What? He’s saying Panzer IV H should be 4.3 instead of 3.7.
What about that is a “German main moment”?
War Thunder players when a heavy tank can actually rely on its armor and function as a heavy tank for once:
Even the ones with <90mm of pen lmao
I don’t know if you have KV-1E, but facing 5.0s such as M4A1 (76)W or VK 3002 (M) with 90mm of pen is enough of a challenge already. Just because it can withstand some fire it doesn’t mean it’s OP.
And to top it off, you want them to even face an M4A1 (76) W armed with AMX-30’s gun and shell from the 1960s that already stomps on other WW2 tanks.
Why do so many War Thunder players hate heavy tanks this much?
2 Likes
I don’t agree with your assessment of Cent M2 and M551(76), I find both are good vehicles.
The APDS lets you lolpen Panthers frontally, even through an angled UFP. Both have stabilizers, a rare feature at that BR.
APDS of course is not without weaknesses, and it requires a bit of strategy and knowing where to shoot the enemy vehicle. I believe this is a fair tradeoff for the impressive penetration ability and relatively short reload.
Overall I think Cent mk2 should stay at 6.7, it’s slow and can’t make use of it’s stabilizer like M551(76) can.
M551(76) however is a little too good for 6.7, and should deservedly go up. Stab + mobility + apds is a meta combination. I think also giving it HEAT-FS similar to T92 and german M41 would be a fair compensation. Less flat pen but better against sloped soviet heavies.
1 Like
It does feel like that with how slow it feels.
I really can not understand why M18s need to move up. They have an average penning round. Yes, they might have good stats, but the most viable play is to flank and sideshot everyone, from the front currently in an uptier they cannot do anything. I hope M18 can stays in it’s happy 5.7, please leave it there! It didn’t even need the speed buff it got recently.
2 Likes
Instead of doing all those Sabres and MiG changes how about moving the F-104A/C up to 9.7, and Su-25 and A-10 to 10.3
3 Likes
I’ll be honest - I don’t see a single change here that benefits me. My 3.7 and 7.7 Swedish line-ups now need to be remade (or probably just deleted) and the 5.7 US line-up now lacks a speedy scout vehicle, which is the main way I play. Also, if those jets are always getting beaten, maybe raise the BRs of the ones that keep stomping on them, and not lowering them so they can fight Spitfires and the like?
Air RB changes are interesting to say the least. Please note im giving my feedback solely from the perspective of balancing Air RB, I know effectively nothing about Ground RB.
The motivation to bring korean war era subsonics down to increase the gap between them and supersonics and strong missiles at the 9.7-10.0 area is valid. However, the subsonics you have chosen to bring down from 9.0-8.7 and 8.7-8.3 are already some of the strongest at their respective BR. Its not outrageous to lower the BR of these vehicles, but it doesnt make sense to lower the BR of the MiG-15bis (one of the strongest planes at 8.7) and not, say, the Venom FB 4 or the FJ-4B (some of the weaker planes at 8.7. Similarly the CL-13A Mk.5 and MiG-17 variants, especially the afterburning ones, are some of the strongest 9.0 planes and IF it is justifiable to lower their BR, then doesnt make sennse to NOT lower the BR of weaker 9.0 planes such as the J29F and the Super Mystere B2 alongside them.
Furthermore, these korean era jets have already been buffed by the addition of fuel sliders, since the vast majority of them can now take a fairly optimal 10-15min fuel load, when before they were restricted to either a 7m (or thereabouts) minfuel, or 20m. So, these planes will probably become super strong, which is not to say that the changes are bad, but what is being done will cause a bit of a shift of dominance amongst the early-tier jets.
I think that alongside this, the 6.7-7.3 area needs a slight rework so that the weaker planes at this BR range dont get clobbered. The Me 262 A-1a will now be able to face a MiG-15bis ISH in a full uptier. I think all the Me 262s could be moved down in BR one step, as could the Spitfire Mk 22/24, Ho 229 V3 and MiG-9 (non late).
The root of the problem is of course, BR compression at around the 9.3 area. 9.3 is an insanely packed BR. F-104s, MiG-19s and Lightnings are at the same BR as the CL-13B Mk.6, Shenyang F-5, G.91 Y and Sagittario 2. Due to the short game times and small maps that define the current air RB meta, furballs are very common and these subsonics can be quite effective in the right hands, however this does not Justify them being at the same BR as Mach 2 capable supersonics.
The other BR changes are also fairly positive tho. The AJS37 was pretty weak at 11.0, I’d like to see the Tornado IDS come down with it. The Q-5A was extremely powerful for 9.0, albeit being quite difficult to get kills with due to the lack of instantaneous manoeuvrability, and it has some flares, so 9.3 seems sensible. The Mirage IIIC to 10.0 is an okay change too, however, it will now return to the same BR as the Mirage IIICJ (Shahak), which is identical but lacks the recently much improved Magic 1. The Magic 1 is a very potent missile for 10.0, and combined with a plane with a lot of AoA/instantaneous pull like the Mirage III, it will get quite a lot kills. But, it doesnt have flares and is certainly not particularly strong at 10.3. I would like to see the F-104G (China), F-1 and J35D come down to 10.0 aswell, since these planes also lack flares, and have a similar missile kit and somewhat similar flight performance. (4 AIM-9J equivalents i would consider to have similar killing power to 2 Magic 1s and a R530). The AMX moving to 10.7 seems a little rough, but I dont mind it if it means diluting high-powered missiles from the 9.3-10.0 area.
Ultimately the Air RB changes seem well motivated, but incomplete. Im sure you can think of other vehicles to change the BR of with the exact same motivation as the ones you have already mentioned
5 Likes
バトルレートを見直すより、マッチングにおけるバトルレート幅を考え直して下さい
±1.0はボトムマッチに当たったプレイヤーを苦しめています
Okay so maybe move the Char25T down again? Its outclassed and unfun to play at 8.0
5 Likes
Ostwind 3.7 3.3 Switched positions with the Wirbelwind.
What’s the point? Then there will be two SPAAs with a BR of 3.3 /SdKfz 251/21) instead of two at BR 3.7.
BTW, just an other case of Gaijin’s time machine nonsense.
1 Like
L-62 needs to remain at 2.7 as there are no other swedish vehicles that fill that gap in rank.
1 Like
The AMX is a much better platform for Air RB than planes like the A-10. It is actually somewhat responsive and manoeuvrable at the right speed ranges. Of course, it it still nothing to write home about in the flight performance department, but it certainly is a LOT better than the average attacker at this BR.
The Q-5A, for a start, doesnt have MGs, it has the 23-3K cannon found on the A-5C, it is certainly subpar, but its good enough. The Q-5A is practically untouchable to any plane at 9.0 since not only is it very fast, it also has extremely good acceleration and energy retention. It is just a difficult platform to get kills with since it doesnt have a lot of nose authority or AoA.
And the Q-5A actually CAN compete with 10.0 all aspect missiles, not only is it able to hold its speed enough to deny a launch opportunity, it actually has flares. It has practically the same ability to defend itself as the 10.0 A-5C does, and that thing is pretty good at not getting shot down.
4 Likes
Completely agree
Oh really,? And what is OP about it ? The fact that you cant aim?
Bro I have better stats in it than you, and I suck with it. Swedish IFV’s and the BMP 2M as all better and none of you are crying about those
My Suggestion (for RB)
Leopard 2A4(All) (10.3>10.7)
Add DM33 to it and move it to 10.7
Tornado WTD61 and MFG (11.0>10.7)
Move it down to 10.7, they dont have a Business against F-16s, also no Guided weapons except the Kormoran which works only against ships and also cant even hit ships…
BO 105 (German TT) (9.3>9.7)
Currently they share the same BR and are to 99% the same, maybe add better ATGMS to the later one and move it to 9.7 (or add the HOT-3 to it, and move it to 10.0 since 10.0 is a dead heli BR except the Mi-24 at 9.7)
F-4F Late (10.7)
Add Aim-9L and/or AGM-65D/G to it.
7 Likes
that and destroying bases do not take that much RP off
Plus the increase in base respawn from 1(?) to 5(?) minuites has just killed the buccaneer in RB, old playstyle was fly off to the side and come back for the 2nd respawn where people are fighting or RTBing, now by the time the bases respawn your team is dead or the “fighters” on your team have come back with bombs/rockets to destroy the base
LOWER THE BASE RESPAWN TIME GAIJIN
Those KVs casually can rock a solid 5:1+ KD and would now be the same BR as those up tiered T-34s. Are you really thinking a KV-1 is in all aspects equivalent to a T-34 with no advantages over it?
Especially the up armored variants can single handedly take over games and descide them by themselves.
There is no personal preference, just observation when driving them and facing them.
Them being a heavy thank has nothing to do with it in WT and you play long enough to know that. Otherwise, a lot of heavy tanks wouldn’t be at BRs where their Armor is just useless. I could make the same arguments you just brought up to justify the Tiger 1s to go to 5.0.
The M51s have a great gun but lack a stabilizer, they are basically TDs compared to 76mm Shermans. You know what also has a great gun? The M36 with a ton of pen, better post pen effect and sits comfortably on 5.3 or 5.7 for the heat variant.
The penetration of a round doesn’t matter if it has little post pen effect, even if it sports a post war gun and would face ww2 vehicles, see Pbv 501, PT-76 (which also has a stabilizer) or the german leKPz M41.
2 Likes
In RB:
AEC II to 3.7 - same if not better (better in higher tiers) than the Puma.
This vehicle should always be the same as Puma, at the least. Only reason is missed is due to rarity I presume.
Wyvern to 4.7 at least.
2 Likes