It would be like the Su-34, yeh.
But with hms which is neat for r73 off bore shots
1 Like
It’s because the Su-34 has eight fox 3s.
1 Like
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: M163, ZSU-23-4M2
BR Change: 7.3 → 7.7
Reasoning:
Both the M163 and ZSU-23-4M2 are currently over‑performing at 7.3 and should be moved up to 7.7.
The M163 features a 3000 rpm cannon with no overheating, allowing sustained fire, and is equipped with an optical tracking system that provides a lead indicator, making target engagement highly effective against any airborne threat.
The ZSU-23-4M2 mounts four 23mm cannons with a devastating rate of fire and carries 4000 rounds, with an additional 4000 rounds available via an ammunition box (reserve), giving it virtually unlimited sustained firepower. Even without radar, its fast turret traverse and high‑velocity ammunition make it lethal against low‑flying targets.
At 7.3, both of these vehicles frequently face late‑WWII propeller aircraft and early jets that have no stand‑off weapons or countermeasures, making them virtually untouchable. They are far more capable than other SPAAs at this BR, such as the Wiesel 1A4 (which is not even a dedicated AA), while comparable radar‑equipped or high‑calibre SPAAs like the VEAK 40 and zsu-37-2 already sit at 7.7. Raising both the M163 and ZSU‑23‑4M2 to 7.7 would align them with similarly effective anti‑air platforms and prevent them from dominating lower‑tier matches.
3 Likes
This change means mkk will be able to have both 2 ld10 and 2 r77 while having 6 kh29td. Also if it can carry r77 on inner r73 pylons, can it carry 2 more pl12 as well? If yes that means it can also carry 2 more ld10 considering its based on sd10, export variant of pl12.
I made a quick, low-effort discussion post about this a while ago, and apparently the Chinese Su-30 can also carry the R-77-1.
The discussion was mainly about moving the aircraft up in battle rating while figuring out its capabilities. I also wanted to find out whether it could use the dual missile pylons like the Su-27. From what I found, the Su-27 can’t actually use the dual pylons after all; apparently, only the Su-35 can.
A lot of people liked the idea of a 13.7 Su-30 with dual pylons, but it would completely upset the balance at lower battle ratings. The tech tree Su-27SM is already very strong with the dual pylons too.
1 Like
If i had to choose between an MK2/MKK and 27SM/J11B at 13.7, i would take anything else with a working radar lol
Mode: Air RB
Vehicle: Mirage 4000
Proposed change: 13.0 → 12.7
Given that F-15A with a similar weapon kit is at 12.7. This aircraft simply does not belong at 13.0. Its radar is identical to the 2000C, and its semi-active missiles are worse than contemporaries such as 27ER and 7P. Only good thing about the aircraft is the Magic II count which is irrelevant considering Eagle can carry 4x9M with 4x7Ms at a lower battle rating. DEFAs are less forgiving than the M61 found on the F-15 as well.
Mode: Air RB
Vehicle: Mirage 2000C-S4
Proposed change: Countermeasures update.
S5 lowered back to it’s OG BR was a step in the right direction, but this change made S4 obsolete. Since it cannot go down to 12.0 it is best to give the countermeasures suite and the MAW found on the S5. Currently it sits in the same BR with same exact performance minus countermeasures and maw which does not make sense at all.
2 Likes
Vehicles: Hawk 200 (UK) & Hawk 209 (Japan)
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
New BR: 10.7 → 10.3
Now that Hawk 200 RDA (UK) is being moved from 11.0 to 10.7, there is no need for these two remain at 10.7 and they should be lower. Hawk 200 RDA is a substantially better plane due to sheer loadout alone because it doesn’t have to sacrifice anything to be better compared to those two.
Hawk 200 has no radar but has 4xAIM-9Ls paired with internal twin ADEN to compensate with alongside decent payload. Hawk 209 at least has something it could potentially receive to keep it relevant at 10.7 but Hawk 200 literally cannot get anything more. IT HAS TO BE LOWERED TO 10.3.
Hawk 209 has a radar but has 4xAIM-9P-4 with 10G less pull and only a single external gun so it has more drag. To get more of your payload or better flight performance, you have to sacrifice the ADEN pod. AGM-65G advantage is mostly due to longer track range but that is around 4km~. Unless Hawk 209 has access to 6xAIM-9P-4 and 3xSea Eagle, its pointless to let it be at 10.7. With how it is and it being a premium, there has to be an incentive to keep it relevant at 10.7. Unless its upgraded (fixed actually), it has to be lower than 200 RDA.
2 Likes
Vehicle: t14
Mode: ground rb
Br change: 4.7>5.0
Reason: if the Churchill mk7 is considered adequate to be raised to 5.0 i believe the similar t14 should receive a likewise increase in br
2 Likes
Eight Fox 3 missiles and four Fox 2 missiles on an Su-30mk? I wouldn’t want to deal with that in a 13.0 or 12.7 aircraft during a sale. It could work if proper decompression were implemented, but right now it would just be a pain in the neck.
Gamemode: RB
Vehicle: Leopard 1A5
BR: 9.3 → 9.3
Comment:
The 1A5 is a perfectly fine MBT for 9.3. Instead of downtiering it I would suggest the following:
Leopard 1A5, C2A1 → add DM63
2 Likes
I would overall not wanna play the MKK or MK2 if they were 13.7 in current compression, no point to play them there because from my own experience and many of my friends 13.7 is almost always 14.7. They do not stand a chance there even remotely when compared to the SM and 11B. Ask for 15.0/15.3 Air, then move them to 13.7 together with most current 13.7s going to 14.0
Something like this?
Vehicle: USS Aylwin/ USS Gridley/ USS Bagley( Helm)
Mode:AB
BR:3.7⇒4.0 4.0⇒4.3
These ships’ main battery firepower is clearly overtuned for their current BR bracket.
They can fire 15 rounds per minute until their ready-use ammunition is depleted, and even afterward they still maintain 12 rounds per minute, giving them an exceptionally high sustained rate of fire. On top of that, their speed, torpedoes, and every other fundamental performance characteristic are above average, making them excellent destroyers overall.
Gridley and Bagley (Helm) are even more extreme, as they do not have a ready-use ammunition limitation at all, allowing two of their guns to maintain a constant 15 rounds per minute. (The recently added Gridley also has 250 crew members, addressing what was previously its main weakness.)
They are essentially “mini Fletchers,” and I believe a +0.3 BR increase would be appropriate for all of them.
1 Like
One post per vehicle.
1 Like
Vehicle: Forrest Sherman USS Phelps
Mode:AB
BR:4.3⇒4.0 4.0⇒3.7
Unlike the previous examples, these are cases where I believe the current BR is too high.
◆Forrest Sherman:
If the 127 mm guns are recalculated using the rate of fire and reload time of the twin Mk.22 mounts, their effective firepower is roughly equivalent to six guns. (The Mk.18 is a single mount with approximately twice the rate of fire of the Mk.22.) Since BR 5.3 is generally balanced around ships with the equivalent of eight guns, assigning Forrest Sherman a BR of 5.3 despite having only about six guns’ worth of firepower is an overly harsh balance decision.
◆USS Phelps:
This is a poor ship that seems to have been completely forgotten. BR 5.0 is far too high for a ship with only five main guns. Although she is a Porter-class destroyer, she carries only five 127 mm guns. Because she is a Porter-class ship, she also has a relatively small crew. Compared to Sumner and Gearing, she has both weaker main battery firepower and fewer crew members, making her significantly less capable despite sharing a similar BR.
sorry
Since posting them individually would result in multiple posts, I’ve grouped together ships with similar performance. I’ll be more careful in the future.
Premiuns maybe
Moving the t26 while the t29 chills with those stats?! Is why people get mad
Also the solid shot of the heavies…
This isnt a good tank, the t26 being left at 6.7 is all they have worth using now
But make it make sense. Moving a tank at 6.7 to 7.0 while another US heavy at 7.0 already has better stats than the t26 at 6.7. Hurt my brain just writing it
BaLaNcEd
1 Like
Ki-44-II Hei
- Rank : Rank II → Rank III
- All Battle: BR: 3.7(SB 3.0) → BR: 4.0
Reasoning
The Ki-44-II is a fighter that combines very high levels of maneuverability, climb performance, and firepower in a well-balanced package. Its engine delivers high horsepower at both low and high altitudes. The four Ho 103 guns are also quite powerful. It can fight quite effectively even against BR 5.0 fighters.
3 Likes