It’s pretty annoying how a ton of aircraft, mostly props and especially bombers, are just left at the same BRs they’ve been at for nearly a decade, or even increased in BR, while the aircraft added around them are generally just getting better.
Stuff like this abomination of a 6.0 that is just an inferior Ki-87, which itself should probably be at a lower BR.
It has absolutely no reason to be the same BR as arguably the best premium/event superprop, the F2G, and only 0.3 lower than the all-round best tech tree superprop, the P-51H, i wont even bother mentioning the BI on the rare occasion you see one its like the equivalent of having an F-86 fight a pre nerf Gripen on min fuel.
There are other obvious planes that have absurdly high BRs despite their lack of performance because of Gaijin’s obsession with:
Balancing based on armament or bombload.
Never re-balancing after the ARB timer change that killed high-altitude fighting and bombers being able to climb.
Examples include the Ta-152C3, Ki-94-II, Ki-87, S.O.8000 Narval, Yak-9UT, F7F-1, and a few more, along with almost every bomber.
Since Gaijin seems to have learned how to do temporary testing of certain mechanics and changes as well as actually consult people about changes by allowing a vote i feel like they should reintroduce 1-hour matches again or even just 45-minute matches for the 4.3 to 7.7 BR range for a week, paired with increased tickets, just so CAS doesn’t end the game in 5 minutes. Obviously, ARB EC is probably in the works, so why not do testing of longer matches Besides, it’d mean increased RP gains as RP is mostly based on game length.
lolwat? Narval, Ki-87, Yak-9UT have remained at their BRs while everyone else increased.
Now as for Ki-94-II…
A 2600HP engine giving a sustained 20 meters per second climb rate, a decent 16.4 sustained turn rate at 2500 meters, and excellent armament.
The P-47M it’s so clearly an analogue of is similar in climb, worse armament, and slightly worse in sustained turn while being 5.7.
Narval gets an air spawn while having a 16 m/s climb, 6 20mms, and a rather fast speed.
Ta-152C3’s FM was changed so it should probably be 6.0 with the H-1.
Ki-87 is just the Japanese P-47M.
F7F is just an F8F with an air spawn. Better than a P47 and Ki-84 still.
Just to remind you, La 9 is 6.0, 30km/h slower, less climb rate, slightly faster turn rate with 4 NS23s but half your ammo. It doesn’t make sense for perfect balance and there are always stronger or weaker planes in their respective BR.
At that point you’re just adding all props that are 5.7 - 6.3, which is just causing compression, especially since 5.7 props don’t ever see serious jets, and the limited 6.0 stuff will at most see a deadly Kikka.
As for the 6.3s… they’re easily powerful enough to deal with the rare Kikka and obviously 262s and Su-9 if their team’s jets don’t do so.
I don’t get adding 5.7s in this list when effectively all of them are more than fine… maybe because they’re weaker than the 6.0s they want to down-BR? In which case why worry about those when the 7.3 Panther is the notable thing causing P51H5NA from being up-BR’d to its proper 6.7 - 7.0 BR.
From playing Ki-84 to Narval, I really haven’t felt threatened by anything other than 2 aircraft at once.
It sure can but I feel like major decompression (like making top tier 15.0) is the only way out not making some vehicles lower BR and some higher (yes I am talking about wyvern and stuff). Generally the balancing shouldn’t be adjusted to certain vehicles.
N1K2’s are a good example of this.
5.0 - 5.3 flight performance but 6.0 Battle Rating.
A6M6 is also hilarious with 3.3 flight performance sitting at 5.0 or the Seafire Mk III being a 3.7 plane sitting at 5.0.
Most Spitfires are actually massively overtiered, I’m still wondering how the Spitfire Mk Vc with 3.7 flight performance got to be 5.0.
God i never want to fly that thing again it’s so bad, I’d also include every zero past the A6M3 since they have to rely on the enemy pilot being an idiot to actually work, if someone doesn’t turn fight you theres literally nothing you can do to them none of zeroes ahould be any higher than 4.7
A lot of the techtree filler spits are just plain garbage that dont make sense sitting at such high br for their performance, it still annoys me that the Seafire FR 47 is 5.7 despite it having the worst drag for a spit ingame theres also all the filler Mk V spits that sit just a bit too high as well and also italy where the C.205N2 is a higher br than the G.55 serie 0 because of guns.
You don’t mention that the La-9 achieves said top speed at 6 km high, while the Ki-94-II does so at 12 km.
At the actual altitudes that you’ll fight in this game, the La-9 is faster and will climb better (almost 80 km/h faster at sea level). The La-9 loses horsepower with altitude, but it’s only above 5km that the La-9 actually dips below the Ki-94 in power to weight.
What makes the La-9 overtiered is the fact that planes like the F2G exist. Not the Ki-94.
You’re running two Double Wasps instead of one, so your climbrate is ever so slightly better as well as acceleration.
Both have their own maneuverability tricks. F8 doesn’t like rudder movement, and F7 has issues with initial turning [its weight might have something to do with that].
Also @Lyn_poster I use MEC in random battles as it’s on my number pad.
Whose correct BR is 6.3.
It’s better to correct the BRs of the under-BR’d props than to incorrectly move the correctly BR’d props.
And the F8F weights so much less than even with the twin engines of the F7F, the F8F has far higher PWR at all altitudes (this includes the F8F-1B which weights slightly more due to 20 mm).
What’s really funny about the f7f 3 is that it should have identical engine power compared to the bearcat, but the snail only fixed the bearcat’s engine last update.
That’s what I was trying to say. I tested them after the update. There should be no differences in the engines. The power curves in the appendix of both the manuals are identical. But beyond the point, comparing the f7f to the hornet or ki 83 is moot, because they have different roles. The f7f was meant to be a long range fighter bomber and night fighter. Not a high altitude interceptor. Given that, I find it more comparable to something like the brigand then the hornet.
