Some time ago, I made a recommendation to reduce the rating by 0.3 in BR for both the TU-95M and the B-52H because they were falling too much against anti-everything attacks. And they did it. There was a 0.3 reduction, and the B-52H became playable and well-balanced. I expected the same for the TU-95M, but that’s not quite what happened. I believe we didn’t take into account that the way to play with the TU-95M is different from the B-52H. The B-52 can spray bombs and drop them at high altitudes without worrying about accuracy. The Tu-95 is something that depends on precision and has a low bomb load.
I recently did some performance tests with the TU-95M in ground battles and had a very mixed experience with it, but overall, in almost every match I played with it, it was possible to notice high mortality rates for anti-all bombs, especially those with 30mm cannons like the Gepard and XM. In almost every match, I was either caught by an anti-all bomb after dropping the first bomb or before even getting close to the map.
I recently made a post showing the best way to fly the TU-95M and land it. In it, I showed that to do so, you need to maintain a relatively low altitude and fly at a speed of around 560-620 km/h. This is an important point because it’s the only way to land a bomber the size of the TU-95M on the map and runway size we currently have, making the TU-95M’s performance similar to other lower-ranked bombers.
The most viable option I believe to solve this problem is a 0.3 reduction in the Tu-95M’s br, placing it at 7.7, the same br as the Yak-28B. This is similar to some anti-aircraft guns with radar but sufficient firepower to defeat the Tu-95, such as the VEAK 40, ZSU, M163 in ground mode.
But with a br limiter so it doesn’t drop to 6.7 or lower. So, I would like your opinion. Do you think it deserves this change or do you think it’s balanced?