I bought the Battle Pass specifically to get a vehicle usable in France 6.0, but I wasn’t told that my BR would increase the moment I got it.
Give me my money back.😢
it can’t get apfsds, the belt feeding system wasn’t built for that
TU-95M air realistic / air simulator 8.3 → 8.7
This aircraft is far weaker than the B-52…
It’s worse in:
- top speed
- acceleration / climb rate
- bomb load
- lack of an airbrake
- 96k base damage vs the 230k of the B-52 (in sim this means the B-52 can take out an airfield by itself, meanwhile the TU-95 cannot).
Then, bump the TU-4 to 7.7
They’ve done that with a ton of battle pass vehicles…
AMX-50 TO90 is a great example.
B-24D-25-CO
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.0
- Give B-24D its missing additional bombs (Bug Report)
Reasoning: How this bomber is still at 5.7 while the B-17G Flying Fortress sits at 5.0, despite being objectively better than the B-24D Liberator, is unclear. Legacy BR, perhaps?
Objectively speaking, compared to the B-17G, the B-24D has worse engine performance, overall inferior flight characteristics, and a lower power-to-weight ratio. The B-17G features a nose turret that provides significantly better frontal protection, whereas the B-24D relies on nose guns with limited traverse, resulting in weaker forward defense. B-24D has a larger profile than the B-17G, making it an easy and massive target to shoot down with a volley of cannon fire.
The B-24D carries the same maximum payload of 8 x 1,000 lb or 4 x 2,000 lb bombs as the B-17G, meaning it does not offer a meaningful gameplay advantage. The B-24D is missing its 4,000 lb bombs as mentioned in the bug report.
The only notable advantages the B-24D has over the B-17G are a faster-opening bomb bay and the fact that all bombs are carried internally, reducing drag.
Overall, the B-24D is objectively inferior to the B-17G and can be considered either a worse side-grade to the B-17G or a slight improvement over the B-17E series. Therefore, a BR of 5.0 would be a more logical placement for the B-24D.
13 Likes
M1296 “Dragoon” 9.7 → 9.3
Reason: being a weaker in firepower Stryker, and having abysmal Power to weight, it’s a bit surprising that this was added to the game as an 9.7, it is overly difficult to play even for a stock grinded tank. It has no business meeting 10.7s and barely even 10.3s. In a perfect world, it should be a 9.0 and can only meet 8.3s
2 Likes
KV-220 6.0 → 5.7 (OR) Reload buff
reload buff: 7.4 secs aced → 6.7 secs. reason: being pretty equal to an IS-1 / other competitors such as the Tiger 1 it really doesn’t do well in 6.0 matches which are regularly 6.7 it has the same firepower as a 5.7 Russian medium. it also has two loaders so loading as slow as 7.4 secs for an 85mm makes no sense I did a tally at comment 1985, which concluded 45% of games were 7.0 matches, and 45% were 6.7 matches in which the KV-220 cannot do much in. 6.3 matches were never found in the 20 games played and the last 10% were 6.0 matches.
1 Like
It’s more equivalent to the other 9.7 ifvs with 30mms than the 9.3 models so I’m gonna say no
The hell it is. It’s so slow, and lumbers about. Maybe with double its currently mobility it could be 9.7
And I’m a pretty skilled WT player, and I am pretty negative in it from what I recall, and my friend whom is good at the game quite literally has 0 kills and 12 deaths he refused to keep playing it.
Literally welcome to the world of trashmaster’s they all should go down but I’m against just one going down without the others.
So far imo the only bad one is truly the m-1296
That new Aussie one is pretty bad with how often the ammo explodes lol
I’ve heard that, at a realism standpoint, that can’t happen because the SuperTEMP was made specifically for the Tornadoes and cannot be mounted on any other aircraft
1 Like
Weird situation in Israel tech tree, F16C and f16I will be on same BR-13.7 in AirRB while F16I have Aim120c, MAW etc
F4U-1C
- Air Realistic Battles: 4.7 → 4.0
- Give F4U-1C its missing bombs (Bug Report)
Reasoning: As it stands, the F4U-1C is the worst-performing F4U-1 variant in terms of flight performance compared to the F4U-1A , F4U-1A (USMC), and F4U-1D Corsairs. Reminder, all F4U-1 series, including the F4U-1C, use the identical engine, so the F4U-1C has objectively inferior flight performance and is easily outclassed by other aircraft at 4.7 BR, particularly due to its very poor climb rate. Simply put, its flight characteristics are closer to those of a 3.0 aircraft.
The 4.7 BR placement appears to be a harsh response to its fairly powerful 4 x 20 mm armament with a high ammunition count, which is understandable from a game design perspective in Air RB. However, I believe moving it down to 4.0 would be a fairer adjustment rather than placing it at 3.0 alongside the F4U-1A and F4U-1D.
10 Likes
Ma man. Making the best balance suggestions.
1 Like
Well I stand corrected ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I’m trying to avoid the controversial stuff for the most part. 😅
1 Like
Like M8 LAC to 2.0? 😏
2 Likes