Battle Rating changes for January 2024 (post feedback)

No one will complain about the superiority of type 81c missiles. However, its ability to detect enemies is very poor, and if it is going to be released in 11.0, I think it will be necessary to change the night vision device to at least the second generation.


I think the F-5Es should still go to 11,0, as at 10,7 they are way too strong and can encounter planes that can literally do nothing against it


“He 111 H-3 — in two weeks, this vehicle will be grouped with the BV 138 C-1.”

This makes no sense as they are completely different. Why not folder the He115 and BV138 together if a vehicle is to be hidden?


Is no-one gonna comment the 2S25M getting 3BM60 at 10.0?


A bit disappointed that not more feedback was taken into considderation


Many poor decisions as usual
T20 should stay at 6.0


Doesn’t have the firepower or armour for 6.0. It’s decidedly worse than the T25 but better than the M4A3 76, 6.0 is perfect.

AMX-10P should stay 5.3


relatively low RPM, it was perfect at 5.3. It’s no R3.

AMX-13 DCA should be 4.7, not 5.0


It’s a good SPAA but not that good.

AML-90s should stay at 7.3


In no way equal to LRF Ikv 91. 7.3 was fine.

AMX-13 FL-11 should stay at 4.0


Insufficient firepower for 4.3.

French 7.7s going to 8.0 should stay 7.7


They’re not that good, having only solid shot.

Me 410s should stay at respective BRs


Fast and decently agile vehicles with great armament, not needing a BR decrease.

PB4Ys should stay at respective BRs


Well-defended bombers with heavy payloads and a strong airframe, there’s no need for a BR decrease.

MiG-29SMT/G should stay at 12.3


Worse flight performance and missile loadout than Su-27.

Barak II should stay at 12.3


Heavier F-16C with weaker engine.

F-5Es should continue upwards to 11.0


Exceptional flight performance, punchy guns, and decent AIM-9Js. They’re the best dogfighters at the BR and decimate downtiers. If necessary, simply add AIM-9L.

And now urgent missing BR changes
(groups are vehicles that all need changed together to be balanced)

F-15s to 12.7


Extremely fast, well-armed aircraft with good maneuverability.

F-104s except A/C, -.3BR
G (Italy) add 2x AIM-9J


Completely lacking in maneuverability. They’re fast, but not extraordinarily so. They also have armaments unimpressive for the BR. The Italian G is bizarrely locked to 2x AIM-9J.

Panzer IV Gs to 3.7
Panzer IV Hs to 4.3


The KwK 40 is a great gun, nearly on-par with the 76mm M1. The G has significantly better armour than the F2, though it’s still not great. The H is rather similar in armour, mobility, and firepower to the M4A1 (76) yet it’s 1.3 lower??? The J has a hand-cranked turret which makes it balanced at 3.7.

Jagdpanzer IV to 4.7


Excellent armour, good mobility, good firepower. It’s certainly better than the Hetzer and at least equal to the M43 75/46.

Do 335B-2 to 5.0


Not sure why this is 1.0/1.3 over its TT counterparts.

KV-1 ZiS-5 to 4 3


Lacks the firepower to fight many 4.7s let alone 5.7s.

L-62 ANTI-II to 3.0


Very strong SPAA especially in an anti-tank role. Much better overall than the similarly armed trucks at the same BR.

All up by .3


Exceptional engine performance provides excellent climb rate and speed on top of good manueverability and armament. The 89B is a direct upgrade over the D.

M36s up by .3


90mm M3 is an excellent gun, far better than the 76mm M1. With similar armour and mobility to the M4 76s, the M36 and M36B1 deserve at least the same BR. The M36B2 with HEAT-FS is even better, being a close counterpart to the M-51.

Tiger IIs except P
Obj. 268
All to 7.0
Su-122-54 to 7.7
M103, Conq to 8.0
AMX-50 Foch to 7.7


These vehicles all have exceptional armour and firepower without a huge lack of mobility. Most Tiger IIs are obviously significantly better than the P, the Jagdtiger is definitely better than the Ferdinand, the T34 has the best armour, mobility, and firepower of any 6.7 heavy, and the 268 is extremely well protected with good mobility. The Tortoise is iffy but seems like it would warrant moving along with the other super-heavies around the BR. Su-122-54 has HEAT-FS, APDS, a good reload, ~156mm LoS armour, rangefinder, good mobility, low profile, and 14.5mm MGs.
M103 and Conq have HEAT-FS and APDS+stabilizer as well as great armour and good mobility. They are both more similar to the T-10M than Maus or IS-4 IMO. They offer much more powerful cannons and much more protected turrets over the M48 and Caernarvon that share their hulls and BRs. The Foch offers >300mm LoS armour frontally (more than the T95!), great mobility, an exceptional 120mm cannon, a 15mm mg, and rangefinder. It doesn’t deserve to be the same BR as the IS-3, only .3 higher than the T95 (and Jagdtiger, 268, etc).

T-44-100 to 7.3


Excellent firepower, mobility, and armour. More similar to the T-54s than 85mm T-44. Significantly better than Panther II or M46.

TO-55 to 8.3


Twin-plane stabilized, well armoured MBT with good firepower at 8.0? It’s literally just a T-55. Less ammo, sure, but no one packs full anyways.

Magach 5 to 8.3


M111 at 8.0. It’s just an M48A2 GA2 with ERA but at a lower BR, they should both be 8.3.

Type 87 RCV (P), Type 87 RCV, VBCI-2 MTC30 -.3


These vehicles don’t have the firepower to compete with conventional IFVs or armoured cars and offer minimal mobility advantage. The VBC is excluded from this list as it is moderately well-protected for the BR and has advanced systems that make it more competitive.

All 17pndr/77mm equipped vehicles excluding Centurions, Archer up by .3
M4 FL-10 to 5.3
M4A4 SA50 to 5.3
ARL-44 to 5.7


17pndr has exceptional penetration, on par with KwK42 and 90mm M3. Yet Fireflies are currently 1.0 lower than M4A3 (76)??? Centurions 1 and 2 are balanced at their higher BRs, and Archer is such a glass cannon it doesn’t matter much. SA50 is even more powerful, being closer in penetration to the KwK43 than 76mm M1! The ARL-44 has excellent armour, good mobility, and a decently fast-firing gun that can comfortably UFP Panthers.

Me 262A-1a to 6.7


Just not a great aircraft. Slow, with poor acceleration and prohibitively low-velocity cannons. See here.

SU-100s to 6.3


Firepower is extremely similar to Jagdpanther. While armour is slightly lower, the better mobility (especially reverse rate) and lower profile makes up for it.

T-72A/M1, ZTZ96 to 9.7


Exceptional armour and firepower with good mobility. Shouldn’t be fighting T-55As and M60A1s.

PUMA to 9.7 or add working AHEAD


IFV with only a cannon at the same BR as IFVs with tandem and top attack ATGMs. Mobility isn’t great, and armour doesn’t stand up to anything more than autocannon fire from other IFVs. I’d have it at 9.3 alongside the CV9030 but 9.7 like the CV9040 is acceptable.

OF-40 to 8.3


It’s a slightly better armoured Leopard 1 with LRF. 8.3 or Leo 1 to 7.7.

Leo A1A1 to 8.7 or add DM33
TAM to 9.0
TAM 2IP to 9.3


A1A1 has terrible armour, mediocre firepower, decent mobility, and poor gun handling for 9.0. TAM is more mobile, with LRF, better gun handling, and its front engine provides better survivability. TAM 2IP adds more armour and DM33 to that.

ZBD86 to 8.0


This BMP variant quietly has 800mm pen tandem ATGM at the same BR as the rest of the family.

All 20pndr equipped vehicles excluding Cent Mk 3, Strv 81, and Caernavorn +.3


20pndr has better flat pen than the L7 and a slightly faster fire rate, but lower sloped pen. The Cent Mk 3 and its Swedish copy and the Caernarvon are fine and balanced, but every other Cent is a direct and significant upgrade in armour and/or mobility over the Mk 3. The 4202 is slightly more mobile than the Mk 3 with only slightly worse armour. The Charioteer offers MBT-level firepower with great mobility and non-terrible survivability, yet it’s a disproportionately lower BR than light tanks like the leKPz 41 or C13 T90.

JPz 4-5 to 7.0


MUCH more mobile than the ASU-85 and better protected than the M56. It’s a Ru-251 without the turret. Quite uncharacteristic for a TT vehicle to be undertiered compared to a premium.

2S6 to 11.0


Excellent missiles and 4x 30mm guns.

Strv-103A, Strv 103-0 to 8.7
Strv-103C to 9.0


Long gone are the days these were uncontrollable wiggle-wobblers. Now they aim as easily as a normal tank. With LRF, 4 second autoloader, armour that shatters or deflects almost anything, and excellent ammunition these vehicles are extremely broken on anything but urban maps.

Finally, BR changes with minor model changes I’d like to see
XM-1s add M774, to 9.7


Extremely mobile tanks with thermals and LRF, very strong for 9.3. However, lacking firepower for 9.7. M774 is realistic and would address those issues. Yes, I have both XM-1s and the Chrysler is not significantly less protected than the GM.

MiG-23MLD add R-73, to 11.7


ML and MLA are some of the strongest 11.3s, and the MLD is a direct upgrade with better maneuverability and RWR. However, it would struggle at 11.7 with R-60Ms. Allowing the historically accurate carriage of 2x R-73 instead of 4x R-60M would make a very well rounded and well-balanced 11.7 fighter, differentiating the MLD from the ML and making it no longer just a better MLA at the same BR.

Gepard 1A2 add AHEAD, to 10.3


2x 9.7 SPAA is redundant and Gepard is missing its AHEAD munitions. AHEAD is air-burst shrapnel, taking data from the tracking radar to program the airburst range. Essentially it’s VT with a bit better damage that only works on the tracked target.

T-54 (1949) remove 3BM-8, to 7.7


Poor mobility and gun handling. Removing the 1967 3BM-8 and lowering the BR would make a more well-rounded vehicle, flesh out the 7.7 lineup, and be more historically accurate. See here.

Leopard 40/70 add HE-VT, to 7.7


Would allow the 40/70 to be more of an actual SPAA instead of a tank destroyer while providing Italy with longer-range air defense.

MiG-21S add option to replace gun with SPS-141, R-13M, to 10.0
MiG-21SPS-K add APU-60-2, to 10.0
MiG-21PFM add APU-13-2, R-13M, to 9.7
MiG-19PT add R-13M, to 9.7
R-13M for all other R-3S carriers except MiG-21F-13 and MiG-17AS


21S is an extremely capable airframe with R-3Rs that are exceptional in head-ons and dominate a BR without RWR or frequent countermeasures. It’s handicapped by poor IR missiles and no countermeasures itself. R-13Ms and SPS-141 make a more balanced, capable, and well-rounded vehicle.
SPS-K is similar, though with a bit worse engine. APU-60-2 is apparently historical, and would make for a similarly powerful vehicle with great missile options.
PFM is a significant upgrade over the F-13, though would struggle at 9.7 with only 2x R-3S. Giving it historical capability of 4x R-3S or 2x R-13M would make for a more balanced and well-rounded vehicle.
MiG-19S is a good 9.3, and the PT is a direct upgrade. However, as above, it’d struggle with 2x R-3S at 9.7. R-13M would make a more well-rounded and balanced vehicle.
R-13M was produced in far, far larger numbers than the M1 and unlike its brother was actually exported. It should be in-game and might make a good stock missile for the 21bis. With vehicles except those already discussed, it’d obviously not be the top missile and wouldn’t affect BR.

F-4F add AIM-9L, AGM-65D/G, to 11.0


Historical armaments. With decompression the argument of avoiding uptiers to top tier by nerfing armament is no longer valid. See here.

F-111A add AIM-9E, AIM-9J, M117R, to 10.7


F-111A is an exceptional bomber hamstringed by a lack of A2A capabilities. 9E/J is historical and would make a more well-rounded and balanced vehicle. See here.

Leo 2A4s add DM33, to 10.7
M1 add M833, to 10.7
T-72B (1989) to 10.3
TURMS-T to 10.3
T-80B add Kontakt-1, to 10.7
ZTZ-96A, 96A (P) to 10.3
Vickers Mk 7 add gen 2 thermals, to 10.7


Decompression 9.3-10.3. 10.3s would generally struggle in uptiers against 11.3 and 11.7, espeically in terms of firepower, so each has received a buff. 2A4s and M1 are missing their primary historical round. Vickers is missing its gen 2 sights. This one might need a bit more buff, perhaps in reload rate. T-80B with Kontakt would technically be a T-80BV, so it would be a BMP-1/1P situation. B '89 and TURMS are direct upgrades over the standard T-72B, as are the ZTZ-96As, introducing thermals, better ERA, and/or better ammunition.

F-5C remove countermeasures, to 10.0


Countermeasures are fictional. Removing them would allow a lower BR where AIM-9E would be more effective while making the vehicle more realistic.



Just make it the right tank ffs

MiG-29, MiG-29A, Yak-141 add R-73/E, remove R-27ER/ER1


R-27ER dominates BVR at the moment. Especially when the MiG-29s fight aircraft without PD radars or all-aspect missiles that allow them to fight at low altitude this is a problem. Swapping R-27ER capability for R-73 would not make a huge difference in overall performance but would help 11.0s and 11.3s greatly. With the R-73 entering service several years before the ER and Germany never using ERs, these aircraft would also be more accurate. See here.


Some of these are actually good, some not so good.

That was quick

No,cause you can just 50 cal it,and its less of a threat than a VT-1-2 with 120 mm DM23 at 8.7


Again, the lack of an increased max BR for GRB will leave the top brackets nearly unplayable. When new Rank VII premiums were announced, it was said that 11.3 wouldn’t be top tier. Well, it is! There has been no change in the matchmaker to justify these as “not selling top tier”. On top of that, you have hilariously poor balancing like the Leopard 2A5 and the 2A7v being the same BR, despite three iterations of improved capability between the two. This is the easiest way to dramatically improve gameplay for players who have completed tech trees and it is shameful it still goes without even a mention.


Moving of BatChat and AMX-50 up, but keeping Somua SM at 7.7 looks like some massive premium bias.
Somua is better then AMX, but is staying at 7.7 even after it got massive turret ring armor buff.


Copy paste from original cause few of the issues were addressed, it needs a bit of trimming down


Seconding this in particular, move them to 12.3 if necessary. Being limited to R-60Ms is painful at top tier and the SMT is a sidegrade, not a direct upgrade.


Ok I understood why the Somua went up but why tf is the AMX-50 TO90 and Char 25T still going up, it makes no damn sense


It’s time to address the elephant in the room… Again.
Why isn’t 2S38 being moved up to least 10.3 (all modes)?
It’s highly effective against both air (thanks to IR tracking and VT shells) and ground (thanks to 57mm APFSDS).

I’ll just copy-pasta my reasoning from original BR changes feedback

Great firepower and aircraft tracking which makes it jack of all trades to some extent by being both capable anti-tank and anti-aircraft due to APFSDS and HE-VT shells coupled with decent rate of fire.
In downtiers it’s not uncommon to see players in this vehicle rack up upwards to 10 kills because tanks in those BRs don’t have much armor (example being Leopard 1A5)


A. Its a light tank, if you play it like an MBT then skill issue, and B) Do you have ANY idea just how rare teh VT-1-2 is compared to the 2S25M? No if they want to give it the best russian round then they need to move it up a helluva lot


Char 25t and AMX-50 (TO90/930) have 200mm of penetration and go to 8.0 XDDDD
Somua SM and E.B.R. at 8.0 would be more logical. You could just give the old reload for Char 25t and AMX-50 (TO90/930) i.e. 6.7s and leave them on this 7.7.
T20 at 6.3 it’s literally a worse panther but it’s played by good players.
I’m still waiting for you to get your brain together and give a normal br, i.e. 6.3 for M26, 6.7 for M26 is the worst br change you’ve ever made.
Stop punishing people for playing well and start finally giving higher br with machines that are really good, IS-3, 2S38, ZSU-37-2, SU122, Tiger II H, Jagdtiger and all spaa with rockets.
You only nerf the machines of all nations, especially the USA, Japan and France.
You only have huge reservations about balancing vehicles from Germany, USSR, China and Israel because they are played by noobs who do nothing in battles.


Good job gaijin. Strela going to 10.0 is a much needed change.

1 Like

I’m gad to see some of the changes for France were reversed, though still not sure the Char and To90 are 8.0-worthy. France does have a fairly large/ crowded 7.7 lineup, which is probably helping pad the winrates and stats. If they had some sort of APDS or other addition I could see it, but I fear they’re going to be relegated to being played only by higher skill players which will continue to skew their stats.

If we’re going to balance based on match statistics, then that should be weighted by the other stats of that same player. IE if they have a high win-rate with all nations and vehicles they play that should weigh less than someone with a high win-rate with a vehicle who has an overall mediocre win-rate. Weighted averages are common in statistical analysis for a reason.


AMX 50 TO90 is still beyond me. dont put it up there

No armor
No stab
No apds/heatfs/apfsds

just not a 8,0 tank