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
2 Likes
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.
1 Like
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.
15 Likes
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
1 Like
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.
12 Likes
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.
20 Likes
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.
7 Likes
it’s because m163 is too high in that case tho, my opinion.
1 Like
Mode: Ground RB
Vehicle: Object 906
Change: 8.0 - > 8.3
Reason: Extremely strong 8.0 vehicle, compare it to say the Char 25t, it is faster, stabilised, and has more penetration. It is unreasonably good for 8.0
9 Likes
But the Yensei is at 7.7 and is arguably better than the normal Shilka
1 Like
Arguably, i feel its more fact tbh
Air RB, Sagittario 2 (jet) , BR 9.3→9.0, Ariete, the same BR, has better acceleration because it has one more engine for the same acceleration performance. The turning performance, which was an advantage of this BR, is not an advantage with this BR.
can Ariete have some love its so bad at 11.7 its a big leo1
1 Like
STRV-103C going up to 9.0? I’d understand the A, but the C’s armor is useless at the BR it currently is at, why does it need a nerf?
7 Likes
at that bryou have the type 93 with no radar and worse missiles and worse thermals. The ozelot is really good at 9.3
GRB
Tor-M1
11.0 > 11.3
HQ-17
11.3 > 11.7
these two are wayyy below their capability BR.
they have nearly 13 and 15km ranged and high G missiles with auto lead lol
4 Likes
You may be right, its just particularly pathetic. Would be nice for people to be interested in a vehicle that would otherwise get so few players due to its squadron status.
Bedish Swias, also IKV is apparently as good as the best 9.0 105mm tank the TAM but whatever lol
4 Likes