I made a table based of the most recent changes for the BR’s of aircraft 10.0 and up and wanted to know what others thought of it. I tried to make it balanced and I also increased the top BR to 15.0 for aircraft like the F16C, Su27SM, JAS39C etc. I.e. Good flight performance and Medium Range ARH Missiles (FOX-3)
Then theres aircraft like the harriers and J8F which have FOX-3 missiles but not great flight performance or worse IR missiles than top tier, those are at slightly lower BR’s.
I couldve forgotten something so let me know what you guys think.
Current top tier is a mess even after the BR changes and increasing the top BR to something like 15.0 would really help
lol… 1.0 BR difference between F-4F ICE and F-16C? lol Massive lol
Joke of a list and suggestion, especially with A-5C being higher than F-8U, and F-8U somehow being no where near its equivalent: F-1.
Mirage 3s being lower than F-8E…
You know… fair. I think that’s not the way to do it, and I appreciate your honesty in how you got to these results.
The list has a lot of issues, especially closer to the top end where AMR- AAMs close the performance gaps of aircraft significantly.
IRST is a gimmick and entirely useless without off boresight missiles, radars are equivalent, and Mirage 3 and F-8 have similar dogfight performance while Mirage 3s are faster.
AKA the F-8 can’t pull as hard as the Mirage.
When all is equal, F-8 and Mirage have similar energy retention.
Mirage allows you to pull more and that’s about it.
Pulling hard isnt everything, The F16 at top tier is a beast because of its energy rentention, their just different play styles,
Again I went off of how I do in them because Im a pretty average player, 50% win rate.
And ive always done better in the F8E, idk, maybe its just my playstyle but I dont really like the Mirage 3’s. I love the 2000’s, but if I want a lower BR delta I usually play the MiG-21SMT or MF, or something like the Viggen
You tried to pull a “Jack of all trades, master of none.” BR evaluation, yet it drags more quetions than answers.
Compression between 12.7 and 13.7 would be TERRIBLE, a Mirage F1C shouldn’t face a 10 missile boat Su-27.
10.3 would be the new black hole BR between transonic and supersonic jets, as a result, 9.7 jets would get permanent downtiers, and 10.0/3 would get permanent uptiers, since you mostly placed strike planes at those latter brs, they’ll struggle the grind in ARB.
MiG-29SMT having 0.7 gap difference between other top tier slingers because “it’s terrible”, yet having one of the most advanced radars to crank and engage at the same time?
Good attempt, but no thanks. Leave everything as it stands right now, it is far easier to fix things and to decompress to 14.0, but further from that it’s just a waste of time.
Im not saying "this is how it should be, Im just trying to create discussion about the topic so hopefully gaijin sees it and actually (hopefully) does something about it
i genuinely don’t think we need a new BR overhaul in ARB. We already received a whole new 1.0+ in decompression, 14.0 would be more than welcome to fix some brackets, but things rn are much better than at the beginning of the year.
The one decompression i would agree on is GRB from 11.7 to at least 13.0. Since BRs in GRB have a direct consecuence in SP cost, it’ll be a domino effect on balancing.
not the best stats, but the Hunter did its job to a minimal extent, and that’s what i stated.
Can’t speak for the G-91YS, but one case isn’t enough to redo an entire bracket.
You are the only person so far i’ve seen that does not support further decompression of said bracket. But if that’s where you stand, then what can I do
saying it’s playable =/= not supporting. Decompression is always welcome as long as it’s critical to overall experience. 8.7-9.7 compression is not that of a big deal. Don’t put words in my messages, git gud or cope with what you’ve been dealt.