its used as a bomber by most players because bombing bases tends to still be one of the best ways to grind. Same reason why you see people in mig21 lazurs or Su30MKK/MK2s bombing bases. It has nothing to do with the planes capability in this case.
Its much faster than a hornet and has much better radar
difference between AAM3s and 9Ls is a pretty steep one to just say “better” only
yes, but even 7Ps are not stellar. Yes the 7Ms are not great but 7Ps arent a gigantic leap. They are just bit better as they feature a IOG+DL which is nice, but its still a sparrow.
Yesnt, the amount of missiles depends. I used to run 5x 7Ps and 4x 9Ls which yes, is more than 4x 7Ms and 4x AAM3s but efficiency wise, 9Ls are way less reliable than AAM3s. And between 7Ps and 7Ms both can be notched pretty easily. I wouldnt really say that the difference in missile load is significant.
A far better reasoning would be to use F15A as a comparison as its effectively the closest thing to it with similar loadout, but F15A has worse FM and way worse radar.
I think F2A ADTW is fine at 13.0 where it is, the flankers just need to be kicked the hell up.
Su-30Mk2 to 12.0 because it “only” has TV seeking KH29TDs with 35 km launch range certainly is one of the takes…Su30 platform with 6 of those together with 4 R73es and 2 Fox-3 RVV-AEs 0.7 BR above the mig 27k (which is already a pretty good cas plane at 11.3; with 2 KH29ts with 13 km launch range and two TV guided Kab500krs or two laser guided agms, with a way worse flight model, P/W ratio, much slower and carrying 0 a2a missiles with full cas loadout, otherwise has access to r60ms.
Way better flight model (Speed, climbrate, acceleration, instant turn)
4 More agms
22 km longer launch range
4 R73s
2 Fox 3 RVV-AEs
that leads to a measly 0.7 BR increase in ground according to u? Hell, the Mig27 doesnt even have a radar, not that it had access to any radar missiles but still…
Only possible in the russian tech tree fr…Why that thing is at 12.3 would be the better question, although im quite confident i know the answer already.
Because my proposal was about ARB BRs. Don’t see any point to discuss about AAB BRs or AAB scenarios. I don’t even know AAB meta, BRs and so on and wrote nothing about it.
And if you’re not defending against 2/10/billion enemies - having actual energy retention is NOT just so much better for extended missile fights; especially with better missile BVR kit.
Flankers also don’t have insane energy retention - what should they do if they harassed by half of the enemy’s team?
Reason: It has the same amount of guns as USS Cowell, but about 2/3 of the crew (270/190). Also Cowell has the guns in separate mounts, as Phelps has them grouped in 3 which is clearly a disadvantage if one gets hit. Thanks.
Vehicle: Chieftain Mk 10/Chieftain 900 Gamemode: Ground Realistic BR Change: 9.3 —> 9.0 Reason: Given the Leopards’ BR lowering, these tanks should also receive a BR lowering. They have better turret armor, which rarely saves them from tanks on their BR or higher, but they pay for it with a virtually complete lack of mobility. They weren’t previously considered as OP-tanks at 9.0 and weren’t often encountered in battle (compared to many similar vehicles and even premium ones). Perhaps their better statistics were explained by the general unpopularity of the British ground forces.
Vehicle: Turm III
Gamemode: Ground Arcade
BR Change: 8.3 —> 8.0
Reason: The Turm III is a sidegrade of the CLOVIS, it is actually worse in many ways, such as the lack of front engine (vulnerability to APHE, SPAA, spalling etc), and extremely poor “ammo city” layout. Its main advantage is that it has APDS (M392A2 which is meh) and a stabilizer, but It doesn’t justify a raise to 8.3.
No, lets swing between AAB-meta in discussion about ARB BRs, examples of 13.7 planes and over-inflate some of the game situations like defensive fighting, while totally ignoring strong sides of other wehicles.
Vehicle: T-72AV (TURMS-T)
Game mode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 10.3 → 10.0
Reason: Has far away less armor than T-72B/T-72B(1989), and it’s struggling even against vehicles on the same BR, their main feature (3rd gen thermals), make no difference at the actual map rotation (70% of times, city and small maps), where armor and gun handling make the difference, but he lacks on both of them.
They aint even matched bro, also lack of front engine?
ah yes very lack of front engine definitely wasnt designed to have the engine in the rear and the autoloader system stacked like that. idk about you but this shit is NOT worse than the clovis pls go to specsavers
Lacks stabilizer, much slower, no 30 mm. But gets apfsds, good thermals and 4 sec reload, but doesnt justify 8.7. should go 0.3 below Turm III (that then is 8.0, like the char 25T lol) to 7.7. Ah yk what, eff it, all german tanks above 3.0 down to 3.0…germany players are struggeling too much.
actually put all german tanks down to 3.0 they are too bad smh everything is worse than the clovis yk what put it to reserve tier even those are worse that the clovis hell the L3
