Reasoning: This is currently the highest battle rating aircraft in the entire game lacking an all-aspect heatseeking missiles. This aircraft’s BR placement is complicated due to the advanced Fakour-90 missiles, however once the Fakour-90s are expended this aircraft is extremely difficult to use with its bad RWR, AIM-9Ps, poor engine thrust, and lack of countermeasures. This encourages toxic passive gameplay with F-14 IRIAF players, where they are not capable of competing against late fourth generation fighters in close range engagements, so instead they fire the Fakours at long range and return to base, sometimes leaving the game or repeating. Many other Fox-3 carriers 13.0 that also are lacking in performance, such as the F-4F, have access to all-aspect IRCCM heatseeking missiles, while the F-14A IRIAF doesn’t even have access to a normal all-aspect heatseeking missiles.
The aircraft currently features the R-27R, however, this missile only saw limited testing, while the R-73 on the other hand was also proven to see limited service and testing. There is no historical reason why this addition cannot be made based on the precedent that has been set on adding the R-27 to this airframe.
a6m5 ko
5.3 → 4.3
air rb
reason: 2 20mms, you are the slowest plane of the br, also made out cloth so you are not survivable at all, this plane as similar FM to the other 4.3s
Alright lets compare the T-55AM’s to other MBT’s at the same BR since for some reason out of all these changes this is what most concerns you.
USA - M60A1 Rise (P)
No LRF
Worse mobility
Worse shells
Worse armor
Germany, OH WAIT they don’t even have one! I’ll compare it to the 9.0 Leopard A1A1 then
Worse armor
No LRF
Did I mention worse armor? you can literally pen this thing anywhere with the T-55AM’s
Trades no LRF and worse armor for a slightly better shell and reload
GB - Chieftain MK 5
Slower
No LRF
Worse armor
Only has APDS, horrible angled performance
Japan, yet again no 8.7, sp I’ll compare it to the Type 74F at 9.0
Worse armor
Same mobility
slightly faster reload (7.3 compared to 6.7)
Notice how it’s much more comparable to the T-55’s than the 8.7’s? It trades off armor for a better shell, which is what 2 vehicles at the same BR should do. The T-55AM’s are much more comparable to 9.0’s than 8.7’s, but I’m sure its every other vehicle that needs a BR change and not them. Also I didn’t even mention the ZTZ88’s which are literally the exact same vehicle with worse armor at a higher BR
Reason: Lack of radar, no ability to protect itself, can struggle to gain lock.
Type81c isn’t comparable to something like the ADATS which sits at the suggested 11.7 and definitely shouldn’t be .3 below Pantsir.
We need to be buffing anti air at the higher ranks not nerfing it.
Also leaves the 11.3 Type 90s with the 9.3 Type 93 as anti air which is completely inadequate.
Reasoning: The composite armour offers very little in terms of protection, same gun as AMX-32 (9.3).
The only boost is to the engine, getting 500 more HP for the proposed +0.7 BR increase is crazy, the tank is fine at 9.7. It’s a good trade between armour and speed, it does not need the increase in BR.
The shell also has trouble tanking out more armoured tanks like T-72 or T-80, imagine what it’s gonna do in a full uptier.
EDIT: As I’ve seen after reading more of the comments on this post, the adding of more composites in the turret
Remove the ahistorical AMRAAM (Bug Report) and HMS. Even with HMS, it is not at all suited to fight the majority of jets it currently faces, including the vastly superior Rafale, Eurofighter, Su-30SM and F-15E.
Its main purpose should be a CAS fighter, as it was IRL in RTAF service; Gripen C, F-15J and F-15J(M) are better air superiority fighters and don’t provide the CAS the OCU could provide at lower BR for tank line ups.
I agree, vehicles like this continue performing well even when you raise their battle ratings. If anything, vehicles around 9.0-10.0 typically actually feature less side and roof armor than vehicles between 7.0 and 8.0. It would benefit 6.7s without negatively impacting performance of these vehicles.
You should really come up with something better, these BR changes are a late April Fool’s joke and the fact that you still don’t have the courage to change naval BR 6.0 to 7.0 and go beyond 7.0 actually shows me how indifferent this company Gaijin is.
flight performance - bad
radar - bad (at 13.0 standards)
RWR - bad (even compared to F-14A), can’t notch with this, just go cold and lose all ur energy in the process. RIP if there are multiple missiles.
It’s only saving grace is the AMRAAMS but the plane can’t make full use of it due to its various limitations such as lack of data link channels, limited ACM range, narrow radar search zone.
I’d take a tomcat over this plane any day. Atleast the tomcat can ripple its ARH missiles and snag a kill or two in early game. JA37Di can’t do that and it is very mid in a fur ball that develops later in match.
Then there are IR missile focused planes (JAS39A and Mirage 4k). They are forced against ARH carriers most of the time. They suffer a lot in the current radar missile meta.
If they plan to change the F-14B, just keep it 13.0 but give it the AIM-7Ps and AIM-9Ms to make it fun to play. Cause the AIM-54Cs are rather… subpar in my opinion. Im not sure what can be done abt that but its alright i guess.
All the top tier stuff should move up 0.7 br in order to decompress 12.0 to 13.0 as well. Facing amraams in a F-4J isnt very fun, especially when youre not done grinding it.
