I’d say 9.7 and move the ozelot to 9.3.
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.
1 Like
why is puma same br???
Aircraft: Bf-109 G-2/trop
Mode: Air RB
BR: 4.3 —> 4.0
Reason: it is just a slightly worse 109f4 at 4.3
2 Likes
There is no US/Russian bias at all, prove me wrong. GJN: Hold my beer.
9 Likes
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.
6 Likes
M15/42
it_m15_42
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.3
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.0
-
47 mm 47/40 mod.38 Reload Speed: 2.9 s → 3.3 s
-
8 mm Breda mod.38 Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.5 s
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.
22 Likes
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.
1 Like
Br Changes:
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.
4 Likes
M14/41 (47/40)
it_m14_41_47_40
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.3 → 2.0
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.3 → 2.0
-
47 mm 47/40 mod.38 Reload Speed: 2.9 s → 3.3 s
-
8 mm Breda mod.38 Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.5 s
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.
20 Likes
It’s closer to the EF Aesa and Su-30SM2 than it is to anything else at 14.3
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
I know, I added this point in my message, (I asked for this so we won’t face BMPT anymore)
1 Like
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.
1 Like
Yes it’s the Norwegian F-5A with 9Ls
Panzer III Ausf.N 3.0 → 2.7
It doesnt have the turret Vorpanzer, and the 7,5 cm KwK L/24, which is a low Velocity gun, shure the Penetration of 115mm is good, however the Downgrade in armor, in comparisson to the previous models is rather aparent, many tanks can easily penetrate the turret, which effectively has BR 2.3 armor, while the 20mm HHA on the hull certainly is an improvement. They could however add a Pz III Ausf.N with full Vorpanzer (including Turret) at 3.0. Panzer III Ausf. N mit Turmvorpanzer
1 Like
Close? Arguably.
Same level? Absolutely not.
Pantsir S1 – BR increase and removal as free top tier SPAA
Pantsir S1 currently provides the strongest air denial capability in the game. Its very long engagement range, high missile velocity and strong tracking performance allow reliable interception of aircraft, helicopters, drones, AGMs and guided bombs before they reach effective weapon release distance. This significantly reduces the effectiveness of enemy CAS while simultaneously allowing Russian CAS to operate under strong protection. The impact of Pantsir on the overall match environment is considerably higher than that of comparable SPAAs. In addition, Pantsir is often available as the default high tier SPAA for Russia, meaning players receive one of the most capable air defense systems without needing to research an equivalent vehicle first. No other nation has access to such a strong entry level top tier SPAA. Removing Pantsir as free SPAA and increasing its BR to around 12.3–12.7 would better reflect its performance and reduce the current imbalance in top tier air defense.
2S6 Tunguska – underestimated multi role capability
The performance of the 2S6 is often underestimated when only looking at statistics. At its BR it is one of the few SPAAs capable of reliably intercepting AGMs, guided bombs and helicopter ATGMs while also providing very strong close to medium range air defense thanks to fast missiles combined with high rate of fire cannons. This creates a highly flexible defensive platform that performs reliably in typical combat distances where most CAS engagements take place. The statistical performance of the 2S6 is distorted because many players use it aggressively as a tank destroyer due to strong AP belts, high fire rate and good mobility. This reduces its apparent SPAA efficiency but does not reflect its real defensive strength when used as intended. A BR increase to around 11.3 would better represent its actual effectiveness.
BMPT – BR 11.7 is not sufficient
A BR of 11.7 would not be sufficient for the BMPT because the vehicle significantly disrupts matchmaking balance within its BR range. The BMPT combines survivability close to MBT level with extremely high sustained firepower through dual autocannons and ATGMs, allowing it to effectively engage light vehicles, MBTs and helicopters simultaneously. In many matches the vehicle dominates engagements due to its ability to continuously apply pressure without exposing significant weak points. Its armor layout, crew placement and weapon redundancy make it very forgiving to play and allow it to remain combat effective even after sustaining damage that would disable most comparable IFVs. Within the 10.7–11.7 matchmaking range the BMPT often overmatches typical opponents and creates an imbalance in ground engagements, especially in urban environments where its sustained fire output becomes extremely difficult to counter. Because of this disproportionate battlefield impact, the BMPT should be moved to BR 12.3, where its survivability and firepower would be more appropriately matched by comparable top tier vehicles.
14 Likes
Bf 110 C-6 GRB (Not Air) 3.0 → 2.3 or 2.0
Reason: The better C-7 is 2.7 which is better because: Armored glass, can carry bombs and has 2x 20mm Mg FF/M and faster while the C-6 cant have bombs has no 20mm and is fixed with the 30mm Mk 101. In comparison the Hs 129 B-2 which is also at 2.3 has more armor, 2x 20mm Mg 151/20 and 2x Mg 17 (instead of 4x Mg 17) and a Mk 103 with 100 instead of 60 rounds and higher fire rate. It overall exchanges most of it offencive firepower for a better flightperformance. It is in comparisson to other planes in ist class also rather limited in armor, beeing limited to 4x MGs and 1x cannon with limited ammo. In AIR RB it can stay at 3.0 i suppose, as a bomber hunter with Minengeschoss.
1 Like
Since the Iranian F-14A Tomcat is finally getting its additional missiles is it to much to ask of Gaijin to also give the American F-14B Tomcat its additional missiles? I’m still waiting for the Aim-9M. Perhaps they’ll get around to it once the American F-14D Tomcat comes to the game.
2 Likes