F104S
Air realistic
11.3->11.0, remove fire bombs/bombs
As dumb as it sounds, leave the TAF one as a bombing premium grinder and let the tech tree one be properly used as a fighter. The devs clearly think they’re too good at bombing and making money to be lowered in rating, so by flat out removing the ability to bomb for the tech tree one it can get a lower rating.
It’s not like anyone was using this thing in tank battles to bomb tanks, so it doesn’t really matter much.
its already best 13.7 by far (especialy after pl 12 nerf). it also gets double missile loadout than f 16c or gripen C. guess you want meteor on gripen C to compensate for that?
radar is meh but more than workable
That’s crazy. Entire IS-2 line going down while T26E5 went up. God forbid US have a APCBC heavy at 6.7. they can only have solid AP T34 at 6.7 lmao
generaly is not always. also again rwr issue and countermeasure issue. being able to be against full team of them as max 4 would be diabolical
Vehicle: Mirage 2000D-R1 and D-RMV
Gamemode: Air realistic
BR Change: 12.3/12.7->12.0 Or at least 12.3 for both
Reason: These two jets are so utterly completely outclassed in Air RB that they are borderline unplayable. They only have two IR AAMs and don’t even have a bombload to take out single base for RP. Just to illustrate M2KCS5 is 12.3, F-15A is 12.7 same as Yak-141, F-111F is 11.7 just like Su-25SM3 is . Sure M2K Ds are strike jets and thus should not dominate Air RB but rn they are unplayable and should be reuced in RB.
Also there is no reason for them to have different BR in Air RB when they are effectivly identical(F1C and CT are more different yet they have the same BR)
My point was, for the sake of balance and variety, one of the Phantoms can get the historic loadout with 9Ls, while the other can stay the way it is with 9Gs and go down to 11.7 and give variety in gameplay (of different BRs)
Why have all the Phantoms at the same BR with the exact gameplay style (except FG.1 and F-4J(UK) getting with carrier capabilities)
F86K
Air realistic
9.0->8.7
The plane does turn better once you slow down, but it’s just not great.
I support this.
Here are my disputes from the planned BR changes:
G.91Y (Italy) - [ 9.0 > 9.3 ] What??? It’s already a mediocre jet and we’re moving it up?
MB-326K (Italy) - [ 7.7 > 8.0 ] Why? It is balanced at 7.7 and easy to exploit its lack of energy and speed with 8.0 jets
A6M5 Ko and Otsu (Japan) - [ 5.7 > 6.0 ] Be reasonable and move them to 5.3 or leave them be at least.
Wyvern S.4 - [ 5.0 > 5.3 ] Its fine at 5.0, maybe overtiered even. But I guess we will keep moving it up in BR till it reaches 14.7 just for the giggles I guess.
Now here are my suggestions for Air Realistic Battles:
Firstly, these are suggestions that I feel like should happen with the current state of BR compression, although we desperately need BR’s to be decompressed across the board, these are changes that I feel like are reasonable despite the compressed BR’s
BR placement issues at 14.3:
These can’t compete with just 6 missiles, and their flight performance doesn’t justify it either. They are considerably overshadowed by the other 14.3 jets
BR placement issues at 13.3:
These are too strong compared to other 13.3, they have the best loadouts and among strongest flight models at 13.3. They are better than the block15 F-16A’s that currently sit at 13.7 with a more limited loadout and countermeasures.
BR placement issues at 13.0:
It’s a very limited subsonic jet, with very poor FM that can’t turn, climb, or hold energy well in a turn, plus no gun without reducing your already small missile loadout. It should go to 12.7, and even there I suspect it would not perform that well.
In no way is it justified for it to be 13.0. The FM is a sidegrade from the 12.3 Mirage 2000. It has mediocre SARHs, and the magic-2 gatewidth IRCCM is very nerfed and doesn’t perform well at all (or currently gatewidth IRCCM is bugged)
BR placement issues at 12.7:
These should never have been downtiered from their original 13.0 BR since they were one of the strongest there. At 12.7, they just considerably overshadow everything else sharing that BR, and are clearly better than some 13.0.
A considerably heavier Mirage 2000 with a very limited loadout, naturally should be below the current Mirage 2000 fighters. This is your usual overtiered strike jet that doesn’t perform well and should drop in BR (for Air Realistic Battles only)
BR placement issues at 12.3:
Just like the Mirage 2000D-RMV above it, it should share the same BR at 12.0
The most obvious justification is that it’s just a much worse jet than the 12.3 F-16A/Netz, since they share a similar loadout. Non-IRCCM missiles are very unreliable tools at this BR range because they are very easy to 1-flare for the most part
BR placement issues at 12.0:
Compared to the Kurnass mentioned above, it has less missiles, less countermeasures, and no radar to slave the missiles to help to avoid IR lock into flares or missiles. Although the FM is a bit better, it is still a worse jet, and outclassed by vehicles even below it.
It’s clearly outclassed by the F-4S and F-4J, it has worse missiles than them, cannot carry a 6x SARH missile loadout, and has no HMD.
(…)
I wish to continue pointing out every issue in each BR bracket like this, but it’s taking too much of my time, and I can’t afford to spend all this time to be likely ignored anyway. So I will point out a couple of the most obvious issues below 12.0 that come to mind.
Having said that, there are a LOT of strike jets that are overtiered (for Air realistic battles), mostly above 9.7-10.0 to 11.7 (already mentioned the few cases above that), and Bombers have similar issues across most BRs. These are very obvious cases, and I will just glance over them for the sake of my time and sanity.
They bully everything at 11.7 and below, and can handle uptiers very comfortably. Amazing FM and missile kit, should be 12.0 without a doubt. The MLD is the worst offender among them.
It’s completely outclassed by the premium Ariete sitting at the same BR which has superior sustained turn rate/energy retention, much better acceleration and speed, and has a 70-80% faster climb rate. It’s just not fair for them to share the same BR. The ariete can be troublesome but the Sagittario is just too easy to avoid and out-energy by other fighters around that BR.
To put it into perspective, the Sagittario 2 is closer in performance to the Yak-23 that sits at 8.3 than the Ariete (although the Yak-23 is still a better turnfighter, just doesn’t handle as well at speed and has a bit less climb rate/acceleration)
These jets are easy to exploit with other 8.0 and + jets, their flight performance is more akin to the better dogfighters at 7.7. They lack the acceleration/climb and speed to justify being 8.0
Air realistic
Amx A-1A
11.0->10.7
Tech tree one exists at 10.7 with sidegrade/arguably better missiles, and the premium one has adens which are clearly worse than the minigun of the tech tree one
Vehicle: Type 5 Сhi-Ri
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 5.7 —> 5.0 (5.3)
Reason: Even before the gun loading mechanics were changed, the vehicle was playing at an average level, but the reload changes had a detrimental effect on its effectiveness. Besides the negative reload changes, their BR was also raised by two notches, and now even at its BR, the Chi-Ri encounters vehicles that are much better than it. Even at the bottom of the list, many vehicles are theoretically difficult to penetrate, and some are simply impossible. The Chi-Ri has no armor (even by the standards of late 2/early 3 rank vehicles, its armor is pathetic), no good mobility, and simply abysmal aiming drives (twice as bad as those of most competitors). Its reload is only slightly better than the M4(76), and compared to many rank 3 tanks, the advantage is even smaller. Previously, it had the lightning-fast two-shot feature, but without it, it’s just a plump Chi-To, and its position significantly above it is unfair (Now, from a unique machine, it has turned into a very mediocre tank).
Could the developers consider adding AIM-9L / Skyflah SuperTEMP to just the Phantom FGR.2, with a corresponding BR increase? It seems like there are quite a few benefits to this approach, and not really any downsides I can think of:
On the topic of the F-4J. You say that giving it AIM-9L would mandate a BR increase (I’ll let others argue for whether that would be a worthwhile trade). But what about the addition of Skyflash SuperTEMP?
The F-4J(UK) is an objectively worse version of the American F-4J, at the same BR. The F-4J has all of these advantages, while the F-4J(UK) does not have a single advantage to its name:
If the F-4J has all of those advantages over the F-4J(UK) while being the same BR (12.0 in RB) then surely the F-4J(UK) could receive Skyflash SuperTEMP (a missile that’s not even as good as AIM-7F in game) without a BR increase?
Air Simulator
Su-27
13.3 → 13.0
SU-30MK2
13.3 → 13.7
Centurion Mk.III
Br 7.7 > 7.7
Change - 3 second reload
Reason. It’s worse than Caernarvon and it’s historical. (Yes, I mean the video that you claim is sped up)
The Chrysler going to 9.3 after weeks :( Its hard to kill anything unless you can see the enemies full tank with the shells it gets
Dont get me wrong everything else about it is great but the duds are hard to use and no smoke seems harsh
Yeah having two planes that are basically exactly the same is annoying
J29F
Air realistic
9.0->8.7
It has afterburner and 2 aim9b just like the shenyang f5, but it is NOTICABLY slower, and all it gets in return is rolling a bit better and more ammo.
I agree with all except MiG-23MLs. They are clearly worse than F-4J/S at 12.0. Yeah the R-24s have good acceleration and pull, but only within 10km. After that the AIM-7F outperforms them. In BVR it’s not even a question
And it can only carry 2 of them. F-4s at that BR can carry 4 and more. Also the radar is very finnicky. Yeah it gets LD, but only under a certain altitude. F-4s of that BR gets pseudo PD which works at any altitude. Clearly the Floggers are balanced at 11.7
Not to mention other niche things like lack of HMS and terrible RWR
