Rear aspect only.
G.91 R/4 Italy and Germany — Add the missing historical armament or reduce the Ground RB BR
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Aircraft: G.91 R/4 — Italy and Germany
Proposal:
- Option A: Keep both aircraft at 8.7 and add their missing historical armament.
- Option B: If the armament remains unchanged, reduce both aircraft from 8.7 to 8.3 in Ground RB.
Reasoning: The proposed BR changes reduce the G.91 R/1 from 8.7 to 8.3 in Ground RB, while both the Italian and German G.91 R/4 remain unchanged at 8.7.
The R/4 uses essentially the same airframe and retains the same weak primary armament of four 12.7 mm M3 machine guns. Its main additional air-to-air advantage consists of four AIM-9B Sidewinders, but these early rear-aspect missiles have very limited value in Ground RB. Low-altitude engagements are generally short, targets are frequently manoeuvring, and an AIM-9B can be defeated without requiring modern countermeasures.
The AIM-9Bs may justify a difference in Air RB, where dedicated air combat is the aircraft’s main purpose, but they should not automatically justify a 0.4 BR difference in Ground RB. They provide no CAS capability and do not compensate for the R/4’s inadequate machine-gun armament.
The R/4 admittedly carries four AS-20 Nord missiles instead of the R/1’s two, but its remaining ground-attack options are still very limited. Once the Nords have been used, the aircraft is left with four .50 calibre machine guns, two bombs or a small number of unguided rockets.
There is already a documented historical armament report covering both aircraft. According to it, both the Italian and German R/4 could receive:
- 12 RP-3 rockets, six on each pylon;
- the historically correct load of up to 100 two-inch rockets, with 62 on the inner pylons and 38 on the outer pylons.
The Portuguese G.91 R/4 represented in the Italian tree could additionally receive its historical custom four-tube and six-tube launchers for 2.75-inch FFAR rockets.
Historical armament report:Community Bug Reporting System
Adding these missing weapons would improve the aircraft’s flexibility and provide a reasonable justification for retaining the current 8.7 Ground RB rating.
However, if these historically documented weapons are not added, both G.91 R/4s should be reduced to 8.3 in Ground RB, together with the G.91 R/1. Four AIM-9Bs, which are highly situational in combined battles, are not sufficient to justify keeping the R/4 at a higher Ground RB rating.
The current official vehicle pages confirm that both R/4s remain dependent on four 12.7 mm machine guns and a limited selection of bombs, FFARs and Nord missiles.
Suggestion
Naval
Japan Coastal Type T-38
1.7>1.0
The Type 38 offers no advantage over Type T-14 (mod 2) that is the current 1.0 reserve boat.
Same 25mmType 96 with 360deg coverage, same Type 2 torpedos, same crew, same armour, but is heavier and slower. Nothing I see or feel during testing or play justifies the BR and repair cost/time increase.
- Alternatively, unless the T-38 has some magic hidden advantage I am unaware of they should be swapped around. T-38 being the reserve and the T-14(mod 2) going to it’s slot but at 1.3.
3 Likes
Suggestion:
Italian Coastal - Stefano Turr
1.7>1.3
Positives - steel structure, 4 (mediocre) torpedos
Negatives - Gun armament is bad…very bad for its BR. 3x 13.2mm sounds sort of OK but their arcs are terrible with only the forward one being unimpeded by the other pair. The stern mounted 6.5mm is useless, both in calibre and ammo (ball, tracer mix only), plus is no longer classed as a secondary so can’t even be used as an independent tail warning signal. Speed and manouverability are OK but nothing spectacular to make up for the shortfall in combat capabilities.
In play you won’t be first to a cap where the hull armour will make you more difficult to shoot out. You also won’t be able to dig out enemies from those same caps due to your own weak armament. Neither can you sit further back and act as a support boat as you lack the range and firepower.
Overall a very poor boat that in many ways I feel is inferior even to it’s Tech Tree predecessor the MS-15 at 1.3. Currently a boat without a purpose.
4 Likes
Would you play the T26E5 in battles at BR 7.3–7.7? BUT German continue to play the Tiger II under such circumstances.
If you use the Tiger II in battles at BR 5.7–7.0 just like you use the T26E5, your experience will be equally good.
However, the 88 mm gun gives the Tiger II the ability to engage tanks at BR 7.3–7.7, while the T26E5’s 90 mm gun does not have enough performance to penetrate them frontally. Therefore, very few people would continue to play the T26E5 in such high‑BR matches.
Vehicle: KV-220
Change reloading time 7.4 to 7.0 s.
reason: like on othere 85mm barels
(ARB) 6.3 → 6.0
2 Likes
Seconded. Its selling point is the number of torpedoes but it’s at the wrong BR to make real use of those.
One of the roughest spading experiences I’ve had in this game.
Not all heavies are created equal. The Tiger II is less BR sensitive, you’re right. But that is because it relies more on firepower than armour. The T26E5 relies more on armour instead.
In a full downtier at 7.0 it will still be a monster and the 7.3s it will meet can be managed. At 7.7/8.0 it will struggle, but fortunately the American lineup is very versatile (more so than the German one). T29, M46, T92, Scorpion, they all give you the tools to handle anything an uptier throws at you, and that’s before we even mention CAS.
The Tiger II has no such luxury. There are no 7.0 and 7.3 German lineups in a meaningful sense unless you’ve been playing since before Night Vision, and 7.7 is a half-lineup. So the Tiger II has to do it all, it’s the backbone of the whole bracket for Germany.
4 Likes
F-5C Skoshi Tiger
10.7------>10.3
This jet really need br changes on ARB.
Suggestion:
Naval
Italian Coastal - RN Gabianno
3.7>3.3
On paper sounds great to have a 100mm, multiple 20mm mounts, and a bonus of 2x torpedos in a coastal spawn sub chaser.
So it’s a pity you are relatively slow, have poor manouverability, the 100mm cannot shoot low angles over the bow with up to 1km blind spot which is not ideal in PT boat lanes, and the 20mms start to run out of effectiveness at these BRs.
Plus you will be completely outclassed if you face even the worst reserve destroyer (even HMS Churchill will trouble you!).
3 Likes
Suggestion:
Naval
Italian Coastal - RN Ghibli
3.7>3.3 (mainly due to forced DD spawn)
I actually have little complaint about the Gunboat itself. Yes it has the same low angle blind spot at the bow as Gabianno, isn’t exactly the most nimble, and relies solely on 20mm for Secondaries. However being faster and with 2x 100mm mains with decent arcs (except as already mentioned) she’s better equipped to deal with challenges.
However it’s all for nothing as she has a Destroyer spawn point and is out gunned at the start of 3.7 matches where faster ships sporting 4x 100mm+ isn’t uncommon. .Even at 3.3 she will face stiff competition but at least the reduced mains can be balanced against the better secondaries. Still maybe not the best first spawn but better later on once aircraft appear and bluewater/coastal fleets close on each other.
3 Likes
Can we have cruise missile for F117 too? or counter measure or even rwr!
Its more peak.that the turms is an OP vic.
If any AA spray even sneezes your direction the tank goes poof. I mean 0.1 seconds and its gone
No lazer/ even just a rangefinder, no thermal, no smokes, bad / ghost rounds
Its pretty quick and gets a 30mm canon.
much faster reload too.
turm 3 should go up to 9.0 instead of leopards going down.
Not fast enough with bad shells +no armour/ smokes
T58 i get but the turms or anything that is melted by a pea shooter just isnt OP
protection analysis feature in the game tells you the exact stats for each shell.
also the new ballistic simulator.
Vehicle: A-6E Tram
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 10.7 —> 10.7
Reason: It has awful flight performance and is aleredy denied by SAMs like Osa and Tor M1 at 11.0 it will become unplayable against Pantsirs and VT1 carriers. Skipper standoff weapon have practical range of ~10.5 km launched from 4-5km alt and is a laser guided weapon which preverts you from spamming them on different targets. Outside of it being premium it has little to no advantages over planes like A-7D or A-7E which are currently a 10.7 alternative. More over at same 10.7 there’s Buccaner S2.b with much better flight performance that now operates data-link missiles with greater range.
Other issue is that US has no 11.0 setup.
5 Likes
its still really good tho.
ive been using it at 10.0 and getting nukes here and there.
still penetrates all enemies.
Vehicle: Leopard 1A5BE
Battle Rating: 9.3 → 9.3
Reason: This Leopard 1A5, unlike the other Leopard 1A5s, was used primarily with MECAR M1001 and M1060 APFSDS-T, giving it vastly better options than DM33
6 Likes
Thats you thats good not the tank
Jumbo is best example. You watched the challange series with cant rember who vs jonBPA?
John chooses the jumbo and its over. The other guy is like i just cant use the jumbo- he is meant to be pro too but shows the levels.