BA-9’s are already worse than Hellfires bring them up to 16 is just giving it parity with Apache platform
More modern airframe sure, but in every metric that matters to WT Z-19 are only better at maneuverability than the Apache’s, not to mention no turret for self defense
ZA-35
8.7 → 9.3
Add its missing NCTR
Add its missing TWS
Add its missing APCI-T, and fix ammunition (100mm RHA @ 1km 0 degrees, ~~130-140mm point blank)
Add its Gen 2 Thermal
Fix its turning Circle
Damn good deal, id take that deal.
Type 25 RCV (P)
Realistic ground battles: battle rating 9.7 → battle rating 9.3
Following the battle rating reduction of the M1296 Dragoon, I personally think that would be fair if others 30 mm Bushmaster II Mk 44 at higher similar battle rating range would be decreased as well given the lower firing rate, terrible dispersion for a cannon created for accuracy (this need to be addressed on the 30 mm Bushmaster II Mk 44 which for some reason is less accurate at distance when compared to the 30 mm L21A1 Rarden).
Mode: Air RB
Vehicle: Yak-1B
Recommendation: BR 3.0 - 3.3 (3.7 if you give it Rank III)
Reasoning:
Flight performance:
The plane has excellent performance in the 3 main categories (speed, climb, turn) and is able to kill entire lobbies - the few planes able to fight it at its own BR are the 109 E-4s and the 2 Bf 109 E-7s - that’s why i bought the German premium.
Armament:
Even as the ammo pool of 120 x 20 mm rounds seems low - with good aim and trigger discipline 5-8 kills are possible as 2 hits kill any enemy fighter, FI-T hits extremely hard, center mounted and excellent ballistics makes aiming easy.
Current classification:
Imho way too low as even in full of partial uptiers to 3.7 or. 4.0 just a handful of planes offer this package. The current BR 3.0 is just the result of the plane being just Rank II - so experienced players just use them for daily Rank II tasks - and the few sweatlords with thousands of kills with it don’t trigger a BR increase to BR 3.3.
Own experience:
I stopped playing the German premium after 59 matches (129:9 kills) as i found the BR 3.3 MB 157 even more op whilst is it far superior regarding top speed and high alt performance and can outrun 109s - and i do not run into the risk of ripping my wings in every dive (lost 5 planes to over-speeding and 4 to bomber return fire).
After some very intense dogfights with outstanding enemy pilots in USSR Yak-1Bs i have also noticed that my theoretical handling advantage (i fly exclusively with a HOTAS in Air RB without instructor) is basically non existent - meaning that the FM is optimized for mouse aim with zero instructor limitations / influence. When i fight with my UK Hellcat an excellent pilot in an US TT Hellcat the Hotas usage is a decisive factor for me as i can turn way tighter despite we fly identical aircraft.
Type 24 ICV (P)
Realistic ground battles: battle rating 9.7 → battle rating 9.3
Like the previously mentioned Type 25 RCV (P), I would like to propose a battle rating decrease in realistic ground battles following the proposal of the M1296 Dragoon to battle rating 9.3, alongside Type 25 RCV (P), this would populate the japanese battle rating 9.3 line-up with two additional vehicles for a more smooth experience for the player.
VBCI-2 (MCT30)
Realistic ground battles: battle rating 9.7 → battle rating 9.3
I would propose a battle rating decrease to battle rating 9.0 but I see that battle rating 9.3 is more realistic for now if those are considered. Following the previously mentioned vehicles and the M1296 Dragoon, I think would be fair for vehicles with only the 30 mm Bushmaster II Mk 44 or slow-firing autocannons only considering the poor firerate or post-penetration damage of 30 mm autocannons in-game.
Vehicle: FV4005
Mode: GRB
Change: 6.3 > 6.0 6.3 and Top Speed Fix
Although a reduction in the br of this vehicle would be welcome, a much better change to improve its effectiveness would be to fix its top speeds in line with the other centurion mk3 hull users too, those vehicles were fixed previously and FV4005 was unfortunately missed from those changes.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/qsZnz6HPouul
Vehicle: Spitfire MK14e
Mode: ARB
Change: Recieve 150 Octane Fuel and a BR change of 5.7 → 6.3
We have a lot of 5.7 and 6.7 spitfires in game.
mk24 is often bouncing between 6.7 and 7.0. It would be nice to see the mk14’s gain their historical 150 octane and fill a gap rather than maintaining the br congestion of 5.7 spitfires.
With the expected increase of the Mk 9 LF to 6.0 i think this would offer a nice spread of spitfires and br’s.
yes, because of a single missile, the best fox3 in the game for BVR. It is being carried by the single missile and there’s only one correct way to play it, which is just climb and dump all ur Fakour 90 and turn back. Why did you think gaijin banned it from Nuclear Thunder? The plane (missile) itself is very oppressive and is very meta for ARB. I even heard that they cut the missile load on it by a few or something for balancing purposes.
doesnt matter cuz ur not gona fly for long anyway, u just need to climb and dump ur missile and turn back
Turan III Reload time 5.9 → 5s
As the German Panzer IV tanks are getting a reload buff , shouldn’t the Turan III also get it? Its basically the same gun. We can get technical and say that it was developed from the blueprints of the German PaK 40, but its kinda the same thing from the game’s standpoint. It uses the same ammunition as the Panzer IV tanks. (for which i asked above.)
they seriously think that the z19 should be the same br as the z10 just because it can carry more mid missiles. its just hilarious
F-86F-35 in arcade from 7.3 to 8.0
its identical flight model wise and loadout wise to F-86F-25 so it makes sense it would be same br.
Vehicle: Strf 9040/56 BILL
Mode: GRB
BR-Change: 10.3 → 10.3
Adjustment: Addition of 40mm slpprj m/01 (APFSDS-T MK. II)
Justification:
The Strf 9040 Bill is essentially a worse 9040B that sits at 0.6 br higher solely for having very situational and unreliable top-attack missiles.
While the vehicle used to be very good, it’s been extremely mediocre ever since the launchers’ ability to depress/elevate was removed, which heavily limits its ability to use the only thing that made it 10.3 on basically every map - and at the same time, you’ll also have to wait a decently long time for it to unfold, which further decreases its viability.
At this time, the missile either tries to cosplay a top-attack atgm or just sends itself into the dirt instantly.
At the same time, since the vehicle is based on a Strf 9040A, it only features a vertical-stabilizer that cuts off at ~30kp/h, which hinders it’s ability to quickly engage targets further (something that even the Strf 9040B at 9.7 doesnt have to deal with).
While having the LEMUR-sight is certainly nice, not being able to fully utilize it due to the lack of stabilization at, honestly not even very high speeds) essentially outdoes this advantage.
At the same BR, Strf 9040C is simply a much better option, as it gets a significantly better dart (m/90 damage is quite inconsistent due to lower residual penetration) while also featuring better survivability against common autocannons.
Imo, the lack of full-stabilization, a better 40mm dart and addon-armour are simply too much of a downside just for getting a extremely situational ATGM and decent commander-sight. The addition of 40mm slpprj m/01 would increase the BILL’s capabilites to where it atleast becomes a viable alternative to Strf 9040C, despite still lacking full-stabilization and additional armour.
BVR performance for missiles is entirely irrelevant past 20km
Why do you think the R-77-1 and MICA are praised so much?
It’s not their BVR performance
AIM-120A/B and C are not praised for their range performance either.
Your point is moot because the missile is completely reliant on the enemy co-operating with you and flying straight
none of these vehicles needed a buff.
they are all incredibly powerful, gaijin doesnt need to give them more strength to compensate for trash tier german mains
Air RB
J-7E
11.3 → 11.7
Add PL-5C
Currently its flight performance is extraordinary for 11.3, and is held back by its missile kit
Giving it a better missile will bring it up to a BR where it will have more challengers to its flight performance, and allow the 10.3s to avoid this monster, and restrict how many 10.7s can see
There are also written sources that dispute that claim, due to lack of much info from the testing. No confirmed numbers, not much in the way of testemonies, etc.
To be clear, I have about as much idea about if it was built as anyone else does. I won’t speak in absolutes. If it was, there’s very limited info. If it wasn’t, then what info there is is well fabricated. But to say “All but comfirmed” is a bit of a stretch given what we know/don’t know. And I certainly wouldn’t want it in WT until we could confirm…well anything.
Zrínyi I - Reload time 5.9 → 5s
Same reasoning as with the Turan III
Has the same main gun as the Turan III. Which is practically the same as the Panzer IVs. It uses the same ammunition as the Panzer IV tanks. We can get technical and say that it was developed from the blueprints of the German PaK 40, but its kinda the same thing from the game’s standpoint.
