When is anybody going to start making the noise needed to change the MiG-15/17 and F-86 BRs back to what they were? It is ridiculous that these far superior jets are at BRs lower than worse jets in every minor nation AND they are compressing the hell out of the game.
6 Likes
They shouldn’t have been moved down in the first place, especially since they were the best performing planes at their BRs. Now it is very common to be playing the Me-262 and be facing them, alongside the F-84s which seem pretty OP with their airspawn.
All of this can be blamed on the F5C and the A10. They forced the 9.X gunfighters down, which forced the MiGs/Sabres down. Now a Mig-15 and F-86 is equivalent to a Vampire.
3 Likes
British RB Ground BR’s:
- RB, A1E1 Independent: 1.3 down to 1.0. Terrible armour for a heavy tank, worse than many nations light tanks even at 1.0. Terrible mobility. Massive target. 3-Pdr gun isn’t a redeeming factor either, it’s not the worst gun in the game, but due to all the other factors combined it’s made much worse. It’s still not going to be an amazing tank at BR 1.0, but people might actually buy it more. So there’s incentive for you to drop it too.
- RB, SARC IVa: 1.3 down to 1.0. It’s fast, and that’s kind of it. If you compare it to the Daimler it shares a BR with, it loses in almost every respect. Worse armour, no shoulder stabiliser, gun is incredibly bouncy and kicks like a mule after firing, worse gun elevation and depression angles, and it’s open-topped. Even comparing it to the Tetrarch it does poorly against, with much of the same issues as the Daimler.
- RB, Churchill Mk. I: 3.3 down to 3.0. The 2-Pdr is horrendous at this point, mainly due to the lack of mobility to flank. Even taking it in full downtiers it struggles to penetrate Pz. III M’s, M4A1’s, T-34’s, etc. Just look at protection analysis.
- RB, Sherman II: 3.7 down to 3.3. Just get rid of the APCR and drop it down to 3.3 with the rest of the M4A1’s in-game. It doesn’t need to be artificially increased in BR due to a round it never received. Dropping it down to 3.3 also means you can add the Sherman V as a tech-tree vehicle at 3.7 and even a 3.7 premium with a pair of RP-3 rockets.
- RB, Crusader AA Mk II: 4.0 down to 3.7. I don’t understand why this vehicle even went up. Just compare it to the Wirbelwind, far less rate-of-fire, less penetration, and half the guns. The only advantage the Crusader AA Mk. II has is an enclosed turret and more mobility. The 2 were very asymmetrically balanced.
- RB, Churchill Mk. III: 4.0 down to 3.7. Less mobility than the Churchill Mk. I, same hull armour, and worse turret armour (only 3.5 inches compared to 4 inches). The gun is better, but that’s it. It’s also the same gun that’s on the AEC Mk. II at 3.0. It’s also the wrong gun, see my bug report, it should be a 6-Pdr Mk III which is even more justification for a drop in BR.
- RB, Churchill NA75: 4.3 down to 4.0. It’s more of a side-grade over the Churchill Mk. III, not a direct upgrade. You lose the good rate-of-fire, lose the shoulder stabiliser, and lose a decent amount of penetration for a better damaging shell. That’s the only difference, the shell is good but if the Churchill Mk. III goes down then the NA75 should as well.
- RB, Comet: 5.3 down to 5.0. It’s really a shadow of its former self. The A30 Challenger is a better vehicle in almost everyway. Just compare it to the VK 3002 (M).
- RB, AC IV: 5.3 down to 5.0. It’s just a better Firefly. Again, just compare it to the VK 3002 (M).
- RB, Skink: 5.3 down to 4.7. Just like the Crusader AA Mk. II really don’t understand why it keeps going up. Again, just compare it to the Wirbelwind, you still have less firepower and penetration but now have the double the guns of the Crusader AA Mk. II, and the same amount of guns as the Whirbelwind. Is that really worth a BR increase of 1.3 currently (4.0 to 5.3)? The Bosvark is a far better SPAA at 5.3.
- RB, Tortoise: 6.7 down to 6.3. Just compare it to the T28, very similar vehicles except the Tortoise is covered in weakspots, lacks APHE, and just as slow. If you add the missing APDS round then it can stay at 6.7.
- RB, Centurion Mk 3: 7.7 down to 7.3. It’s been power creeped by new additions and previous BR adjustments. Just compare it to the Centurion Mk 5/1 which has far better armour and secondary weapons, the Caernarvon which has a better front plate, and then the Conqueror which has amazing armour especially with the add-on armour module. At 7.3 the Centurion Mk 3 can make a line up with the FV4202 which it compares well against. This also opens up an opportunity to add a new Centurion 7/1 or 8/1 as a new 7.7 vehicle, with the other being a new premium.
- RB, Falcon: 8.3 down to 7.7. Just remove the APDS and/or adjust the belts. There’s now 3 British SPAA’s at 8.3 now, what’s the point? The Falcon has no radar and should be lower. Just compare it to the ZSU-37-2 and the VEAK 40 which have similar shells and radar, yet both are 7.7. If the APDS is removed it will have worse penetration than both of the above mentioned vehicles.
- Chieftain Mk 3: 8.7 to 8.3. This one is going to be controversial but just compare it to the Conqueror. The Chieftain’s armour is worse in many ways, the mobility isn’t much of an improvement, and only the firepower is better but not drastically. The only massive improvement is the reload which is 50% shorter. I don’t believe these differences are worth a 1.0 BR increase over the Conqueror.
- Chieftain Mk 10: 9.0 to 9.3. Remove L15A3 as the stock round and replace it with L15A5. Remove the fake L23 round and replace it with the correct L23A1, this bug report has been outstanding for like 4 years. Add a tier IV modification to turn the vehicle into a Mk 11 with TOGS, it’s a very minor visual change swapping the IR light box for a TOGS box. This also adds the potential for a new Mk 5/4 to be added at 9.0, you lose the stillbrew of the Mk 10 and the .50 ranging gun of the Mk 5 but gain L15A5 as a stock round and L23A1 as the top round.
Khalid: 9.3 to 9.0. This thing is just a faster Mk 5 and definitely not worth a 0.7 BR increase, especially when the Mk 5 missing LRF bug report is actioned. It should also get L15A5 as a top round. It would compare quite well against a new Mk 5/4 suggested above, this offers far more power-to-weight and speed, while the Mk 5/4 has better firepower.
Swedish RB Ground BR’s:
- RB, SAV 20.12.48: 3.7 to 4.0. This vehicle is a monster. Not much else to be said really.
Soviet RB Ground BR’s:
- RB, SU-122: 2.7 to 3.0. This, and the two vehicles below are incredibly powerful. Especially against new players. You see entire squads of SU-122, M4A3 (105), and StuH 42 G when playing these BR’s.
US RB Ground BR’s:
- RB, M4A3 (105): 3.0 to 3.3. Again, low tier monster. Armour might as well be a Jumbo in a 2.0 uptier.
German RB Ground BR’s:
- RB, StuH 42 G: 3.0 to 3.3. Same story as the SU-122 and M4A3 (105).
French RB BR changes:
- RB, AMD.35 (SA35): 1.7 to 1.0. This thing is trash. It’s basically a side-grade to the 1.0 AMD 35.
- RB, M4A3 (105): 3.0 to 3.3. Same reasons as above mentioned SU-122, StuH 42 G, and US M4A3 (105). Moving all these vehicles up would improve the new player experience drastically.
Italian RB BR changes:
- RB, M15/42: 2.7 to 2.3. It’s really not a massive jump from the M13/40 (II), M13/40 (III), or M14/41. Very small jump in penetration, small jump in top speed and power-to-weight, and better hull armour. That’s pretty much it.
2 Likes
GIVE JAPAN a spaa system that has RADAR AND MISSLES ALREADY ITS BEEN FLIPPING YEARS
Yeah these are all very uncontroversial, sensible suggestions
1 Like
Can the bmp2m move to 10.7? When comparing it to the Vilkas that got moved up to 10.7 in the new update, the Vilkas should either be moved down to 10.3 or bmp2m should get moved up to 10.7, I’m more in favor of the latter. Its gun shoots faster than the Vilkas with a slight hit to the penetration for the APFSDS, but its ATGMs are literally better than the spikes on the Vilkas. They have more pen and I would take the manual aim on the BMPs missiles over the fire-and-forget capabilities of the SPIKEs.
1 Like
When will be nerf russin bias? Even rubbish with K/D 0,66 makes -9 easy.
Aviation has no effect, isn`t it? A player from a respawn at 12 km launches missiles and no anti-aircraft gun can focus him. You need to increase the number of respawn points to at least 1000, because now you can go into battle to take a point, give a kill or support and take aviation on top attachments
May be wine on Reddit can help.
Imagine Yak-23 is still 8.7 💀
2 Likes
While this is true, the root of the problem is the overall BR compression in air RB.
Which would be easily addressed by raising the top BR to 15.0+ and rearranging every vehicle accordingly. There is no problem with queue times in air RB. Not sure why Gaijin thinks 0.3BR cap raise every few years has been enough.
1 Like
Korean jet air sim BRs really confuse me.
Straight wing and swept wing jets are both 8.0. Early aim-9Bs are 8.3. It looks like outside of some british and soviet planes and the f80s, the 7.0-8.0 bracket seems to be mostly at 7.7-8.0
Also why are the cl13 sabres as A.I “”“bombers”“” in a 7.3-8.3 bracket. Why are the wiggling like crazy while they fly.
1 Like
Agree, especially the G. Fortunately most of them are galaxy brain IQ players that completely waste their OP air spawn by diving to bomb a base or diving to attack a bomber who is diving to bomb a base.
I’ve been driving tanks in WT for a while in the last few days and noticed that the German tanks are still worse than bad in this game and that my decision not to invest any more money in this game was the right one.
It’s sad that it’s not just in the German Tec Tree that the vehicles are becoming increasingly weak and tanks that are simply bad in reality, in game the best.
I spent money once on a good simulator game few months ago and donated the rest to the Ukrainians that I would otherwise have put into WT.
The other bad thing, it gives everytime more and more Jets and no good Airdefense.
you’re being really vague, what vehicles are you talking about
3 Likes
Looks like he spent a gorillion dollars on every premium in the game and is doing mediocre in all of them… I guess he was just really hoping Germany would somehow make his winrate go up?
1 Like
Do I have to apologize for having money and being able to afford it, unlike you? If I feel like buying something I can do it and don’t have to beg for money.😂
- Hitting the ammunition depot on the turret of the 2A4, at this angle not only destroys the ammunition and kills the commander, but destroys the complett tank.
The blowout panels are just for decoration at Gaijin.
Meanwhile, with T models, if you hit the ammo carousel, rarely or nothing happens, no Jack in the Box effect, which made these vehicles famous for exploding spectacularly when hit.
- The Spike-LR2 in all nations, a top attack weapon like the Javelin, only much stronger and deadlier. But 90% useless in the game.
because Gaijin apparently has no desire to implement this properly, or so I suspect, because the weapon seems too powerful.
These are just a few examples from the last few days.
The sad thing is that it used to be balanced with large maps and decent vehicle models.
Many errors simply remain because Gaijin stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the facts and fix errors.
Why is the Ho 229 7.7 in air sim?
It’s right next to planes like the Saggitario 2. Most of its bracket rotations have it face aforementioned saggitario 2 as a 7.7 plane (only in a full downtier can it avoid that thing)
It has absolutely no business being right next to the saggitario 2 or the various 8.0/8.3 missile jets like the f9f cougar or the german hawker or the saab105. It’s way too slow to evade aim9bs and it burns energy so fast that an aim9b carrier can easily third party it.
It should probably be like 7.3 or 7.0 like the meteors f mk3. It’s nowhere 0.7 BR brackets than the meteors.
I say this not as a Horton pilot, but someone who just had the pleasure of watching a horton suffer in the 7.7-8.7 bracket and look super out of place.
Not at all, I just think it’s funny you talk about not spending any more money on the game when you’ve bought like everything there is to buy. You drank the kool-aid and only now that you’re looking at the empty pitcher do you say “wait a minute, I didn’t like that”!
That’s what you think.
But the fact is that I only bought a fraction of what would have been possible.
So your analogy is only partially correct. Based on your analogy, I bought about 10-15% of what was possible, since there are still a few nations open.
Apart from the fact that I would have to regularly reach into my wallet for a premium account.
Now you can calculate for yourself how much money no longer flows into the game
You do see your blowout door was hit and compromised, meaning it just wouldnt work, right ?
Get some game knowledge first.
Literally no chance to escape one on a heli, guaranteed heli frag with zero requirements.
1 Like
The blow out panel sits on the roof and would be blown away regardless if the ammunition burns out.
Learn about reality.
PS: My vehicle was counted as destroyed because the commander was out of action. Which in itself means to me that Gaijin is actively manipulating the games.
There is no other way to explain this.
Yes, that may be true. But the main focus of the Spike is on combating ground vehicles and, secondarily, on anti-aircraft defense.