Rationale:
The M14/41 is still a pretty marginal improvement over the later M13/40s. Despite being at 2.0, it’s still not outright better than the Pz.III F [BR 1.3], which is over twice as fast, similarly armored, has a punchier gun with access to HVAP, and has a larger crew. Lowering the arcade battle BR would let it form a line-up with its Semovente counterpart without facing some of the rather strong vehicles populating 3.3, which it currently can’t do much against.
Give the He grenades to Rank I and II, with Overpressure and many unarmored or thinnly armored vehicles, especially if your tank doesnt have a coax (P.204 (f) for example) and most can be effective. Especially the Pz III Ausf.F and J which have the 5 cm KwK 38 L/42, the Sprgr.38 has 200g Fp.02 and Np.10 with an TnT aquivalent of 256g thats more than enough to Overpressure enemys.
5 cm KwK 38 L/42 Aced Max Crew Reload Speed of currently 4.0 Sec lowering to 3.0 or 3.3 Seconds (the fastest). It is a good/mediocre gun, with good Penetration (80mm) at relatively low Velocity (685m/s), but even the fastest reload is 4.0 Seconds.
For comparisson the other guns of similar Performance and size have much faster reloads with, including 1 and 2 men turrets, while the 5 cm KwK 38 L/42 (on Pz III Ausf.F and J as well as Pz.Sp.Wg. P204(f) KwK), it also has a Dedicated loader (and on the Pz III Ausf.J even nerfed by a Ready rack):
37mm M3/M5/M6 guns 2.9 Sec
75mm M2 3.3 Sec
45mm 20-K 2.9 sec (on T-80 even 2.5 sec)
76,2 mm 1902/30 4.3 sec
76,2 mm KT-28 4.0 sec
4 cm QF 2 pdr 2.8 sec
4,7 cm QF 3 pdr 3.0 sec
5,7 cm Type 97 3.3 sec
4,7 cm Type 1 3.3 sec
4 cm MAVAG 41.M 40/51 2.8 sec
4,7 cm 47/32 2.9-3.0 sec
4,7 cm 47/40 3.3 sec
4,7 cm SA 35 L/32 3.0 Sec (with Dedicated loader, without 4.0 sec (1 man turret))
4,7 cm SA 37 3.0 sec
This has to be one of the WORSE BR Changes yes. Why is the Yak-3U now the same BR as a freaking A6M5. The Fw190 A8 is already not a “meta” plane at 5.0 so why does it get uptiered ? It can now face the P-51H against whom it cannot do anything. Why is the Re 2005 going up to 6.3 while it’s just a worse LF mk IX.
Speaking about the LF it’s actually a decent change but why move the Mk24 up against Mig15s instead of getting the Mig15s/sabers UP ?
Pbil m/40, 20 mm Pvlvkan M/40 reloadspeed from 1.0 sec to 3-6 sec (like other Auto cannons or more) it has a 36 rounds drum, in a small turret, barely overheats and can pretty much continuesly fire without stop.
The 2 cm KwK 30/38 L/65 on AA vehicles such as Sd.Kfz.222 (and Chinese), Sd.Kfz.234/1 and Sd.Kfz.140/1 from 6 → 3 sec reload like the 2 cm Flak 38 L/65, These Vehicles are dual Purpose AA vehicles, have a Dedicated loader next to the gun (unlike Pz II Ausf.C and F where he is in the hull and Needs to reach up) and only have 10 round Magazins unlike the 20 round Magazins on the Flaks. Effectively giving it 1/4s effectiveness (compared to the Flakpanzer 38(t)
Pz.Sfl.Ic GRB Reload Speed: 5,9 Sec → 3,7 sec or along the lines, like the other vehicles with the same armarment. It still the 5 cm gun, with the reload Speed of a 75mm gun. It already went up from 2.0 to 2.3 to 2.7 but the reload is still slow.
Helicopters:
EC-665 Tiger HAC/Tiger HAD Block 2/EC-665 Tiger UHT
Mode:
Ground RB
Proposed change:
12.7 > 12.0-12.3
Reasoning:
General Thoughts
Only 8–12 FnF missiles
Compared to 16 missiles for AH-64E/Z-10ME (8 for Mi-28NM, but this one has a lot more avantages to it to counterbalance that)
Limited maximum range:
7–8 km
vs 16–25 km for AH-64E/Z-10ME/Mi-28NM
No IRCM (infrared countermeasures)
Slower climb rate than other helicopters
HAC and UHT variants do not have a 20-30mm main cannon. Also, Mi-28NM’s main cannon is a lot more accurate than Tiger HAD Block 2’s main cannon, and other helicopter main cannons in that mater
Tiger helicopter FnF missiles top-down approach is NOT as perfect as Mi-28NM LMUR’s
Missile Explosive Power
Mi-28NM (LMUR)
→ 19.2 kg TNT
Z-10ME (CM-502KG / Blue Arrow 11)
→ 7.7 kg / 6.3 kg TNT
AH-64E (JAGM-MR)
→ 4.8 kg TNT
Tiger helicopters (Spike ER)
→ 3.3 kg TNT
German Tiger (PARS 3 LR)
→ 3.7 kg TNT
Air-to-Air Capability (same reasoning for SACLOS/Laser+IOG/Beam Riding Air-to-Ground missiles)
Mi-28NM
→ 16 air-to-air missiles
AH-64E
→ 4 missiles
Tiger helicopters
→ 4 missiles
Z-10ME
→ 16 missiles
N.B. : identical reasoning can be applied to the italian AH-129D, while keeping in mind it does have IRCM and 8 Air-to-Air missiles capability.
Rationale:
In terms of mobility, survivability, and firepower, the M15/42 is not on the same level as other light and tanks at its BR (T-50, Pz.III J1, Chi-He, M3 Lee, and Strv m/42 EH), and in some cases, those lower than it at 2.3 (T-28E and Pz.III J). The mobility, while better than its predecessors, is still only mediocre and the armor is only improved along one part of the front plate. The gun is still outperformed by Soviet reserve vehicles, resulting in it being much less competitive, even in just slight uptiers.
In exchange for a generous BR reduction, the reload should be slightly nerfed to bring it in line with the Japanese 47 mm gun’s fire rate.
Sd.Kfz.234/2 Rank II → Rank III. It already moved up to BR 3.7 and germany doesnt have any other rank III Light tanks until much later. There even is now a Premium variant.
T18E2 RGB 3.0 → 3.7/4.0 It has more armor, a stronger gun and comparable Speed and cant be easily destroyed with even HMGs and lighter cannons, it has so much armor with angle that frontally some cant penetrate it at all (like the italian guns), compared to the Sd.Kfz.234/2 which allready sits at 3.7, which has only 30mm (angled) armor, with the rest only 8-14,5mm and a weaker gun.
Rationale:
Compared to the bog standard M14/41, the M14/41 (47/40) isn’t a significant enough step up in terms of performance to warrant facing 3.3 vehicles. The 47/40 gun is still generally inferior to most other guns in the 45-50 mm category.
In exchange for a BR reduction, the reload should be slightly nerfed to bring it in line with the Japanese 47 mm gun’s fire rate.
the spitfire F Mk24 moving back up is understandable but back up without moving the MIG-15 you moved it down for are staying at the br ? its gonna struggle quight abit agenst alot of the jets that it will face
Panzer IV Ausf.E GRB 2.0 → 1.7
It is basically in between the Pz IV Ausf. C and F1, even tho it only has mere 30mm frontal turret armor, and mostly 20mm side and back armor. While it has 10mm more Frontal hull protection, however that has holes with just 30mm. There isnt really a reason to play the E over the F1, as you cant even properly angle, because of the 20mm side, which can even be penetrated by relatively more powerfull 37mm guns. If put at 1.7 it could also be used in a new line up, along future tanks, made of: Pz III Ausf.G (which armor wise is Pretty similar), Flakpanzer 38(t), Pz.Sfl.I and Pz II Ausf.F. A Pz IV Ausf.E with turret add on armor would fit better at 2.0 in the future.
