For the love of God move strela up in br, there is nothing more annoying than dying by an unavoidable death machine
Battle Pass ends, time to up tier the main reward. :D
Meets my expectations
2 Likes
skill issue, that’s the exact same thing when facing F…ing guided munition in tanks. It’s very good yes, but that’s just spaa standard, and it can’t do anything else.
I mean the most similar vehicle. The Lvkv 9040C has less than 8.7 spaa capability. Where the VEAK 40 is just objectively better.
So i think its worth mentioning.
Now wether or not that ads up to the 2S38 should go up or LVKV9040C should go down is for someone else to judge as ive not playtested the 2S28
1 Like
Do not move the 9.0s to 9.7 RB
If you do move the Hunter F.1 down with them
The Vampire FB.4 has no place at 8.0 and being the same BR as the export Vampires
The Vampire FB.4 has less engine power Spaded than the export ones have stock while being at the same BR, move it to 7.7 or 7.3
the MiG-15 and F-86A-5 do not need to move down i cannot wait to have to fight a MiG-15Bis (Ish) in my Spitfire F.24 (probabally Ok but should prob move down to 6.7)
and if they are moving down move hte Swift F.1 down with them, and maybe even the Swift F.7 to 8.3 with the later sabres and MiG-15bis
move most if not all the 9.3 supersonics to 9.7 as they were, they stomp in downtiers and perform well in uptiers
the Fox needed to move up but a 0.7 increase is sharp, move it to 7.3 will release the issue mostly, and if it needs to move up again do so (liek you did with the Su-25 (9.3 → 9.7 → 10.0) Buccaneer S.2B should arguably go down, sure it has AIM-9Ls but the A-10A Early has the same number, a gun, more Countermeasures (the 30 stock flares on hte buccaneer may as well not be there) and the Bucc needs to sacrafice weaponry for the missiles, then the Su-25 is also lower with comparable speed and manoeverability, with having missiles that are equivalent and a very potent gun, the Buccaneer S.2B shoudl also go down in sim but thats another issue
rework Sim BRs I do not know how hte F-4F is 0.3 higher than the FG phantoms which have a better radar, engine, radar missiles, and IR missiles
Move F-15 to 12.7, it may not be the best out of the 12.7s but it isnt 12.3 worthy and shoudlnt really be fighting 11.3s with its performance and 9Ms
i may edit this as things come to mind
5 Likes
Once more the naval changes are absolutely pitiful as expected by the devs…
All things are regarded to realistic battles.
• If you’re gonna put the Peacock class Corvettes to 4.0 at least give them more shells then a minutes worth of ammunition.
• Which Albatros is going up? The Type 143 FAC or the Albatros class Corvette?
• I don’t agree with the K class sloop going to 4.3, the thing is slow an the guns are inadequate above such a BR.
• Okay It’s probably my fault for the No.13 subchaser going to 2.0 but I don’t see how that can work when it’s so lightly armed even compared to the ahistorical Type 5 at 1.7.
• The Minensuchboot M-1935 M-17 should stay its current BR.
• The Gabbiano class Corvette Folago should also stay its BR, no point increasing it.
• At least the Königsberg class cruiser Köln going to 5.3 makes some sense but where’s Karlsruhe?
Suggestions:
• Serious question but how in the world isn’t the Project 204 Going to 4.0?? for it’s a menace at 3.7.
I ponder when the BR changes happened after its addition an saw the Restigouche class destroyer get sent to 4.0 even through back then it was ehh but to see this corvette remain at 3.7 is ridiculous.
• Project 35 4.3 to 4.7 or at most 5.0
With how easy it’s to get the SKR-7 & how ridiculously OP it still is the vessel should have its BR increased significantly.
• Project 159 from 4.3 to 4.7
Like the SKR-7 the SKR-1 is also OP but being EoL TT it should be increased but not as much.
• Project 50
SKR Rosomacha 4.0 to 3.7
SKR Karl Marx 4.0 to 3.7
SKR Yenot 4.0 to 3.3
These ships have remained at 4.0 for a rather long time an are basically over BR’ed, the first two get rocket assisted depth charge so they should have a lesser BR but the third is rather horrible for 4.0 only has two torpedoes & hedgehogs, This vessel should at least be 3.3 imo.
• Tacoma class Frigate USS Hoquiam PF-5 3.3 to 3.0,
Once more I beg that this stupid sad & useless ship get a BR reduction for it cannot defend itself from forward or reward engagements & has one horrible damage model especially now, It probably wouldn’t be to OP since it struggles against most similar size & smaller ships.
• Porter class destroyer USS Phelps DD-360 5.0 to 4.7.
It’s a pre WWII ship stripped down to a lighter armament akin to a Fletcher class yet still stuck at 5.0 even even similar armed ships are at 4.0.
• Impetuous class destroyer 4.0 to 4.3 basically as just mentioned it’s quite armed for 4.0 & it’s a surprise it’s still here.
• Ayanami class Destroyer JDS Ayanami DD-103, 4.0 to 4.3 only on the condition it’s rerated as a destroyer like it’s historically so AI AA doesn’t melt it due to its frigate damage model.
• Chidori class Torpedo Boat 3.7 to 3.3, It’s ridiculous to think that this is still 3.7 when similar ships to its design time are 3.3, the vessel should be at that BR imho.
Aircraft,
• A-7K 11.0 to 10.7 or 10.3
This Aircraft is quite sad & extremely horrible to play it should’ve been lowered ages ago yet here we’re.
• Q-5L, 9.7 to 9.3,
Ahistorically gimped an is only at 9.7 due to GBU’s but it could easily be at 9.3 given Aircraft around it, OR you it all the historical bells & whistles an make it 10.0 or 10.3.
• US F-5A/C 10.3 to 10.7
These Aircraft are incredible for their current BR an should be higher up in BR over what they currently are even if with Ahistorical countermeasures.
• V-12 2.3 to 2.0 or 1.7
I don’t get this aircraft it’s rather sad compared to it’s predecessor but it shouldn’t be it’s current BR especially when more heavily armed Aircraft are below it’s BR.
• Fw 189 A-1 2.3 to 2.0 or lower
Same as above inadequate armament for BR especially in the bomb department an it doesn’t take damage well at all ntm for it’s BR it’s terribly slow.
• A-36 2.7 to 3.0
How in the world is an early mustang at 2.7 especially with the ability to carry twn 12.7 mm HMG’s which will destroy basically all underpowered Aircraft around its BR.
• P-51A 3.0 to 2.7
Also an early Mustang but somehow it’s a higher BR must runway spawn & has a lower armament, how are these two BR’s a thing.
• D4Y2 2.3 to 2.0 or lower
This thing doesn’t make sense especially since it’s a bomber that must research bombs to be a bomber so it suffers a bit just before it becomes a bomber, It could definitely work at 2.0 or at least give it the 60kg bombs stock please.
• F-104 A models & C model 9.3 to 9.7
I was happy when it went down originally from 10.0 but the decision to make it 9.3 was ABSOLUTELY STUPID, Put it back up & maybe give them their other historical armament or those in the CDK.
• F-104G Italy 10.7 to 10.3 it’s a balanced aircraft but it’s current BR is daft tbh.
• F-104S /TAF 11.0 to 10.7
They were originally this BR & okay but the decision to make them 11.0 was dumb imo, they should return.
• F-104S.ASA 11.3 to - 11.0
It’s quite sad an it fights 12.3 fouth gen aircraft, this thing should be lowered plus four AIM-9L’s is meh nowadays ntm this things RWR sucks in game.
• MiG-21SPS-K 9.7 to 10.0
I don’t get how this went down as it was perfect at 10.0 ntm R-13M1 missiles at 9.7 is ridiculous imo (R-60’s are overrated imo).
• MiG-21S 9.7 - 10.0
If it became the MiG-21SM an had R-13M1 missiles & the SPS-141 countermeasure pod added (besides Red 23 was a MiG-21SM, So why is it on a MiG-21S airframe??, NTM the old forum had a thread discussing this aircraft).
• MiG-21PFM 9.3 to 9.7
If given the ability to swap out armament into the export fighter variant as a mod & gained the ability to launch R-60 AAM’s, This is kinda like some soviet tank mods currently take the T-64B/ BV mod kit iirc.
Yep that wraps up my thoughts but like always I doubt anything will happen especially for the naval side…
7 Likes
Tell me you don’t want me to ever play subsonics again without telling me you don’t want me to play subsonics ever again.
4 Likes
M4A3 76 is at most .7 better
The mobility is marginally better, reload is identical (5.9s aced), filler is nice but overrated with the firefly still one-shotting with a hull shot, stabilizer is nice but not 1.0 BR difference nice, and gun depression is the same. I mean, there’s the entire Soviet lineup with 5 degrees or less depression!
Now consider the 30% higher penetration of the Firefly, which makes it an absolute menace for any heavily armoured tanks it faces, including Tigers and Panthers, let alone the KVs it fights on the regular.
Right now, the Fireflies are closer in BR to the M4A2 (75) than the M4A3 76!
1 Like
mig-15, F-86a-5 (8.0) VS Spitfire F mk 24 (7.0)
…Do I understand correctly?
13 Likes
have fun :)
The late F-86s, MiG-15 and MiG-17 should stay where they are. them going down is just a side effect and long term consequences of all aspect missiles being as low in BR as they have been.
Instead what they should do is this: move every all aspect missile carrying planes to 10.7, lock them from ever seeing 10.0 and then move the F-104 and MiG-19/21F and YaK-38 back up to 10.0 and leave the MiG-15/17 and late F-86s where they are at and the problem will for the most part be fixed.
Planes without flares do not need to see all aspect missiles and this is a problem that should have been fixed a long time ago.
8 Likes
T-34 1941 is perfectly fine at 3.7? even 2.7 tanks in a full uptier can pen its sides and hit ammo just fine and the entire turret front can be easily penned by the American 75mm/Soviet 76mm, which almost every small nation gets.
1 Like
True. Lvkv 9040C should probably be 9.7, largely due to its APFSDS round along with good search radar, and track IR systems.
It’s also why I say remove OTOMATIC’s APFSDS round and move it to 10.0/10.3.
If the AMX-50 TOA100 and Lorraine 40t will still be at 7.7 where they’re defeated by the powerful guns and stabilised tanks in uptiers, I don’t see why they couldn’t get their historical commander gun controls, it would be a slight qol update without ruining enemies’ lives in downtiers
22 Likes
Object 292 10.0>10.3/10.7
It is too OP in 10.0，especially，when tanks in 9.0 meet it
And I think all the Italian Top br ground vehicles
should be in lower br
5 Likes
Aircraft Battle Rating Discrepancy for Air Simulator Battles
Phantom F4J(UK) vs Phantom FGR2/FG1
Spoiler
Phantom F4J(UK) [Premium]
Nation: Britain
Current Battle Rating: 11.3
IR AAM: 4x Aim-9G
BVR AAM: 4x Skyflash DF
External Gunpod
Max A2G load: 2x base kills
Radar: AN/APG-59
RWR: AN/APR-32 (E, G, I bands, 50km, Type 6, SPI)
CM: 60
Top Speed: 1153kt
Turn rate: 26.0s
(note Britain’s Phantom F4J(UK) does not have HMD or Slats)
Phantom FGR2/FG1
Nation: Britain
Current Battle Rating: 10.7
IR AAM: 4x Aim-9G
BVR AAM: 4x Skyflash DF
External Gunpod
Max A2G load: 2x base kills
Radar: AN/APG-59
RWR: ARI 18228 (E-J Bands, 50km, Type 6, SPI)
CM: 90
Top Speed: 1222kt
Turn rate: 26.0s
These 3 aircraft are near identical, with the difference being the engines, RWR and CM count. Which are all in favour of the Phantom FGR2/FG1 resulting in it being the superior airframe. The RWR on the Phantom FGR2/FG1 is better and has better engines that result in a higher top speed and acceleration and has 30 more CMs. It makes no sense for these 3 aircraft to have different BRs. The Phantom F4J(UK) should come down to match the Phantom FGR2/FG1 which are ideally located at 10.7.
The only reason it appears to be 11.3 is because its Premium. No other reason exists for it to be at a higher BR
Mig-23ML vs Mig-23MLA
Spoiler
Mig-23ML [Premium]
Nation: USSR
Current Battle Rating: 11.0
IR AAM: 4-6x R-60M
BVR AAM: 0-2x R-24R
Radar: Sapphire-23ML/TP-23M
RWR: SPO-10
CM: 60
Top Speed: 1271kt
Turn rate: 33.0s
Mig-23MLA
Nation: Germany
Current Battle Rating: 11.3
IR AAM: 4-6x R-60M
BVR AAM: 0-2x R-24R
Radar: Sapphire-23MLA/TP-23M
RWR: SPO-10
CM: 60
Top Speed: 1271kt
Turn rate: 33.0s
These 2 aircraft are Identical and yet maintain different Battle-Ratings. They have same loadouts, same radar, same RWR. The only difference is the tech trees they are located in and the premium status. I dont know if the ML should go up or if the MLA needs to go down, though the Mig-23ML use to dominate the 10.0-11.0 brackets, so I suspect that it will need to go up in BR. but either way, these 2 airframes should be at the same BR.
Air Simulator Battle Rating Changes needed
Hunter FGA9 BR reduction from 9.7 to 9.3.
The Hunter FGA9 has no CMs, No radar and is sub-sonic like the Hunter F6, but only has 2x Aim-9Es instead of 4x SRAAM. Which impacts it serverly in A2A combat, there is a reason the FGA9 has an RB rating 0.3 lower than the F6 and I cant understand why this does not also apply to Air Sim as well.
Harrier Gr7 BR Reduction from 11.7 to 11.3
The Harrier Gr7 recently got a massive increase from 11.0 to 11.7 due to the addition of Aim-9Ms, but ultimately, this is highly unfair and has rendered the aircraft almost unplayable. It has no radar, at all. Meaning using any missile, Aim-9L or Aim-9M beyond rear aspect is extremely dangerous, severly impacting effectiveness. It was moved up due to the addition of Aim-9Ms, however, R-73s still exist at 11.3 on the Su-25T, Su-39 and Su-25BM. and Magic IIs exist on the Jaguar IS at 11.0. 11.3 is a more appropriate BR for an aircraft with no radar in SB and would actually give Britian a viable “fighter” for this BR range, as we currently only have the Tornado Gr1
Mig-23MLD BR increase from 11.3 to 11.7
The Mig-23MLD is one of the best 11.3s in the game currently, with few rivals within the 11.3 brackets. It outperforms everything with strong SARH and All-Aspect IR missiles, as well as a decent airframe. Similar such aircraft like the F3 when added received a 11.7 battle rating in Aim Sim and so should similar such aircraft like the Mig-23MLD
Harrier Gr1 BR Reduction from 9.7 to 9.3
This is entirely based upon the current BR of the Harrier GR3. An Identical airframe, with better IR missiles, CMs and RWR which currently exists at 9.3. There is little justification for the GR1 to have the higher BR at this time, especially with SRAAMs in their current state. Once they are fixed, it can potentially return to 9.7, but SRAAM wouldnt be unreasonable at 9.3
Air Realistic Battle Rating Changes Needed
Hunter F1 from 9.0 to 8.7
All 9.0 Gunfighters have had a BR reduction down from 9.0 to 8.7 but the Hunter F1 has been forgotten, if the others require a BR reduction, so to does the Hunter F1 and should join them at 8.7
Hunter F6 and Harrier Gr1
Both of these aircraft are currently struggling at their current BR due to BR compression. They Lack CMs but almost exclusively face uptiers against All-Aspect missiles. Additionally the SRAAMs are underperforming hard, with a number of outstanding bug reports, a few more than a year old. In the absence of SRAAM fixes, which would certainly restore these aircraft to being 9.7 worthy, they desperately need a temprorary BR reduction to 9.3 or lower. Where they may stand a better change of survival.
The Harrirer Gr1 is notable here due to the lack of CMs, its direct couterpart, the Harrier Gr3 has CMs, RWR and better rear aspect IR missiles and is the same BR in ARB.
F-15 (all variants) increase from 12.3 to 12.7
There is really no justfication for the F-15 not join the others at 12.7. Its fast, well armed and can easily out-turn anything it encounteres in a downtier. Just because a BVR truck cannot compete with turn fighters like the Gripen or F-16 does not justfiy its current rating.
Stock Aircraft changes:
Jaguar Gr1 and Gr1A both start with no secondary weapons at all. Nothing. Please consider adding either 540lb bombs or Aim-9Ds or Aim-9Gs to these aircraft as stock weapons, gun fighting, in a stock strike aircraft, is not fun.
Tornado F3 additionally could do with the standard Skyflash (not DF or SuperTEMP) as stock as well.
Naval Realistic Battle Rating Changes Needed
HMS Renown decrease from 7.0 to 6.7
The Renown has notably less armour than HMS Hood and 1 less turret. This makes the Renown signifcantly more vulnerable and less able to fight back than the Hood. Compression in Naval is extremely high, but even the slight reduction to 6.7 would help greatly
HMS London decrease from 5.7 to 5.3
HMS London suffers greatly from a total lack of armour, a well placed destroyer Salvo can easily kill 30-50% of your crew. The turrets have no protection and can be easily disabled and the citadel makes up most of the ship. Meaning you spend most of your time unable to steer in a fight. The lack of offensive fire power and armour leaves it extremely vulnerable. If ships like Prinz Eugen are returning to 5.7, then HMS London needs a BR reduction alongside, as it is well below the Prinz Eugen in performance.
All 5.7 British Cruisers
They all need a review in their current placement, whilst HMS London is a notable example, they all have low armour, and limited fire power. With stronger ships like Admiral Hipper and Prinz Eugen returning to 5.7, then all British Cruisers at 5.7 need a review and consideration for 5.3.
Ground Realisitc Battle Rating Changes Needed
Challenger DS
The Challenger DS should recieve its currently missing L26 and armour upgrade package and move to 10.3. The Challenger was deployed to operation Granby exclusively with L26 shells and addtional armour. As the Challenger DS is this tank, then it should recieve these upgrades.
This would not harm the Challenger DS in anyway as most run the Challenger DS at 10.3 with items such as the Stormer, Lynx and other MBTs like the Challenger Mk3 and Vickers. In fact it would only increase the value of the Challenger DS, likely increasing sales as the 10.3 line-up Britain’s best high tier BR at the moment, with top tier boarderline unplayable.
Challenger 2 (all variants) and 3TD
After the nerfs in the last major update, the Challenger 2 is no longer suitable for top-tier GRB and until such time they get buffed or fixed. They have the worse armour and mobility and they no longer hold a reload rate advantage. They require a Battle Rating reduction if gaijin is unwilling to give buffs such as reload rate increase or improve other aspects of the tank.
Challenger 2, 2F, TES and OES to 11.0
Challenger 2 BN and 2E to 11.3
Challenger 3 TD is by far the worst Challenger at top tier, with worse armour and fire rate than the others, but due to DM53, cannot move. Instead it is in desperate need of a reload rate increase to 5 seconds to match the other Challenger 2s
This appears to be a popular opinion based upon this poll
Without such a buff, there is no reason to play the Challenger 3 TD over the 11.7 Challenger 2s due to its major weaknesses and so it too needs a BR reduction as a result.
S238 increase from 10.0 to 10.7
I actually think it needs to go to 11.0 but baby-steps
The S238 is by far one of the strongest IFVs in game, easily able to one shot most MBTs at its BR and can fight any aircraft with ease. Its the perfect support tank. It also has fairly decent armour and mobilty, able to tank some darts. Additionally, it totally outperforms current IFVs at 10.0 such as the 9040C.
11 Likes
Italy only have 10.3 AND 11.3/11.7 Ground formation.
If AMX 10.7，there is no ground vehicle to play with.
Because 11.3/11.7 you can just to use Tornado IDS 1995.
No one goes back to using a subsonic attacker in 11.3
9 Likes
I spend the majority of my time playing Rank V and VI planes across all nations, so I feel compelled to weigh in on the proposed changes.
I seriously urge the developers to NOT implement the changes to the 8.3-9.0 Sabres and MiG-15/17s.
Dropping these planes to 8.0-8.3 will make starter jets nearly unplayable. All of the Sabres and MiG-15/17s are well positioned as they already are relative to the planes below them.
The problem is that most planes from 9.3 and up are undertiered.
Dropping the matchmaker spread to only 0.7 BR would solve the issue. Yes, queue times could be affected, but it would still be worth piloting to see it that actually happens. I made a spreadsheet looking at every possible Air RB matchup from 6.3 to 10.3, and this proposal would resolve >90% of majorly imbalanced matchups in that range without requiring changes to any individual aircraft BRs. The reduced BR spread could even be implemented only for BRs 6.7 and above, since Ranks I-IV are–for the most part–well balanced with a 1.0 BR spread.
Alternatively, moving most planes from 9.3-12.7 up (9.7-13.0) would be a much better solution as well. There are certain planes (Hunters, Sagittario 2, Ariete, etc.) that should stay put, but if much of Rank VI and above moved up 0.3 BR, this would be a much more elegant solution to the problem of imbalance around 8.3-9.3.
3 Likes
not to forget the PR206 which is also not affected by BR change - now the M17 M802 and Albatros have to face them in nearly every match…
1 Like
the M551(76) mobility is only marginally worse and 2 degrees of gun depression is virtually nothing, then you have the full speed stabiliser which is huge (look at the Centurion Mk.2 being 0.7 higher than the Mk.1 despite being effectively the same in everything else)
1 Like