why remove air spawn from xp50? it’s already a niche plane;
Why uptier merkavas? they are already mid;
Why uptier amx? they are already not great;
Why downtier Roland? it is already op;
Btw good job with namer and kv1s;
Next battleplass make some better veichles please;
Please return to periodic events with less battle points needed and sellable coupon unlockable by doing phases and not by doing 600k battlepoints in 3 minutes Thank you.
p.s.: When do you plan to fix the unhistorical italian f16 with aim7 and aim9L? historically it had aim120 and aim 9 L-I, there is already an accepted bug report about it so when it is your intention of implementing it?
Also, when do you plan to increase Ariete tank armor values to their accurate numbers as the base model had a protection comparable to a Leopard 2A4 (also there is an accepted bug report about this)?
amx-13 is not that great, but m4 is excellent at 6.7
roland op? saclos nerfs hit those hard and they are quite bad now. even the rapier is better after its damage buff.
osa-akm cannot be the same br as rolands. its too much stronger. thats the reason they are going down now.
also the french roland is already at 9.7, its not overperforming and aint nobody complaining about it.
What do you mean “niche” and how does this justify the air spawn? XP-50 already has a very competitive climb rate, comparable to the Bf 109 F-4. Meanwhile, it’s quite a bit more agile. It doesn’t deserve an air spawn.
Reasoning : It’s the same BR as the Su-25T, an yet it trades every good thing that the Su-25T has for more speed, but not enough that it’s actually better.
I would like to add that the STRV 103C should not be increased in BR, at its own BR now it gets one shoted by everything and most people don’t even play it. Increasing its BR would be a turn off for people that wants to research it. Since the Maps in WT are getting smaller and smaller the tank it’s kind of losing its purpose, that is sniping.
They have SEP only truly contested by the Bf109F4 and spitfires. Under 1km, yak-3 and zeros catch up. Over 4km, they dominate 4.0 and below.
They have not great, but still competetive roll and instantenous turn.
They’re more than viable as ground-spawn aircraft. They’ll still be able to climb to their perch and do energy fighting/energy traps.
Now, prop efficiency does make raw p/w calculations less reliable. However, two props have an easier time generating thrust than one prop of the same design (common issue of losing prop efficiency is the propeller blades “stalling” - too much engine power, not enough blade diameter and making the prop pitch any finer would over-rev the engine. This is very visible in late-war Bf109s due under 200 km/h (60% vs 70% prop pitch lead to 600 more kgf thrust, and pushing it to 75% kills the engine.)
From these only XM800T and Type 87 have it but they don’t have thermals, they cap better, this one spot better.
As for acceleration I would suggest to get tech specs and make bug report because yes its almost 20 tons heavy but BTR with 14 tons and 100hp less is much more agile, I would assume that Germans know how to build a gearbox and make decent drive transmission.
AMX 13 7.0 > AMX 13 6.7 (Realistic). I mean… I don’t even know what to say. I mean it can be awsome, but in average it’s not performing any better than, let’s say: m18 at 6.0. Just the same can be good, just very inconsistent. Plus no reverse speed and no .50 cal : <
laser doesnt really make a difference with the 20mm. it historically wasnt equipped with one either.
it being 8.7 together with bmp-2 would not make sense.
The AMX-40 basically has no armor, and aside from its mobility, it’s not particularly strong compared to other 9.7 vehicles. If it’s just because of the 20mm autocannon, then the AMX-32 and AMX-32 (105) should all be moved to 9.7 or even 10.0 as well—after all, they’re pretty much the same. But if that happens, no one would want to play France anymore. Would that really be better?