Mode: Ground RB
Vehicle: KV IB
Change: 4.0 → 4.3
Reason:
The armour on the KV IB makes it a menace to any 3.0 and most 3.3 vehicles and its gun is only bad on paper. Even against 5.3 vehicles it can still penetarte most if not all frontally and Heavy Tanks are not even spawned that much when bottom BR making consideration for when they are top BR in a match far more important for balancing than the other way around.
7.7 is pretty much the perfect BR for the Char 25t. Perfectly fits into France’s dreaded 7.7 lineup as well
give the su25 and a10 an airspwan
Noticing that the UH-1B(JPN) is receiving additional rockets without change to it 's BR, is it possible that the SA.313B Alouette II might have it 's rocket pod loadouts provided to it also ? These could be useful in situations where the SS.11 ATGM 's are less helpful, such as dealing with groups of soft targets in Heli PvE.
I don’t like to play artificially slowed Ratel, i want increase their speed and br.
Currently its unplayable slow with just 20-30km/h.
You’re thinking BMP-2M the BMP-2MD is a heavier less armored BMP-2 with no atgm at the same BR as the BMP-2 which is lighter, more armored and has an atgm but no thermals.
IMO its fine at 8.7
@Smin1080p_WT Any chance you could ask why the Q-5A and L are going up to 10.0 in ARB?
They have luckluster fighting performance, low thrust, barely supersonic, no missiles, only dumb bombs and rockets (for the A, the L has LGB’s but what good are they in ARB?), and they only 18CMs. None of that screams move it up.
To be honest they aren’t even that good at 9.7 but for the sake of having them not be under tiered 9.7 is fine for them.
Mode: Ground RB
Vehicle: Churchil VII
Change: 4.7 → 4.3
Reason:
The Churchil VII has strong armour only on paper as its front is littered with weakspots and the turret roof can be overmatched by almost every gun in the game (around 45mm needed to do that) giving every vehicle it faces the chance to kill it in 1 or 2 shots irregardless of range or angle.
The Gun is not up to the task of fighting even most 5.3 vehicles let alone 5.7 with even T-34s needing 2 or 3 shots to kill when well aimed.
As for the reason given above the armour is also not too much to handle for 3.3 vehicles as those already mostly share the guns with the Tech Tree 4.3 vehicles of their respective nation. So consideration for the full down BR have been made when proposing this
Mother of cope, thats a terrible take
8.0? That’s a little low for a vehicle with a stabilized 30mm with thermals. 8.3 would suit it more tbh
Mode: GRB
Olifant 8.3 → 8.7
Laser Rangefinder and M111 very strong for the 8.3
Not too many changes on the Air RB front, but the changes that were made are excellent.
The Wyvern going up is fantastic, removing the XP-50s airspawn is also fantastic.
The C-2b at 7.7 is also a great change, the plane will be a lot more usable now (it was very very niche before) whilst not really being a problem since it’s still not that difficult to defend against in the short term. The 163 and Ki-200 going down makes sense given the severity of their most recent nerf.
The Q-5s have flares and great energy but I think 10.0 wasn’t really necessary.
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Type 81 (C)
BR Change: 11.3 → 11.7
Reasoning:
The Type 81 (C) currently fits perfectly into Japan’s 11.3 Ground lineup, however even at the current BR, it already lacks significant capabilites against various common aerial threats, moving it up to 11.7 simply cannot be justified.
It is a short-range IR-Lock dependant SAM, which unlike to other (current) 11.7 SPAA’s (ADATS, FlaRakRad or HQ17 for that sake, though that is 11.3) cannot engage helicopters outside of point-blank range due to their low IR-signature (especially at low movement-speed), it doesnt have a search-radar either, so it’s ability to engage targets as a whole is solely dependant on visual-contact, which is problematic as aircraft tend to not render at longer ranges and can either outrange it, our climb high enough to the point where it essentially has no chance at ever seeing/detecting and therefore engaging them.
Other SPAA’s, such as ADATS, FlaRakRad, Tor M1, HQ17 or 2S6 are far more capable in basically every aspect, the last 3 at the same (current) or even lower BR. (They have SACLOS SAM’s and search-radars, which greatly increases their ability to detect and engage aircraft, especially helicopters, which the Type 81(C) can barely engange)
Moving it up to 11.7 would not only render it almost useless the moment it isnt downtiered significantly, but also remove the only proper SPAA from Japan’s 11.3 lineup.
No lineup, and if left at 8.7 it has no lineup there either. This whole BR changes kills the only other lineup on sweden until 10.3
as someone that just had to deal with fighting the HMS Invincible while in a destroyer i can’t agree more
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: ZSU-23-4M2
BR Change: 7.3 → 7.7
Reasoning:
With high vertical and horizontal guidance speed , ZSU-23-4M2 can fight with different enemy planes.It has more ammo storage and needn’t reloading.ZSU-23-4M2 has better battle efficiency than M163 ,which is in the same 7.3 BR.
Type 81(C)
Ground RB: 11.3 → 11.3 (not moving up to 11.7)
Are you serious? This vehicle sat at 11.3 without a lineup for MONTHS before the decompression in ground happened, which you left it there in anticipation for the Type 90’s moving up. Now that it’s finally back in a lineup with the Type 90’s for a few months you want to move it back up again? This is some sick joke. Besides the fact that it can easily be one shot by an MG, has no radar and only carries IR missiles this change is just plain insulting to the player base especially while the Tor-M1 and HQ-17 sit at 11.0 and 11.3 respectively. Putting this at 11.7 without a lineup is basically the same as moving it to 12.0, since almost no one will use it at 11.7. This thing is already fodder to TV/IR guided munitions and you want to move it up to the point it becomes literally unplayable. Get a grip.
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: Kurnass 2000 (Israel)
Change: 12.3 → 11.7
Reasoning: Previously the kurnass 2000 had Aim-7f, making it a good fighter as the F-4EJ Kai. But since the Aim-7f is removed, I’m sure the Kurnass 2000 has lost the ability to cope with target in high altitude. The All-aspect IR missiles it carrriy, which are the only effienct AA weapon it has, lack irccm and is vulnerable against flares in its BR. And its flight performance is not good enough for its current competitor. So generally the Kurnass 2000’s BR should be rated in 11.7 but not 12.3.
it’s because m163 is too high in that case tho, my opinion.
