It was just promised to the wind.
3 Likes
I know. Listing them seperately was intentional because they have different names.
I would suggest R2Y2s going 7.7 o:
I think these have the same performance as Me 262, if not worse. I have these 3 planes, but they definitely are not 8.0 planes, at least, definitely not made to face anything with air to air guided missiles. They have no radar, no warning system. Not that I complain, in the end, I don’t think these three have place anywhere, but it would be nice, if these three got some love from Gaijin c:
2 Likes
Agreed. The changes to Sabres, MiG-15s, and MiG-17s should NOT be implemented.
This would make starter jets unplayable/unwinnable. It would also seriously disadvantage British, Italian, French, and Swedish jets in the 8.3-9.3 BR range that would face more uptiers.
As many have mentioned, the problem here is the compression of jets from 9.3 and above downward into the Korean-era jets. Keep Sabres/MiG-15s as they are and move supersonics UP!
5 Likes
It can’t be due to the HP change, as m-18s which didn’t get it are also going up.
Yeah, but the armor can be trolly sometimes. Plus it’s cannon can also pen most, if not everything at it’s BR. It can UFP a Sherman, PZ4 and can pen the sides of every heavy tank it could see them, and even now when up tiered to 5.0. Oh and if you don’t believe me, I can use the same gun in the German one at 4.3 and do just fine. Andddd on top of all that, it’s not like it’s not the only one going up in BR. All the 76 ones are, except the 1940, and so it won’t be alone :) oh and just wait until you play the STZ one, same gun plus extra armor. And I don’t see that going up to 4.3 like the German one
RB:
G:
Sd.Kfz.234/2 → keep at 3.3. No survivability and weak cannon for 3.7.
M18 and M64 → keep at 5.7. It’s perfectly balanced there. It doesn’t need to go up.
A:
MiG-15 → keep at 8.3. Can’t go to 8.0, are you crazy?
Mig-15BIS → keep at 8.7. You already moved it from 8.3 to 8.7 because it was murdering everything. At 8.3 I felt like a god playing it.
In fact, looking at all the ARB changes → bad. Stop compressing. You need to expand BR!!!
7 Likes
Both are positioned just right at 9.0.
The only Sabre that is worth adjusting is taking the CL-13 Mk.6 down to 9.0.
F-86A, all F-86Fs, CL-15, MiG-15, MiG-15bis, MiG-15bis ISH, MiG-17, MiG-17PF, Lim-5 should all STAY PUT.
2 Likes
F-16 A mlu（China）12.0>12.3
In reality,the F-16A mlu which served for ROCAF
has the ability to lunch AIM9M instead AIM9L
(Because it was sent to Taiwan only with AIM9M instead of AIM9l)
And it also has the ability to carry LANTIRN 2, AGM65G and GBUs,
4 Likes
Option B is the only way, the 2S38 doesn’t deserve that low of a BR and introducing the HSTV-L at 10.0 wouldn’t make things anything any better.
2 Likes
M18 HP/tonne went from 22.6 to 25.99, which is a VERY large difference.
In my opinion, moving to 6.0 is fine, but ONLY if they fix (unnerf) the APCR to have historical 230 mm pen, and to fix M18’s top speeds to 96 km/h and -32 km/h.
5 Likes
The German T-34 also has a stronger turret with a faster reload and improved hull armor, as it is a combination of the T-34 (1942) with the T-34E STZ, which are the 4.0 T-34s.
So the T-34 (1942) gets the stronger turret with faster reload, the T-34E STZ gets the big hull armor improvement, and the T-34 (1941) gets neither. It just ends up being worse.
3 Likes
That’s very true.
This change is so dumb tbh
1 Like
move both to 9.3 and give the F-104C the extra AIM-9Bs, just like all the foldered straight up grades at the same BR (Spit 14 → 17, Cheiftain 3 → 5, T-34('42) T-34E, Pz 4 F2 → G, Pz 4 E → F1, B-57A → B and so on)
I’d love to see the F-16A MLU be introduced with better ordinances in return for a BR of 12.3.
2 Likes
M26 to 6.3.
3 Likes
M551(76): 7.0-7.0
but do pls give a HEATFS ok? How the hell this using merely a APDS and against those 7.7 heavy tanks
J-5(Export): 9.3-9.0
All Mig 17 PFs gone to 8.7 and why this being exceptional? Plus where is Mig 17 AS?
Type 16( FPS): 9.3-9.7 with Type 93 APFSDS added
Never on Earth a vehicle built in 2016 can’t get APFSDS which was in 1993. Pls tell me why this still using M735 APFSDS, JGSDF received M735 only since 1984 and after 1993 they already started using Type 93 APFSDS. And how could a 2016’s vehicle still using a 1984 APFSDS?
6 Likes
Aim9M have no business fighting 11.3 planes with 30 countermeasures.
Any F-16 with Aim9M should automatically move to 12.7. Especially since the A are the most agile versions, even with a weaker radar they would compete directly with the Gripen.
It goes for the F-15 of course, they all need to move to 12.7.
1 Like
I totally agree!
To be more precise, the point I was trying to make with Option A is how the two shouldn’t so different in BR as they currently are. That being said, I think it’s better for 2S38 to go up to HSTV-L, rather than the HSTV-L coming down.
2 Likes
Marder A1 should also go 8.0 with SPz BMP-1, their effectiveness are similar (20mm better in CQB and AA, 73mm better with hard targets, and both missiles good with hard targets )
Pbv 501 also moves up in RB, probably to 7.0 or 7.3, its maneuverability is too good for the WWII tanks in 6.7