Choice inferior to kh29td or kh31p
1 Like
Just remove the gbu-39s and make it 11.3. the only time the gbu-39s are good on this thing is when you have altitude and that extremely rare.
Vehicle: XM1C and XM1gm Gamemode: Ground Realistic BR Change: 9.3 —> 9.0 Reason:The M735 cannot handle tanks with a BR.M735 is inferior to 3bm22 Dm33 type93 dm63 m/90c. Or need powerful apfsds to 9.3
1 Like
Just 11.3 without gbu39 removal. Gbu39 are worth nothing on a10c in grb.
1 Like
Oh I agree, just stating it as a counterpart to his “but muh IR mavs on the 18C early” counterpart. If someone wants to have long range weapons on the MK2 there are plenty choices.
Oh this. Do people really need explanation why agm65 is outright useless post 11.7?
1 Like
Without the GBU-39, it would essentially be no different from the A-10A in the game.
Suggestion
Air
De-folder Bristol Brigand & Westland Whirlwind
Having these paired makes no sense. Other than having two engines and four cannons they have little in common as one is a 3 seat bomber and the other a single seat fighter from a different company… The Whirlwind has far more history alongside the Welkin who’s design originated from proposals built on Westlands experience with the earlier plane (although the final result bore little resemblance).
- Seperate. There is room for an independent Whirlwind placed ahead of the Brigand.
Or
- Seperate then refolder with a more appropriate workmate. Make a new Tier III folder with the Whirlwind + Welkin. The resulting gap in TIV could easily be filled with a new DH Hornet variant to maintain a 2 plane minimum. (likely either F1 or NF21)
Mode: Air Realistic Battle
Vehicle: Yak 3 (VK-107)
BR Change: 5.7 → 6.0/6.3
Reasoning: The Yak 3 (VK-107) is on par with the Yak 3u, which has really good acceleration and energy retention, good top speed and very good turn, while its slower at low altitudes, its faster at 4000m and higher. The climbrate is also better at 4000m+. Only at 6500/7000m both have around the same performance.
6 Likes
Raising the A-6E TRAM and J22 to 11.0 will simply kill them off. They perform perfectly well at 10.7. Let me remind you that all their long-range missiles are easily intercepted, and now they will become literally unplayable.
3 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battle
Vehicle: Bf 109 G-14/AS
BR Change: 5.3 → 4.7
Reasoning: The G-14/AS has worse performance at 5000/6000m and lower than the Bf 109 G-6, only having better performance at higher altitudes. There is no reason to have it at 5.3, as its slower, has worse climbrate and turn than other aircraft it competes with.
2 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battle
Vehicle: Bf 109 G-14
BR Change: 5.3 → 4.7
Reasoning: The Bf 109 G-14 has more or less the same performance as the Bf 109 G-6. Its outclassed at 5.3, as its slower, has worse climbrate and turn than other aircraft it competes with.
2 Likes
OH BR change right after sale, well well well
Mode: Air Realistic Battle
Vehicle: Bf 109 G-10
BR Change: 5.7 → 5.3
Reasoning: The G-10 is slower and has a worse climbrate as the Bf 109 K-4, only having better performance at around 7000m and higher. Its outclassed at 5.7 as it doesnt fit the meta, where the K-4 has already a hard time to performe good.
3 Likes
M26 (all) - RB BR 6.7 → 6.3.
If Tiger 2 P gets it, Pershings should also get. it is not needed on this br due to the presence of T26E1/M26E1
3 Likes
T26E5 - RB BR 6.7 → 6.7
This tank does possess decent armor performance, but that’s not a reason to upgrade it to version 7.0. You should reduce some of its engine power or increase reload time to balance its combat effectiveness. Upgrading it to version 7.0 will drastically worsen its combat environment.
3 Likes
Those two are subsonic.
A-10 is actually slower than some prop aircraft.
It is a terrible CAS platform
Those vehicles do not carry Fox-3’s (F-16A does not have IRCCM missiles)
And mavericks are significantly worse than KH-29s.
Consistently dealing no damage or crits while KH-29 is an almost guaranteed kill while being one of the fastest air to ground missiles in the game.
It isn’t.
Last I checked this only gets 4 mavericks if even.
Mavericks are so much worse than KH-29s it’s kinda funny
If anything, the F-16A could go up to something like 12.3.
The other American vehicles stay.
Su-30MK2/MKK can go right up to 12.7
1 Like
have a look for yourself
3.7s
Compared to T-34(1940):
3.1 seconds Quicker reload (Almost half)
60% more penetration (with the shell everyone uses)
Stabilised
Almost double the verticle speed
much higher top speed
Higher HP/T (Acceleration)
nearly 2.5x more gun depression
1 more crew member
access to Smoke grenades
Neutral steering
better ballistics
half the reverse speed
Worse Armour
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
Compared to Pz IV G:
1.9 seconds Quicker reload (soon to be 1 second)
Stabilised
2.5x the verticle speed
50% more horisontal speed
much higher top speed
9 more HP/T (better Acceleration)
2 degrees more gun depression
neutral steering
much better hull side armour
much beter turret front armour
no cupola APHE/HE magnet
half the reverse speed
Worse frontal Hull Armour
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
worse pen
Compared to M4/M4A1
1 second Quicker reload
20% more penetration
2.5x the vertical speed
much higher top speed
Higher HP/T (Acceleration)
2 degrees more gun depression (M4)
access to Smoke grenades
Neutral steering
better ballistics
Marginally better side armour
1 mph worse reverse speed 1.5x slower
Worse turret and frontal hull Armour (M4A1s is marginally better, M4 is notably better)
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
No .50 Cal
4.0s
Compared to M4A2
1 second Quicker reload
20% more penetration
2.5x the vertical speed
much higher top speed
Higher HP/T (Acceleration)
2 degrees more gun depression
Neutral steering
better ballistics
65% worse reverse speed 1.5x slower
Worse Armour
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
No .50 Cal
Compared to T-34 (1942)
2,5 seconds Quicker reload
27% more penetration (with the shell everyone uses)
Stabilised
2.5x the verticle speed
much higher top speed
Higher HP/T (Acceleration)
nearly 2.5x more gun depression
1 more crew member
access to Smoke grenades
Neutral steering
better ballistics
half the reverse speed
Worse Armour
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
compared to Pz IV H
1.9 seconds Quicker reload (soon to be 1 second)
Stabilised
2.5x the verticle speed
50% more horisontal speed
much higher top speed
10.5 more HP/T (better Acceleration)
2 degrees more gun depression
neutral steering
no cupola APHE/HE magnet
half the reverse speed
Worse frontal Hull Armour
no APHE *(can be rectified with addition of M86)
worse pen
no AA Machinegun (minor)
at 4.0 the margins of the Cromwell’s benefits are reduced in most cases unless a specific figure was given
(gun can be given more pen by the addition of the correct 6pdr Mk.V as i suggested)
and the lack of APHE can be rectified by the addition of M86 (would require a further BR increase probably, like the Cromwell V has seen, 3.3, then 3.7, then got APHE, then proposed to 4.0 in the current changes)
with the evidence above, and personal experience, I do think the Cromwell I is a 4.0 worthy vehicle, but i’d be very happy to see its correct 6pdr cannon
in addition to the fact that the Cromwell I trades APHE compared to the Cromwell V,
1.1 ton less weight,
a stabiliser
2.5x the verticle speed
17% more pen
better ballistics