.7, the Su-25's are uniquely powerful, being able to face anything from BR 8.7 such as Sabres, G.91's and the like without countermeasures of any kind. 9.0, 9.3 and 9.7 aircraft often suffer the same fate for the same reasons, but might have some better armament available, but still no defensive capabilities against Su-25 variants. Given their offensive AND defensive capability, and ground striking capability (the ability to end the match on tickets, basically) I feel that Su-25 and A-10 variants all need to go to 10.7. Now that 12.0 is arriving, they won't all be sucked into the highest bracket as the BR spread is still +/- 1.0 Edited January 23 by _Kolonel_Klink_ 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Frenchboi8 2 Report post Posted January 23 Quote For opening rank VIII aircraft, the number of required aircraft at rank VII has been adjusted to 2. Does that include all nations' rank 8 ? If so that is really nice, as the US tree won't be forced to research and buy 5 planes and thus forcing CAS tree research because the F-14 will become rank 8, which is what I was complaining about last forum post ! Otherwise seeing BR decompression for tanks is also appreciated, even if I don't play high BR tanks (because I don't have them) it's still a great change. And the tornados not being brought up in BR as was planned before is great, they don't deserve to become target practice for the f-14/f-16/mig-29s/etc Overall I'm very happy about the changes, and I'm glad to have been heard along with the others, keep it going ! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Pischinger 4 Report post Posted January 23 These changes look good for once. M48A2 C could've stayed 7.0 but oh well. F-14A early to 12.0 please. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... MTF_10086 93 Report post Posted January 23 Can you keep WMA301 and PTL02 at 8.3？ At 8.3, WMA301 and PTL02 are quite powerful, but they also have fatal defects that are hard to ignore. For example: 1. - 4, which makes it difficult for you to aim at the enemy and kowtow when you stop in a hurry. 2. - 7km reversing makes you unable to retreat when you encounter the enemy. 3. Very fragile and tall car bodies, whether 7.62 or. 50, can be easily killed, and you can hardly hide yourself. 4. The steering plane is relatively slow compared with other wheeled combat vehicles. As a Chinese player, I really hope that WMA301 and PTL02 can stay at the 8.3 weight. 8.7 weight will lead to a huge number of T72AV, T72B, BMP2M and PUMA, which may only be matched to 9.7 weight in this lifetime. This will be a huge blow to the 8.3 queue in China. 2 33 43 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... CloudKill 253 Report post Posted January 23 CV90105 with the new changes should definitely be 10.0. Same thing with the 2S38. PTZ89 is just a obj 120 with stabilizers, 8.7 is to high for this vehicle! And why all "toptier" italy is going up? They should go down! Otomatic in the same br of the tunguska really? 2 1 29 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 1 of 11 This topic is now closed to further replies. Share More sharing options... Followers 41
Thanks for you feedback everyone. We have now passed all comments onto the developers for them to check out
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.