Ground Vehicles **PROPOSED** RB battle rating changes

Let’s be honest, out of all BR changes that have been discussed in this thread this is by far the most necessary. Maybe just go straight to 15.0 and decompress Air at the same time.

2 Likes





Look at the way you were angling, and how your tank was reversing off of a slope:

Look how much you can angle with the KV-220:

The front plates of the KV-220 are very sensitive to changes in elevation (as that unangles the plates), but the side does not care one bit.

The KV-220 is so ordinary that every top squadron in SQB uses it at 6.0

after trashing the Conquer in the game chat after the shell shattered 2 time on a OF-40 i got a nuke in my 5th game with it, still i belive its a 7.7 tank until they fix the APDS

Spoiler

They must’ve updated it then. That’s good the Nera actually kinda works now.

I don’t think the shell in the kill cam is correct. Because he practically hit the weld location, in addition to this, you can see where he fires from. He’s the Sherman in the first few seconds that I didn’t fire on.

The angles don’t match up.

The armor is at least what I pointed out if not more.
And yes I know how to angle it.

But, if you look here. I have 0% pt loss, 31 ping, and I’m at a good angle.
You can see where he fired from. I highlighted it and my position.

I’m actually more angled when he shot at me.

Then also there is this random nonsense:

The shell was seemingly defeated by the armor, yet either the fuel or ammo suddenly explodes despite taking no damage?

Maybe that guy was a cheater? Maybe not.

All I know is the Kv-220 is not as good as the hype.

We really gonna use SQB logic here?

What’s wrong with that?
9/10 times, vehicle that is meta in SQB is very good in GRB.
Why wouldn’t they use a different 6.0 vehicle if the KV-220 is nothing special.

Because You need to understand the difference between SQB and normal battles?

Yes, I see that.

I mean, it looks somewhat reasonable (since you were reversing off of a small slope / hill).
Though sometimes the kill cam can be strange.

image
I wouldn’t say that’s a good angle (it’s quite shallow).
You want to use more of that strong side armour the KV-220 has:
image

Yeah, I’m not sure what’s up with that to be honest.
Could be a kill cam bug. I might be able to find the sherman’s POV and see his kill cam if you know when that match happened.

Really doubt it to be honest with you.

It’s good at 6.0, and I’d be fine with it getting a 6.7s - 6.4s reload buff and moving up to 6.3. (Or maybe having its first stage be in the turret, and staying at 6.0 with a 6.7s reload).

Leopard A1A1 should be moved down to rank 5 and 8.7, it would be a not mandatory vehicle to research. Leopard 1A5 should be moved down 0.3 br as the mobility isn’t that good considering the armor. This would buff german tech tree a lot while keeping the game balanced.

The difference is that there are many more players in GRB than SQB, and that in SQB there are almost always aircraft to deal with, so tanks like the ISU-152 and M18 behave very differently between these two gamemodes.

However, the KV-220 (besides being able to withstand bombs better than other tanks at 6.0), still has everything you’d really want in GRB – good enough mobility, good survivability, good enough round, and good armour.

Tell me please what is the maximum B.R. of the SQB we are talking about?

Leopard A1A1 sure, but the 1A5 can stay at 9.3.
It has an amazing dart, with good optics, thermals, LRF, and decent mobility. The only real downside is the mediocre gun handling and armour, but it’s arguably better than most things at 9.0 (besides a few that probably should be moved up).
A lot of 9.3s should move up to 9.7 instead.

1 Like

Are you trying to say the KV-220 suffers more in uptiers than other 6.0s?

Oh please, tell me what has a higher chance against a Tiger II H frontally, KV-220 or M-51.

1 Like

Oh please, tell me what has a higher chance against an IS-4M frontally, Tiger II H or M50.

Thanks for proving my point that KV-220 should be 5.7 as it has the same chance against Tiger II H that Tiger II H has against IS-4M

And what about Tiger II H or M50 against a Ho-Ri Production?