I think 9.7 is fine for both Merkavas (I don’t know why Merkava Mk.2D is worth 0.3 BR higher than the 2B).
The Olifant Mk.2, AMX-32, Gal Batash / Magach 7C, KPZ-70, CM11, and OF-40 MTCA should probably all go to 9.7 too.
The T-72A could stay at 9.3 since it doesn’t really offer anything special other than good turret armour, and good hull armour in downtiers. Its round is just about as good as 105mm DM23.
It is a very good plane dont get me wrong.
But the only reason people struggle against the rafale is because of the mica offbore, and trying to hold S in every single dogfight against it. But the rafale wipes you there. If you keep distance and dont try to go into every fight with brain off and one cirlce, you can deal with it just like with any other plane!
If you do BVR against a rafale in a f15, euro or su30 you have a great advantage! So its pretty much forced to play a rat role cause it struggles at height due to lower range missiles and not infinite CM’s and its very good at playing the rat. So no the rafale is not way better than a f15E or euro. US planes had the advantage for a while with the f15C and E and they still do but just at close range the rafale beats it. but that doesnt mean its OP and needs to be nerf/moved up!
Just let a plane or tank be good at a specific role just like how the f15E and euro are very dominant at BVR!
The mobility of the AMX-32 (105) is below average, the vehicle accelerates slowly and has a hard time reaching speeds higher than 40 km/h (also bleeds tons of speed in a slight turn). It definitely doesn’t have the mobility that is adequate for a vehicle that literally dies the moment it gets hit. I’d argue that even the T-55AM-1 (the vehicle I played alot and can tell from my experience) has a far more consistent mobility while still having good protection atleast. Its upgunned brother, the AMX-32 (120) already has much more consistent speed.
The thermal is only 1st gen that I only use in very rare cases, because more often than not, it’s more hindering. Also doesn’t help that the vehicle only has 10.0x gunner zoom, lowering the effectiveness of thermals in the first place.
ESS is literally meaningless in a BR where every single vehicle has thermals to counter it and even then, it’s more situational than smoke grenades.
The dart is literally the only good thing about the vehicle and again, at its BR, it’s only average. Atleast at 8.7, it could actually stand out in that way.
It also doesn’t have any zoom
IRCCM doesn’t change anything to you ?
Let’s say a 14.3br was added, then ok fair point, otherwise I stand by that.
The Su-25BM exists.
The Mirage F1 exists.
Im aware, but that same logic can be applied to the 103 which obviously has two seperate powerpants connected to the drive train and hydraulic pumps. They can make it as slow as they want but it has to have at least some movement to make it a viable vehicle at that BR. When you compare it to other MBTs it lacks in every field except firepower and survivability and what good do you have from all the firepower and survivability if you cant return fire and youre just forced to sit there and pray the enemy has a skill issue.
Fair enough.
Well your first point is the reason why ESS works so well.
Even with access to thermals, people don’t really use them since most vehicles only have gen 1 thermals and crappy field of view / zoom.
Not only that, Russian / Chinese MBTs don’t get access to them – which means you can make them easy pickings (as well as the fact that they don’t have good reverse gears).
That’s the thing, I think it would be too good for 8.7.
Most vehicles use DM23 / crappier darts.
AMX-30B2 Brenus is at 8.7, and it still somehow manages to cope (even without the stabilizer).
9.0 seems more reasonable, though I think there needs to be more decompression around 9.3 anyways, which would give more breathing room for things like the Leopard 1A5, T-72s, Strv 105s, Magach 6Bs / M60 TTS, MBT-70, and AMX-32 (105mm).
The AMX-32 (120), along with the others I listed,
could all probably go to 9.7 without any issues.
Large chunk of them still doesn’t.
IIRC, only chinese / italian / russian MBTs mostly don’t.
That’s still far from almost all.
T62 is 8.7-8.3
I’d say ~70% or so, maybe 80%.
Though I could go through each tech tree at 9.3 and see for sure.
T-72As, T-64A and KPZ/MBT already take up a large chunk of vehicles you see at 9.3 that lack thermals.
Acting like thermals aren’t a really good thing to have at 9.3 is asinine.
Yeah no, the 1B/E’s are fine where they are since any flavor of uptier renders them completely useless.
All it takes is a 75mm Sherman to look at you and you die, no joke.
Vehicle: T-62
Gamemode: GRB
BR Change: 8.7 → 8.3
We currently have base T-55A on 8.3, and upgraded and improved T-55s are going to 9.0.
It would be logical for base T-62 to go to 8.3 while we have upgraded and improved T-62M at 9.0
I agree that thermals is great to have, but I agree with HunLepto that most of the vehicles at 9.3 don’t really have a use for them other than to see through ESS, or in some rare instances find enemy tanks from very far away (which is still quite difficult because of the generation thermals and pointless because of the crappy FOV).
I’d say half of them with thermals don’t even have access to ESS of their own too.
EC-665 UHT should stay on 12.0.
Reason
It’s not as good compared to french variant.
It got 1km less range compared to spikes and no gun to self defence.
And having HOT 3’s as another atgm variant vs hellfires on french
He’s just trying to handwave a clear advantage in order to make his case stick.
We can all play that game and use “x doesn’t matter, y is useless because I say so” argument.
I think it’s best that majority of players don’t get stomped at 3.0 by the few KV-1E/B spammers than majority of the players at 5.0 stomping the few KV-1E/B spammers.
Besides, 4.3 doesn’t seem too harsh.
Its hull armour is roughly 200mm when angled at 45 degrees, which is enough to stop even the Panther’s gun.
The turret is much weaker, yes, though it still has similar effect as the MAUS, where it can angle its turret and become practically impenetrable (other than through the cheek armour).
Thing is, not using a situational tool you have in a situation where it could excel at is just a skill issue rather than an objective point.
Honestly, fair point, I actually didn’t even think of this tactic. Could be a reasoning to just remove its ESS tho if it would make it broken.
The thing is, every other vehicle has atleast something else to utilize. Leopards have great speed with high agility at the cost of armor, American tanks have a good balance of stats around the border, Soviet tanks have very good armor at the cost of mobility, etc. Problem is, what does the AMX-32 (105) has at its current BR that would make a reasonable choice to use it? There’s nothing it excels at and when compared to others, sometimes does worse even in comparison to things that are supposed to be shortcomings of other vehicles. I’d also be fine with it going to 9.0, but the problem is, there’s literally not a single French 9.0 vehicle at all, not even a premium, so you would have to uptier your whole 8.7 line-up just for 1 vehicle.
Again, I’d be happy even with just the solution of lowering its reload speed, because even the devblog mentioned that instead of being objectively worse to the AMX-32 (120), it’s supposed to be a sidegrade instead that trades firepower for faster reload. The thing is, this vehicle is in desparate need of any kind of buff, because at its current state, you’re handicapping yourself by playing it, especially when its upgunned brother is better in straight up every single way.