amd being invulnerable to atgms and slow shells because of its aps and its composite armor front plate tanking 400mm heat and 350mm apds with ease is very toxic.
im glad its finally going up. t-55a/t-62/o-435/o-140 arent really that bad, they are good vehicles, but not toxic.
honestly wouldnt mind planes get removed from naval entirely
im here to shoot ships, not get nuked from orbit or get random notifications that i killed a plane i didnt see
id rather have them return ARB maps with ship-shaped targets (or put the ships back into the maps they removed them from for no reason whatsoever)
*giving planes the same BR for naval as they get for ground shouldnt be too much effort
Mode: Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Khalid
BR Change: 9.3 > 9.0
Reasoning: Khalid is not a very strong tank, it has a long reload (even among classmates with 120mm), weak armor, and average maximum speed. Yes, it has a strong engine, but with its mass, it still remains extremely sluggish, slow and stiff on turns. At the same time, it has another drawback - its gun does not descend in the entire rear hemisphere, which makes gameplay even more difficult.
Mode: Realistic and simulator Battles
Vehicle: F-4J(UK) Phantom II
BR Change: 12.0 > 11.7
Reasoning: This version of the Phantom is extremely weak for its combat rating. It is simply unthinkable to have rear-angle missiles on the 12.0 (especially when we have an analogue in the same branch, the Tornado F.3, which has both all-angle missiles and longer-range radar missiles, and the MiG-23ML, which has a lower combat rating and also has all-angle missiles). The aircraft has terrible performance characteristics, which make it inferior to literally everyone it encounters.
Mode: Realistic and simulator Battles
Vehicle: Harrier GR.1
BR Change: 9.7 > 9.3 or give him countermeasures
Reasoning: This aircraft has nothing to dodge a maneuverable missile, almost every time a missile is fired at it, it is shot down, because maneuverability alone is not enough to get away from a missile. This aircraft has terrible missiles, which, with a very short flight, cannot catch up with anyone further than 600-700 m, if the plane does not move away from you in speed, because the Harrier itself is a subsonic aircraft and therefore cannot catch up with the enemy or give the missile additional speed.
Mode: Realistic and simulator Air Battles
Vehicle: Harrier GR.7
BR Change: 12.3 > 11.7
Reasoning: too slow for this combat rating aircraft, with very little armament, it carries only 4 missiles, and all its opponents have 8 or more (the Su-33 that it often encounters generally carries 12 missiles)
I also ask you to reconsider and cancel the increase in the combat rating for the AMX M4 and AMX-13(75), these tanks do not have the characteristics to be considered 7.0 vehicles
1 Like
could we get the me410s with the better gun at that br too?
We cried, now you cry (T55 players), good job gaijin
2 Likes
I can’t imagine it going lower than 12.0 in RB unless it loses it’s 9Ms. At 11.7, you’ll have it being better than the A-10C at the same BR.
AMX-40 change doesn’t make any sense on it’s own. Much like the hell that is playing the Leopard 2A4 NL, all you’re doing is dragging the rest of the 9.7 line-up into a BR where they are much less competitive. You either need to produce a viable line-up for 10.0 (and 10.7 for that matter) or leave the AMX-40 alone.
1 Like
Despite how fun this would be. It would destroy everything. Equivalent airframes like the Harrier T.10 and AV-8B(NA) with 9Ls and less CMs are 11.3 and even 9M slingers like the A-10C are much weaker than it.
Maybe just maybe 12.0, but would rather see buffs like BOL overhaul for it. That would make it an incredibly strong aircraft and thats without even mentioning that its FM is underperforming loads and is WAAAAAY too hot.
I’ve won enough fights in SB in the Gr7 against aircraft like the Mig-29 and F-16 to know that it can handle its own quite well. Including nearly winning a 1v3 vs Mig-29s, I got 2 but the third snuck up on me and this was before we had the MAWS and that would have saved me
1 Like
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: Mig 23 ml/a/d
Change: 11.7 → 11.3
Reasoning:
ive played this plane through pretty much the entire USSR tech tree, most would disagree with this change, but atm the mig 23 at the BR of 11.7 isn’t good, it consistently get’s uptiered especially with the recent addition of the f/a 18c early, probable only 20% or less of your games are downtiered and with the rwr only having 4 directions, the radar being mediocre at best it struggles.
It consistently faces, mig 29’s, f16’s, f/a 18c early, f4s, mirage f1c’s, which all pretty much out class the mig 23
at it’s current br, if i was to go play the mig 29, 9 times out of 10 i would get the exact same matchmaker, which really shouldn’t b the case
Haha, no chance. Mig-23MLD probably should be 12.0 and Mig-23ML and MLA are some of the strongest 11.7s in game. Only way they go down in BR is if they loose R-60Ms and maybe also loose R-24T/Rs
1 Like
most of the planes ingame face planes that out class them. i think its called “uptier”.
2 Likes
Mode: Ground Realistic Battle
Aircraft: Type 87 rcv
Change: 9.0 → 8.3
Reasoning: The Type 87 rcv lacks of a stabilizer, lws/lr and thermal imaging device. It is really unfair to have an vehicle from Italy which obtains all of these at a br of 9.3 and a better reverse speed.
5 Likes
very much agree, but dont forget that vbci pt2 is additionally frontally 50cal proof.
Also the new french vbci at 9.3 has autotracking too on top of everything else -thermals.
id say go further, remove apfsds and move it down to 8.0.
magach 5 has 75 less hp to drive 2.1 more tons, also lacks a commander sight for some reason.
considering how germany is 2nd to france in amount of heat slingers at 7.7-8.7, and the fact that the era on the magach is basically useless, id say its br is fine.
Losing R-60Ms wouldn’t change much, since R-13s are arguably better. Without the R-60Ms, it will still be better than the 11.3 J-8B. They could only go down if they lose the R-24s in my opinion.
worse mobility & lose commander sight for better armor & era. id say they are equal.
both sure are better than the 8.3 t-95e anyway.
1 Like
Was just thinking hte loss of all-aspect rather than necessarily raw missile performance (R-60M ----> R-60s) , but you are probably right
yeah, that whole usa 8.3 lineup probably could have stayed 8.0
1 Like
ok, maybe I went overboard with the 11.7, but for the 12.3 it carries too little armament and has a low top speed
Well… Its a subosnic aircraft, but one of the fastest accelerating Subsonic aircrafts, so… it fiddly on that front.
It could get 6x Aim-9M, but Id fear that would push it too 12.7 and Id kinda prefer to save that as an “upgrade” for the GR9A.
For now though, I think we just need to continue fighting for various buffs for the Harriers in general. They are underperforming rather significantly.