How do you think the tracks attach to the vehicle? That’s apart of the additional track assembly.
The difference between the Early Tiger II and Late Tiger II’s turrets are ~80mm, better increase the late version to 7.0 too.
I think moving up the Tiger II Late to 7.0 is better than moving the Tiger II Early down to 6.3, yes
1 Like
And that has what to do with M833?
Ah, but that’s not a 0.7 difference like the T28 and T95.
No, but then the difference in performance between the Tiger II’s and between the US Super Heavies isn’t equal.
The Tiger II Early still gets the amazing gun, good hull armour, and decent mobility for a heavy tank. It just has a big weakspot on the turret (That one can easily disguise with bushes, mind you).
The T28 has perhaps 1/3rd the effective side armour of the T95. If it gets tracked and has no support, it is dead. For the T95 it depends on exactly what tracked/flanked it, because some guns just don’t have the pen to overcome the extra and pretty thick spaced armour.
Mind you, I’m talking about guns in its BR range, of course.
statsShark hasn’t updated the July data yet. I can’t wait to see the July data and find out just how huge the improvement is.
I still cannot stress enough how absolutely dead the R2Y2 is, I get that the BR has been 8.0 for years now, but still if you are willing to change the BR of the Flakpanzer 341 even though at that time it wasnt in the game for a while, then that shows you can change the BR of other removed vehicles. Back to the R2Y2, it NEEDS a lower BR (7.3 ideally) You removed the airspawn and nerfed the guns.
3 Likes
Was that the stats from last month only?
As my Cromwell tulip was a 70% winrate now
That should have been the decision NGL. The tiger 2 is a nuke printer tank played by the most garbage players the game gets
Can understand your point but 6.3 will destroy lower planes.
Vehicle: All ICV Bushmaster (Type 24, Type 25, M1296, VBCI-2)
Gamemode: Realistic
BR Change: 9.7 —> 9.3 (9.0)
Reason:
All of these vehicles are grossly overrated and post terrible stats. The main problem is the Bushmaster’s gun: it rarely penetrates even the side, and the ridiculous damage and poor rate of fire make the situation downright catastrophic. When driving into the tank’s side, you can shoot at it for 10 seconds without inflicting any damage, while it will easily turn around and kill you with a single shot.
The Japanese Type 24 and 25 lack an unmanned turret, and the completely identical Badger at 9.0, while the Chinese CM34 is at 9.3. It’s simply impossible to find logic in these BRs; these completely identical vehicles are at three different BRs.
Badger, CM34 and Type 25 should be at 8.7-9.0 with a manned turret. Tanks with unmanned turret (M1296, VBCI-2) should be at 9.0-9.3.
The Type 24 should have its turret module fixed (bug reports have been ignored for months, three bug reports, one 8 months old, the other 6 and 2) and also be at 9.0-9.3.
9 Likes
Vehicle: F-104s.ASA
Air RB: 11.7 → 11.3
Reason: Basically, all BR 11.3 fighters are better than it and more effective in combat—I don’t understand how this plane is ranked so high in BR. The J-8B, MiG-23ML/MLD, JA-37C, F-4E Phantom II, etc., are in lower BR tiers and are definitely better fighters.
What’s more, to carry Aspide-A1 radar-guided missiles, we have to forgo the Vulcan cannon— which alone means it should be lower in BR, but that’s not all—it lacks a directional RWR; it only alerts you to a lock-on and nothing more. We have no information on the direction of the threat, no information on whether a missile has been launched, NOTHING.
These previously mentioned flaws, combined with a very poor flight model that prevents us from fighting anyone other than by fleeing 8–9 km away and only then turning back, mean that this aircraft, even at BR 11.3, won’t be anything special, but it will at least give it some breathing room.
And one last thing: when will the aforementioned F-104G/S get EEGS and IRST? We’ve been waiting for this for two years…
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/TA3Omz0Zuqgs
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/wlETGoDDwzUn
7 Likes
The player stats of German players are dragging the Swedish one down.
Same thing is happening with leopard 1a5
you know that with the removal of the HO-RI… you manage to made a FOMO … reaction…
the game at 4,7 is unplayable. from the how many jap players want to get that
is amazing how something like a remove a vehicle can ruin the half game.
If you had a choice to be sat in a western tank or a russian tank which would you choose?
I know which one i would rather be in, something about having my corpse sent a couple hundred meters in the air along with the turret doesn’t fill me with confidence.
Also, you act as if getting stuck in mud is uniquely western. Believe it or not when vehicles are put in situations where they have to wade through deep, thick mud they get stuck and require towing out…
the A6M5s (and on a lesser note the A7M2, but it is slightly better off due to having better engines) going to 6.0 is basically the final nail in the coffin for them. They were already slow planes at their previous BRs, hell they might even be on the slow side at a slightly lower BR too. Sure they can turn, but what use is the ability to turn if everything is faster than you? They can just run away. Also correct me if I’m wrong, 6.0 is the point at which you can start regularly seeing jets.
4 Likes
that does not seem to be the case. its a badly performing plane, even with 4x 30g low range missiles.
solely because its just how bad airframe is:
imagine the harrier, but shits away speed 2 times faster while turning and harrier already shits a ton.
1 Like
I mean, most players i see use this thing try and dog fight in it which isnt a great sign. I just think 4 missiles is a little excessive for 9.3 when they could have been kept with 2.
Although from memory they dont get flares which makes it a little better but still. 2 was more than enough.
1 Like
I dont know if this scales properly but the swedes get 4 RB24s at 9.3, but im not sure if they are comparable to the R-60s, they seem closer to copies of the AIM-9B. Other notable nations with 4 missiles at this BR are the USA, the British, China and France, but again, all of these use AIM-9Bs so i’m not sure this comparison works
Actually its bloody brilliant for sealcubbing in the Churchill VII rn, however it’s not helping that vehicles case for staying at 4.7 with the noobs zerg rushing for the hori