itpsv is almost always used to push very agressively at the start of the match. you cant compare its kd to a slow AA that does most of its work passively sitting back and killing aircraft.
you have to always account for both, you just cannot look at one of the two.
give itpsv AHEAD and put it at 9.0.
Merkava Mk.2D: receive M426, its historical shell.
Since there is an insistence on bumping this tank’s BR higher and higher for no objective reason every time, at least it should have at 10.0 the same shell that many 9.3s already have.
Yeah idm the FV4030 going to 10.0, it’s the fact that the T-64B gets to remain at 9.7 that is the issue.
agreed
The F1C-200 does have MTI, but it doesn’t do anything when it comes to countering chaff. Along with this the radar missiles don’t have IOG such they will also loose lock.
But the F1C isn’t good because of the radar missiles its because of the Magic 2
Yeah they are really good for thier BRs tbf especially the gals and magachs
Whats your thoughts on shir 2?
Should it now get the l23a1?
PD, not IOG. IOG is a different thing and pretty rare on SARH missiles.
turns out, it might not have that option.
Now wouldnt be the first time Gaijin made a slightly ahistorical change for the sake of balance and there is no reason why it couldnt use it, just, it was about 5 years before L23A1 entered service
r2y2 to 7.7 with air spawn pls
all mods, AB and RB
AMX-13 , using the shell of a 5.0 tank, going to 8.0 ?! it should never have never went past 6.3
AMX-M4, why is it going up ? every nation in that BR has AP shells doing similar or better than france !
AMX-40, why is going up ? the tank at 10.0 are all statisticly better in armore and performance than the french one.
AMX-13 (FL-11) a tank using 3.3 shell being at 4.3 ? why, because the germans in front cant shoot back at me ? i should never go above 3.3/3.7
E.B.R. (1951), a tank using 3.3 shells, being at 5.3 and can do nothing… i should never go above 3.3/3.7
E.B.R. (1954), why is it at 6.7 with 5.0 shells ? i hardly do anything against tanks of that match making, even less against 7.7 tanks, its a 5.7 tank MAX, never above it
E.B.R. (1963), its bad at its BR due to how mobility works, cant climb, cant accelrate, bad offroad performance yet it was built to be offroad, 7.3 or 7.0 until the performance is fixed would be nice
AMX-50 (TO90/930), this tank should be 7.7, it has no place at 8.0, overkill and cant compete againt all the enemy armore , APFSDS, stabilizers and others unbalanced things
ITO90M aint a top tier AA now, it cant track and shoot that well anymore, i used to do 1000 kills in 3 month, now i cant even get 300 in 1 year, missiles flight physics has changed to unrealistics du to how missile works, and they wanted to do as “real” performance, but this AA has as 12km kill range to intercept anything that gets in it, be it missile or aerial vehicles, yet cant neither do both… it cant even kill/track anything past 5km…the missiles ruberbands like crazy…
edit : AMX-13 DCA 40, why is it at 5.0 ? when the swedish one is litraly at 4.7, it has same performances, and exactly same penetration of shells, either lower it, or upBR the sweedish one
This is reducilouse at this point, the reason to france to go un BR is what ? because it only has AP, yet all other nation has similar shells but never use it ? a punishement for france because other nation dont use AP shells when they could ?!
atm the game is only made for one sort of vehicle… medium tanks, why ?
if you have armore, BR UP
if you have mobility, BR UP
if you have fast reload BR UP
if you have weels, BR UP
if you have a turret on weels, BR UP
IF YOU ARE FRENCH , BR UP
they even removed flanking routs so you cant even flak to get shots by outplaying the enemies
The sabra, the only good Israel’s tank, at 10.0
If u hate israel that much gaijin why add them into the game at all??
Vehicle: Netz & Netz (Mod)
Gamemode: Air Simulator
BR Change: 13.0 ----> 12.7
Reason: The Netz and its premium equivalent have an almost identical performance to the US F-16A which is currently at 12.7, with the only real difference being the Python-3 which whilst stronger in some respects to the Aim-9L, is not an IRCCM missile and so this leaves the Netz far weaker than other equivalents such as the Belgium F-16A or Gripen A that both have Aim-9Ms. Lowering both to 12.7 would be far fairer, especially with how compressed 13.0 is already.
Im aware it technically shouldn’t which sucks but realistically mate it being 10.0 it needs a better round.
Or are gaijin now saying L23 a 192 angle pen round is sufficient at 10.0? Where russia at 9.7 gets 3bm42
Germany the dm23 on tbe leo2k
France the dm13 equivalent
Ans ofc the sabra with the meat wagon of a round it has.
Why is the shir two limited to the L23?
I completely agree
L23 just sucks in the full uptiers and is rough to use it in my usual 10.3 line-up with the Chally Mk2 as my main MBT backup
To be honest, before we had the leo2a4 and such move to 10.7 I used to try use it on the khalid, the L23 round seriously is long in the tooth versus these vehicles, like the Abrams, Leo2a4, T80B etc Its just a shame as usual.
Harrier GR. 1, ARB/ GRB: 9.7 → 9.3.
This plane is significantly worse than the US, Thai and British TT versions at the exact same BR. Having worse missiles, worse flight performance and no countermeasures warrants this vehicle moving down one BR step, as the SRAAMs are both unreliable and extremely short range, drastically reducing their efficacy despite their strength on paper.
Such a shame they wont fix them
Yeah…
Can’t pretend that Gaijin reads or cares about this thread in the slightest, but i find it pretty ridiculous that the T-64A is considered equivalent to T-72A, being essentially the same vehicles aside from T-72A having better armour, turret traverse and a laser rangefinder
Don’t personally see a problem with the T-64A going to 9.0 as is, but even still i believe it fitting to remove 3BM22 if necessary to allow it to drop down in BR.