I understand that for some players the Merkava Mk.3 Raam Segol might feel “fun” to play, but we need to separate personal enjoyment from actual performance within War Thunder’s top-tier ground meta. If we’re going to justify its current BR of 11.3, we have to do so based on facts, not idealized assumptions.
-
Optics and thermals: You mentioned its 5x–12x zoom and Gen 1 thermals as a strength but that’s the bare minimum expected for a vehicle at 11.3. The majority of tanks in this BR range already have equal or superior thermal systems, including Gen 2, so this is not a competitive advantage, just a basic requirement.
-
ESS and smoke launchers: Yes, it has 60 smoke grenades, which looks good on paper. But smoke doesn’t compensate for poor side protection, sluggish mobility, or lack of repositioning power. You can hide once, but without the speed to escape or flank, it’s often pointless. Also, ESS is nearly useless when most of your opponents are using thermal sights.
-
M322 round: Sure, it’s a solid round, but it’s not unique. The TURMS uses 3BM42, and vehicles like the Leopard 2A4 can fire highly effective shells as well and they’re more mobile. The Merkava’s cannon alone does not justify staying at BR 11.3. If it were dropped to 11.0, it would still face dangerous opponents like the T-80, Leclerc S1, and M1A1 HC so the idea that it would suddenly be “the best” is not backed by reality.
-
Reload time: Claiming it could get a 5-second reload is purely speculative. In practice, its reload time is average, not exceptional. It doesn’t outperform other tanks in reload speed, especially when compared to the TURMS with its autoloader. You can’t justify a BR based on hypothetical reload rates.
-
Survivability and “trolly armor”: Real gameplay shows otherwise. The Merkava’s ammo is scattered in two vulnerable racks, which means even a hit to the turret can result in instant ammo detonation. Its massive silhouette makes it one of the easiest targets in the game. This so-called “trolly armor” may catch players off guard once, but it doesn’t hold up under repeated engagements. It’s anecdotal at best.
-
Mobility: You yourself admitted it struggles in this area. And in top-tier, mobility is everything it defines survivability, flanking, retreat, and tactical repositioning. Being “not much better than a Challenger” is hardly a compliment. In a tier where speed and agility are essential, the Merkava is a slow and predictable target.
-
Matchmaking reality: Perhaps the most overlooked point is this you will not be fighting mostly 11.3 or 11.0 opponents. In most cases, the Raam Segol is up-tiered into 11.7 and 12.0 matches, facing the likes of the T-80BVM, Leclerc S2, M1A2 SEP, and Type 10. These are vehicles with superior optics, mobility, protection, and firepower, and the Merkava simply can’t keep up. So the claim that it’s “balanced” at 11.3 falls apart when you consider the actual matchmaking it faces.
-
“It won’t go below 11.0 unless it gets worse ammo”: This ignores the fundamental purpose of BRs relative performance, not isolated stats. A vehicle can have a strong gun, but if the rest of its platform can’t support it competitively, then it needs a lower BR. And that’s the case here. Even a Leopard 2A4 at 10.7 can reliably destroy a Raam Segol with better mobility, better handling, and equal firepower.
Conclusion: The Merkava Mk.3 Raam Segol doesn’t need a nerf — it needs a BR that reflects its overall performance. Dropping it to 10.7 wouldn’t make it overpowered; it would make it fair. It would still face strong opponents, but at least it wouldn’t be hopelessly outclassed in almost every match. You can’t justify a vehicle’s position in 11.3 just because it has decent smoke and a strong round — especially when it’s slow, poorly protected, lacks thermal superiority, and is consistently matched against 12.0 tanks.
