indeed.
all of those are clearly “equal” to the mig-15bis’s performance…heck i cant even pretend writing that as a joke.
gaijin you either have absolutely no clue about the performance of vehicles in your own game or you have completely lost it now.
The AMX 30 dca doesn’t even have a stabilizer and it goes to 8.7 where tanks have had one already at 7.7… It looks like Gaijin wants to stop us from playing French tanks…
You think BMPs have any business at 8.0? I can agree that 6.7 fighting BMPs sucks, but at this point you might as well delete them from the game if you place them at 8.0 when they already run a negative k/d at 7.7.
Then thank god that no one here that has that perspective is a game developer/designer, as no rational player would touch a vehicle that has been purposefully relegated to be a placeholder in a hyper-compressed bracket.
This is what happens when attempting to balance a game with a spreadsheet versus tackling parity through practical gameplay experience.
It’s symptomatic of a much larger issue which unfortunately continues to get lost in all the noise created with topics like this: the core/fundamental game design of ARB hasn’t changed in over a decade and the constant algorithmic/statistical based tinkering with vehicle BRs ultimately does nothing to move the needle on improving the game we all love.
To be clear, I want every vehicle to be as balanced as it can be. I would love if every vehicle could be good at its BR without being OP.
What I’m saying is that if push comes to shove, if the choice is a vehicle completely dominating everything below it or being bad, I will choose it being bad because 1 vehicle being bad leaves the other vehicles around it intact. A vehicle being broken OP dooms everything under it.
Mig-15Bis ISH is on the menu Boys…
Okay, gonna try to explain what I said previously(might not be everything):
F6F-5N to 4.0
There are a few planes that really requires 80%+ radiator output to maintain the overheating just a little bit. The complete neglegence of energy aspects kinda makes it undesirable at 4.3. Arguably due to being an okay fighter as well as a decent CAS platform, while before the split BR took place, for the time being.
Seafire LF Mk.III to 4.3, Seafire F Mk.XVII to 5.0, Seafire FR 47 to 5.3:
These fighters, while have excellent high-speed mobility and are considered to be some good BnZ fighters, lacks the ability to exploit energy advantages because they are not very good at climbing. Also subpar turnfightings
Reverting 8.0-9.0 changes:
Legacy top tier is rather unplayable, and it is indeed due to compressions, but decompressing the BR at the cost of 7.0-8.0 kinda doesnt help, instead of decompressing 9.0-10.0.
Reverting Q-5A changes:
Alternatively, give it PL-2.
Reverting AMX A-11B changes:
Alternatively, take the A-6E with it, or give it AS-30L.
Su-22M3 SyAF/HuAF to 10.3, without R-60M:
The Su-22M3 is effectively, a 10.3 CAS and a 10.3 fighter put together, unlike most soviet designs which cant do both at the same time, hence why it might be placed at 10.7. It is not bad, but still being one of the worst 10.7 aircrafts, due to namely the lack of effective standoff attack methods, with flares and RWR. R-60Ms will only make them even harder to balance.
Buc S.2B to 10.0, without AIM-9L:
Before split BR, planes like this would still be a pain in the ass to balance. And before the said changes takes place, maybe it could be placed at a lower BR compared to GR.1A to compensate for the lack of thermal pods, and temporarily removing AIM-9Ls.
M3C to 10.0, while Shahak given AIM-9G:
Idk if the latter change is possible historically, anyway, the lack of RWR and flares makes them unfitting to be placed at the same BR of the M3E.
J-7D to 10.7:
Effectively a MiG-21MF with PL-5B. The J-7E has modernized RWR and incredible energy management for a MiG-21 airframe, both the J-7D lacks. Despite how much better they are compared to the R-60, PL-5Bs are hardly two increments worthy.
J-8F to 11.3:
Comparing to the K2K, the J-8F has better FM and HMD, yet not having any guided A2G options and much worse dumb bomb payloads. These should not result in a difference in BR.
F-16A ADF USAF/AMI to 12.3 with AIM-9M:
This is more of a diversification of gameplay, both the nations mentioned has 12.0 fighters, albeit not in the same role.
Netz to 12.0:
PT3s are not much of a privilege nowadays. Similar to the J-8F, the PT3s should not result in a higher BR. Not to mention that the netz lacks sparrows.
Because it has Laser GBUs and 9L are way better than r60m?
In ARB/ASB
Without 9Ls id struggle to make a reasonable argument to even be at 10.0. Id guess maybe 9.7 due only because of the internal CMs, but maybe even 9.3 (Buc S2 probably should go down to 9.0 with split BRs)
absolutely agreed and we as community have been telling that to gaijin for years, heck its a decade by now.
air RB is still the same old that it was in 2014 pretty much, since they shelfed air RB EC
Move the BR of F1/J35Draken/F104 to 10.0 gaijin. it no have flare and is 10.3, fighting against missiles like magic2, python3 or r73…
Please folder the following helicopters :
USA
UH-1B and UH-1C
Same BR, identical performance and loadouts with the TOW being only marginally better (+30mm pen, +250m range)
Russia
Mi-24V and Mi-24P
Same BR, identical performance and loadouts except 23mm vs 30mm cannon
Germany
BO-PAH 1 and BO-PAH 1A1
Same BR, identical performance and loadouts except +200mm more pen HOT-2.
Sweden
HKP9A and HKP9A FC
identical flight performance and comparable loadouts. 8 HOT-2 vs 4 TOWS + Thermals.
There is also a strong case for foldering the French Gazelles as well as the British Scout and Wasp since they are very similar and not worth the extra 150k-390k RP. Only a .3 BR difference for a marginally better loadout on both.
Note that the British Wessex is also the ONLY Rank 5 helicopter out of 11 to currently cost more than 99-150k RP at 360k.
At point blank M728 has better penetration than 3BM25 at any angle from 39 to 82 degrees.
Also not true. M735 at point blank has better penetration than 3BM25 at any angle above 36 degrees. This is not an extreme angle at all. And 3BM25 loses penetration faster with distance, so even at just 500 meters that already becomes 33 degrees, with a small interval between 17 and 23 degrees where M735 also has better performance.
the R-73 is much better in flight performance to the 9M, and its IRCCM is only less reliable than the 9M, but still works, the 9L is kinemetically the same as the 9M at the moment, but without the IRCCM, if you play ground its understandable, due to the smokeless, but if you really call it equivalent to the 9L, you are clueless
and Javelin FAW Mk.9
Hey Gaijin
I’ve played 57 games with M551 (76) and from my experience you couldn’t penetrate most of the frontal plates of a tank (example: IS-2), so I don’t think it should move to 7.0 because it will not be balanced. I’m saying this solely due to its penetration limitations.
I’m sorry, but it’s not the vehicle’s fault
APDS has great penetration ability, yes, but it doesn’t remove the need to “aim” completely.
You may not be able to pen the UFP, but you can still take it out from the turret. It also requires it to be a 1944 one, the earlier one is easier. Also you can just hit the LFP. But I do agree, I’m sad it’s going up. I love it so much!
Yeah
