We lost Alvis, he was eaten by Elias
1 Like
Absolutely incredible news! I just hope this ends up applying at all BRs (and for all vehicle types) eventually; we see far too many things only given to high tier vehicles.
For example, the Churchill VII absolutely needs the option to not take its (newly-added) explosive shell and get its old lower BR. This applies to virtually all tanks, but heavies like the Churchill are especially badly affected.
There’s also, say, the Ki-43-I which is three variants crammed into one, with a choice between two 7.7mm MGs, one 7.7mm and one 12.7mm, or two 12.7mms… yet all are stuck at the same BR. :(
Literal sufferbus 😭
That is going to be food for everything at the BR
1 Like
And the F-14D (VF-11) at this point!
Dear God y’all can’t even balance separate air and ground BRs this is going to be a nightmare
1 Like
Stop whining, this is an objectively excellent change
4 Likes
i’m more concerned that Gaijin might start skipping many vehicle variants. Why add multiple variants of an aircraft when they can just add one and cover all possible configurations through variable BRs? It’s a possibility I’m personally not too happy about.
i am not buzzer and hate BR balancing past 2 years
this one is acceptable
1 Like
They would have a basic BR. For example you can see J-22 at 9.0 as a basis and depending on the armament it goes up.
NF-5A either with 9Js or 9Ns is more or less the same thing. It won’t matter for its BR. It won’t go up or down.
The only thing i can think in your example is equipping…nothing and play 10.3 for example. But they’ve already answer that everything will have a minimum BR, so it might not even be possible.
For things like F-5A with 9B and E, the difference between them at 10.3 basis don’t even need any adjustment.Now if you give it 9P and P-4 it will just go up accordingly.
Why does guilded air to ground munitions change the BR in air modes? I can see the difference in ground modes but carrying these munitions have almost no bearing in air RB, if anything it makes it a worse dogfighter woth the added weight and drag.
Where this should be used in is in situations like the A10. Give it the 9Ls and move it to 11.0, or give the option to equipped 9Hs for 10.7, and no AAMs for 10.0 or 10.3.
AGMs should not change the BR in the standard air RB mode.
Also an ocean of suggestions/theads/bug reports of aircrafts which can use certain weapons, but dont, because until this point they were denied by balance reasons
1 Like
I’m slightly opposed to something like the Ah-64D getting handed F&F munitions, as a progression of technology should still be present in a tech tree, however I don’t think downgradijg your vehicles is grounds for concern since you ha e already progressed past the ‘inferior variant’, and have the choice between the two anyway
KH-38MTs on the Su-25SM3 are better AAMs than the r-73s btw, there is absolutely cases where AGMs are powerful tools to certain jets
I wanna believe that gaijin isn’t going to butcher this - because this is a legitimately GOOD idea.
1 Like
My point is more like this, using the AH-64D and E as an placeholder for a theoretical future vehicle family, why would Gaijin add the D when the E could essentially replicate its capabilities by removing its more advanced loadout options? With this new system, i am worried they’ll be less inclined to add earlier variants of vehicles, when a later model can fulfil the same role at the same br just with loadout changes.
Literally thought that bc I had seen your comment in the other thread.
Downside, the stastical risk of the world ending before this update just massively increased lolol
1 Like
An excellent change if you like a select few vehicles stomping everything else, sure
Mig29 change would be pointless with how germany and russia both have 13.0 and 12.7 29s that only differ with r73 and 27et access