Wyvern was 5.0/4.7 some years ago, it was an easy target for the fighter opponents P-51 or Bf-109 which were mostly the same as nowadays 5.7-4.7.
Wyvern’s turn is very bad, can be out-turn by most single-engines and some twin-engines. And Wyvern lose energy rapidly during maneuvers, the energy advantage is usually lost before the second B&Z . Avoiding Wyvern’s headon and doing some defensive fly are actually much easier than doing dogfight with the decent fighters like Yak-3, P-51, Bf-109.
If the rookie pilots don’t know avoiding headon with 4x20mm, Firebrand or Firefly are also deadly.
The 17pndr and 77mm are exceptional weapons, I don’t know what your problem with them are.
I specifically compared the firefly as it’s the most prevalent 17 pounders vehicle and the one with the most 1:1 comparison.
Vehicles such as the avenger also deserve to go up, but I don’t want to overwhelm anyone with excessive writing.
On the 77mm, it’s on the Comet, which sure has a bit lower penetration than the Challenger at the same BR but also dramatically improved armour and a bit better mobility.
Then there’s the Concept 3, which is all the way at 4.3.
The 76mm M1 is roughly comparable to the 17pndr, though I’d argue that the 17pndr is generally more effective with its dramatically higher penetration. The KwK42 is found at much higher BRs than the 17 pounder, as is the 90mm ME except on the M36s which I’m sure you saw I believe are undertiered.
Too many people will look for any reason to bring or keep a vehicle at the lowest BR possible, and then they wonder why there’s compression…
please look at the KA-50 again and rethink if its fair, fun or smart to keep it at 11.0. I suggest raising it’s BR to 11.3 I think it’s a no brainer that it shouldnt fight at BRs with only one more or less effective SAM which is the french Roland.
Yeah the M4A3s mobility makes a huge difference. Whenever I played the M4A2 in an uptier I struggled way harder then a M4A3, simply because I couldn’t get into positions fast enough.
The M4A2 mobility is the same or worse then other tanks (medium/heavy) at the BR but having better mobility then the enemy makes a big difference in survivability and getting kills.
It is, but I’ve had no issues with it at higher BRs. My only comment is that it’s gun seems to be much more effective than the Warriors? No idea why, but I have more confident that it will do damage unlike when I used the Warriors where it seemed to do nothing but just punch holes through things.
It’s great they rope us into getting it through the Battle Pass, and then decide it needs to be pushed to a BR where it can barely cope, and in an up tier is useless.
huh m18 going to 6.0? for what? from what I recall the m18 just got buffed very recently, how can there be enough data already to justify an uptier?
also i really don’t think its much of an upgrade at all, sure engine is better but its already better than pretty much anything else that tier so no difference whatsoever. imo 6.0 is way too unjust
That take for the strv 103s tells me youve got no clue what your talking about bud. The majority of your list jas some very bad takes but some good ones too. I do hope youll send a video of the strv 103’s aiming like a normal tank with no shaking since you’ve come to the conclusion that they fixed hullaim(hint: no its still broken)
I’ve commented elsewhere about why I think the proposed changes to the Sabres & MiG-15/17s are a bad idea.
A few unrelated changes I recommend considering for this patch:
F-104C - Add 2 additional AIM-9B on a center-line rack (historically accurate from Vietnam era) for a total of 4x AIM-9B. Then move it to 9.7.
R2Y2s - drop all of them to 7.7. After the Type 5 cannon muzzle velocity was nerfed to be more historically accurate, these planes are not competitive at 8.0. They would not be OP at 7.7.
Me 262s - Drop the A-1a to 6.7. Drop the C-1a to 7.0. drop the C-2b to 7.7. These are all very overtiered relative to their performance. The stats are–almost certainly–balanced out by more experienced players using inferior airframes to a fuller advantage. If the proposed Sabre/MiG-15/MiG-17 changes are implemented against the judgment of the players, the Me 262s will become completely impotent.
And there’s the core of the problem. You, like many others, only compares vehicles to their max uptier counterparts while neglecting the downtier vehicles they primarily face. By doing so, you can argue for a lower BR and for BR compression.
The Firefly is an incredible and undertiered vehicle, with better firepower than similar vehicles a full 1.0 above it, even with minor weaknesses in mobility. It deserves at least a simple .3 BR increase, as it currently dominates and bullies 3.7, 4.0, and 4.3, and handles up to 6.3 well in my experience.
They should have all-aspect, or at the very least, very decent side aspect ability
They should actually work within 500m of the target, but dont due to TVC issues
All of these have been bug reported and passed to the devs. SRAAM overhaul was rumoured more than a year ago, but nothing since.
I personally like SRAAM, and really want more aircraft with them, like a BAE Hawk. But they are just underperforming and combined with compression, they see aircraft they should not be seeing, especially those with all-aspect missiles.
try VIFFing. Angling the vector of the thrust to give better turn. I do think it needs to be lower for now, but less due to the SRAAM or flight performance and more due to the lack of CMs
That’s just a lie. I outright said after that very quote that the Fireflies in a downtier are nothing incredible.
Edit: Since you edited your comment with a new paragraph, I’ll edit mine as well, with a simple answer: The Fireflies do not dominate or bully any of the BRs you mentioned.
Add AH-1W swapping places with A-129 and G-Lynx, it only gets maximum 2xAIM-9L that REPLACE the AGM-114s, which the A-129 and G-lynx can carry along with missiles…