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.
13 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
Unfortunately gaijin goes off “this vehicle was OP almost three years ago, which clearly means the meta hasnt changed at all since then and it needs to stay nerfed”
This is why the F14s are all in such miserable states
But the IRIAF gets a pass because it was added well after the meta evolved
1 Like
Bf 110 G-2 GRB (not Air) 3.7 → 3.3
Just like gaijin once intended. The plane can be used in Ground attack with the Bk 37, however is limited to HVAP, which is quite bad, Overall it is realtively ok, somewhat slow and big for where it is. And the very similar ◔Me 210 Ca-1 36.M is also 3.3.
1 Like
Fw190A-8 5.0 → 5.0(GRB) 5.3(ARB)
The Fw190A-8 does not overperform in ground battles. There is no need to up its BR and take away another option which is primarily a fighter, not a ground attack plane.
2 Likes
Hs 129 B-2 GRB (Mainly Ground) 2.3 → 2.0 while the Offencive Firepower is good, it has no defencive armarment and is quite slow with usually 250-300 km/h, especially in an uptier to 3.3 the power increase to other planes is extreme and the Hs 129 cant even escape, escaping from Biplanes (like the russian ones) is even complicated).
3 Likes
Jagdtiger: reload time 23,6 sec → 19,4 sec (T34, Sturer Emil)
The Jagdtiger has two dedicated loaders for its two-piece ammo, because of this the reload should be faster than the Maus/E-100 and significantly faster than IS-3 and IS-4 with their cramped turrets and only a single loader.
The Sturer Emil loads similar ammo into a nearly identical gun in 19,4 sec with just a single loader!
7 Likes
AB43
it_ab_43
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.0
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.3
-
47 mm 47/40 mod.38 Reload Speed: 3.3 s → 3.5 s
-
8 mm Breda mod.38 Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.5 s
Rationale:
The poor penetration causes the AB43 to struggle much more in uptiers than its competition, mainly the AMD.35 (Pak) [BR 2.7], which can handle 3.7 heavy tanks with some skill. Even the KwK 38 version of the AMD.35 at 2.0 still isn’t an outright downgrade compared to the AB43, since it still boasts better armor and much better penetration.
The arcade BR is lowered to greater extent because this mode’s visibility mechanics tend to put stealth-reliant light vehicles at a disadvantage. This is a trend already seen in other light vehicles’ arcade BRs.
15 Likes
Marder 1A1: add DM63
20mm HVAP is not even able to kill most light tanks from the front.
It already has the worst ground based ATGMs in the game and only four of them with relatively long reload and very limited launch angles.
It should at least have some firepower, the BMP-1 not only has far superiour missiles but also a gun capable of engaging every other tank frontally.
3 Likes
Ju 87 D-5 (Ground, not shure About air) 3.3 → 2.3 While it did get a new aquivalent bomb loadout to the D-3, the flightperformance doesnt change and the very aquivalent plane, the Il 2 Mod. 1941 with 2x 20mm Shvak and 2x Shkas is at 2.3 (while also having a wider arrangement of explosives, such as Bombs and rockets). And even the mod 1942 sits at 3.0
2 Likes
Semovente 75/46 M43
it_semovente_m43_75_46
-
Arcade Battle BR: 4.7 → 4.3
-
Realistic Battle BR: 4.7 → 4.3
-
8 mm Breda mod.38 Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.5 s
-
Correct hull armor (Bug Report)
-
Correct weight (Bug Report)
Rationale:
I see this vehicle as analogous to the Hetzer [BR 4.3]. Both are compact TDs with decent frontal armor, but otherwise poor survivability and mediocre mobility. Where the Hetzer has more uniform front protection and a larger crew, the Semovente M43 gets a lower profile and better gun. I therefore don’t see why the Semovente M43 needs to be placed any higher than the Hetzer.
16 Likes
Lol F-18E at the same BR as the F-18C (1994) lol
F-18C has no HMS, no K band detection, only 120B, no C for longer range targets and the standard 120 cm lol
Aircraft:
J7W1 Shinden
Mode:
Air RB
Proposed Change:
6.0 \rightarrow 5.3 - 5.0
Reason:
The J7W1 currently suffers from a Battle Rating that assumes its high-speed interceptor role translates to effective combat capability, but in practice, its flight model is severely lacking compared to its contemporaries. Despite the heavy punch of the 4 x 30mm Type 5 cannons, the aircraft is hamstrung by an abysmal climb rate and a complete lack of maneuverability. It is consistently out-climbed by nearly every Allied fighter it faces, forcing it into a defensive position from the start of the match. Once engaged, its sluggish turn rate and poor energy retention make it nearly impossible to shake a tail or reverse an engagement. Lowering its BR would place it in a bracket where its high-speed diving capability is balanced against more appropriate opponents, rather than forcing it to face super-props that outperform it in every metric except burst mass.
8 Likes
Comparing how Gaijin favors the US compared to how they’ve been consistently pampering Russia during this last months is basically wild gng 🥀🥀
1 Like
Did you not read the post?
The F-18C is overtiered it’s not equal to the F-15C or J-11B
2 Likes
This tank was so nice to play at 2.3… I hated to see it get unreasonably uptiered.