Spitfire F Mk.24
BR change 6.7 → 6.7 (No change)
The Spitfire 24, while a good plane, can absolutely not move to 7.0 while the Sabres and MiG-15 still reside there, Before this can happen, the previous changes to the 8.0-9.0 jets needs to be reversed
Vehicle: Tornado ASSTA1 (Germany)
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Sim
BR Change: 11.7 ----> 11.3
Reason: It has identical performance to the earlier Tornado IDS aircraft (Tornado A200, Tornado MFG and Tornado WTD61) in every single respect and therefore has no justification for being a higher BR within air gamemodes. Additionally, the Tornado IDS MLU (RET.8) is also at 11.7 with a far larger flare count and all-aspect MAWS which gives it a notable defensive edge
lol lemme guess you only play russia
Vehicle: AMX A-1A
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 10.7
Reason: The AMX A-1A is identical in nearly every single respect to the tech-tree version the AMX, except it has the MAA-1 Piranha Air-to-air missiles. These are notably different to the Aim-9Ls that the standard AMX carries but comparable in overall performance and I don*t believe justify any reason for the AMX A-1A to be any higher at this time.
All Ground Attack aircraft are underperforming notably with Air Realistic at the moment, especially sub-sonic airframes that routinely encounter super-sonic ground attack aircraft. Such a higher BR guarantees that they will encounter aircraft such as the F-4S which routinely clear any and all bases long before the AMX can arrive.
The only gamemode that the AMX A-1A performs “well” in is Air Simulator, but even within this gamemode it is notably underpowered and would be better suited at 10.7 alongside similar airframes such as the AMX and Buccaneer S2B. Whilst the MAA-1’s are little stronger with Air Sim due to their short burn time, making them harder to see, the lack of radar limits the AMX A-1A’s ability to ID targets at longer ranges.
The AMX and AMX A-1A are not strong dogfighters, with aircraft like the Sea Harrier FRS1e at 10.7 much more capable under most conditions and its hard to justify even 10.7 for the airframes if not for the on-going compression
With the introduction of the Hawk 200, located at 10.7 with 4x Aim-9Ls, the overall justification for 11.0 has only become much weaker
Same br as p-80 soon lol
Vehicle: Phantom FG1
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 ----> 11.7
Reason: It has one of the worst A2A weapon loadouts at that BR and is being carried by the fact it has decent engines and slightly more CMs than most. But vs equivalent F4s like the F4S, it stands no chance, let alone aircraft on its own tree like the Tornado F3 that is universally better in almost all respects at the same BR.
Vehicle: Phantom FGR2
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Simulator
BR Change: ARB: No change, ASB: 11.3 ----> 12.0
Loadout Change: Add Aim-9L and/or Skyflash SuperTEMP
Reason: Unlike the Phantom FG1, the FGR2 actually used Aim-9L when it was in service with the RAF, this would give the FGR2 the performance it needs to operate at 12.0 alongside airframes such as the Tornado F3 and JAS37D . This change also helps differentiate between the FGR2 and FG1 which are currently Identical and gives a reason to own both airframes.
Vehicle: Phantom F-4J(UK)
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Simulator
BR Change: ARB: 12.0 ----> 11.7 ASB: 12.0 —>11.3
Reason: It is an identical airframe to the F-4J(US) and lacks upgrades such as Agile Eagle or HMD upgrades, lowering its performance notably. It also has a considerably weaker missile with the Skyflash DF (Aim-7E-2 equivalent) It is one of the weakest 12.0 aircraft in RB at the moment and doesn’t belong at 12.0.
In Sim, its equivalent TT aircraft are currently at 11.3 and there is no justification for it to be at 12.0 given it is weaker than both with less CMs and weaker engine
Ah yes because irccm is such an important feature against sabers and mig 15-19
Do you only play cas ?
Seams to me you are not very good in air RB either
Vehicle: Buccaneer S.1
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: Air Realistic: No change. Air Sim 9.0 -----> 8.7.
Rank Change: Rank VI ----> Rank V
Reason: This change would enable the Buccaneer S1 to get its Air Spawn back. Unlike even later Bucs, it has a notably weaker flight performance and absolutely no A2A performance (No AAMs and no CMs). It is extremely vulnerable to any attack and rarely if ever can make it to a base to drop its bomb on target. Lowering its Rank to V would enable air spawn and fix a LOT of issues for the Buc S1
The Buc S1 is also substationally slower than the Yak-28B and far less armed. These 2 aircraft should not be the same BR
BR change in SIM is due to the lack of any sort of A2A. 9.0 places it above a lot of other aircraft when its closest equivalents are at 8.3
And yet you have no proof how many of those deaths are actually from planes and tanks.
I can also say that I have a 8 K/D in the M1A2 because I decide to not count any deaths by CAS.
YAK-1B 3.0 ->3.7
very good in performance and basically ruins the BR range very strong and mind numbly easy to play with very op armaments
Why are all the low tier turn fighters nerfed?(re-2005 a6m spitfire etc)
Because American mains don’t know what energy fighting is and have a terrible win rate thanks to their skill issue?
Vehicle: M1A1
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
**BR Change:**11.7 —> 12.0
Reason: The M1A1 has better fire power and mobility than most if not all 11.7 and a few 12.0 MBTs with it easily matching the survivability of more than a few too. There is little reason for it to be 11.3 at this time and could quite comfortably be 12.0 or maybe even higher when directly compared to an MBT such as the Leopard 2A4M which is worse in almost every regard bar thermal gen. Is that enough to justify the lower BR?
Vehicle: M1A2
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 —> 12.7
Reason: The M1A2 has access to the M829A2 round which is the second best round at top tier, coupled with the 5 second reload this arguably gives the M1A2 the best fire power at top tier, and yet it is only at 12.0. Coupled with its excellent mobility and perfectly capable survivability, this MBT stands well ahead of anything else at 12.0 currently and could even be considered the equal to several MBTs currently located at 12.7. An increase to 12.3 is the bare minimum required. However, when directly compared to the other M1A2s currently at 12.7, the only difference of significance I can observe is Gen 1 vs Gen 2 Thermals. Whilst this may warrant a 0.3 lower BR, it did not for the Leopard 2A6, which has a Gen 1 thermal compared directly to the 2A7 which has a Gen 3 Thermal at the exact same BR.
Vehicle: M1A1 HC
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 —> 12.7
Reason: The M1A1 HC has access to the M829A2 round which is the second best round at top tier, coupled with the 5 second reload this arguably gives the M1A2 the best fire power at top tier, and yet it is only at 12.0. Coupled with its excellent mobility and perfectly capable survivability, this MBT stands well ahead of anything else at 12.0 currently and could even be considered the equal to several MBTs currently located at 12.7. An increase to 12.3 is the bare minimum required. I am unaware of any meaningful differences between the M1A1 HC and the M1A2 SepV1 which is currently a 12.7 MBT. The only difference I can see is the M1A1 HC has APS and a slightly weaker thermal gen. The APS is a minimal advantage, which only really leaves the thermal sight difference. Whilst this could warrant them being at different BRs, this was not enough to justify the Leopard 2A6 and the Leopard 2A7 to be separate BRs and there are greater differences in performance between those MBTs as far as I am aware.
It’s not THAT better than f-15 radar. 120 countermeasures vs 240 on F-15. Some one said that its to op for 12.7 isnt wrong. F-15 also to op for 12.7. So its just unfair that f2 is still on 13.0
they for some reason didnt go after the YAK 3U
Vehicle: M1A1 Clickbait
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
**BR Change:**12.0 —> 12.3/12.7
Reason: The M1A1 Clickbait has access to the M829A2 round which is the second best round at top tier, coupled with the 5 second reload this arguably gives the M1A2 the best fire power at top tier, and yet it is only at 12.0. Coupled with its excellent mobility and perfectly capable survivability, this MBT stands well ahead of anything else at 12.0 currently and could even be considered the equal to several MBTs currently located at 12.7. An increase to 12.3 is the bare minimum required. I am unaware of any meaningful differences between the M1A1 HC Clickbait and the M1A2 SepV1 which is currently a 12.7 MBT. The only difference I can see is the M1A1 HC Clickbait has APS and a slightly weaker thermal gen. The APS is a minimal advantage, which only really leaves the thermal sight difference. Whilst this could warrant them being at different BRs, this was not enough to justify the Leopard 2A6 and the Leopard 2A7 to be separate BRs and there are greater differences in performance between those MBTs as far as I am aware.
The complication is that this is a premium, and gaijin have previously stated they will not add max BR premiums to the game but I think it is far more egregious to leave a top tier MBT at 12.0 and simply pretend it’s not an issue. If its BR cannot be increased to 12.7, then at least remove the M829A2 round and replace it with M829A1 so it is limited in terms of shells compared to the other Abrams to warrant the slightly lower BR, but even with this reduced round performance, it is still a 12.3 worthy MBT when directly compared to several other 12.0 MBTs such as the Leopard 2A4M. M829A1 is still one of the better performing shells at top tier.
Dont remember off the top of my head, but if i go by my all time average kills/spawn, that would be 1.4, which is about the same as your 1.3. As of late now though, i have been seeing more out, around 2 or 3 per game minus the occasional no planes round when my team curbstomps the other so hard they cant spawn cas. Also the tunguska is a radar guided sam, not ir, so no irccm.