Reasoning: The Merkava Mk.1/2B has next to no advantages over even 9.3 tanks and does not have the flexibility to fight 10.7 tanks. The Merkava Mk.1/2B lacks mobility, rate of fire, armor protection, and a potential lineup to be moved into the 9.7 bracket.
Tank: Merkava Mk.2D
Change: 10.0→9.7 (revert)
Reasoning: The Merkava Mk.2D is barely superior to its tech tree counterparts and does not have the capabilities to fight 11.0 tanks.
Tank: Namer RCWS-30
BR: 11.0→10.7 (revert)
Reasoning: The Namer is an IFV with limited ammo capacity, and its armor is already pathetic. It carries very little spike ammunition and has no lineup of its own. Putting the vehicle up makes little sense when the BMP-2M and 2S38 are just as good, if not better, in many aspects and have not seen similar treatment.
Please, Gaijin, as a plea from all Israeli players, do not nerf these already hard-to-use vehicles. Their performance is not based on their capabilities, but rather ours. As Minor Nation players, we perform better than Major Nation players because we have more experience on average. By Nerfing based purely on statistics, you leave Major Nation vehicles untouched because inexperienced players use them more frequently than ours. Please do not kill the Israeli 9.3 and 9.7 lineup. We did not receive a new tank this patch to fill Tech Tree gaps, and we’re already starving for a reason to play the Tech Tree.
KV-1E, KV-1B
RB
4.0 → 4.3
The armor protection on this vehicle makes it incredibly abusive at 4.0. With the KV-1 ZIS-5 having moved up to 4.7, as well as the KV-1S now moving up to 4.3, this should also move up. It has no business facing 3.0 and even some 3.3 tanks, which have essentially no chance of fighting it.
M60A3 TTS (China)
Add M774 APFSDS
It is worse than the American M60A3 TTS and only has access to M735 APFSDS, which is not sufficient at 9.0. Gaijin has previously demonstrated that adding ahistorical ammunition types for balance is an acceptable solution, chiefly with DM33 on the Type 16 MCV. This should be the same case.
One should not only focus on penetration… for example, what good is 800mm of penetration if it takes one minute to reload? The reload time and mobility of the vehicle are crucial factors, and when you look at the current numbers, they speak for themselves. In RB, the vehicle has a 3.0 K/D ratio, and in AB, it even has a 7.0, so an adjustment is necessary
Air RB, Bf 109 Z, 4.7 > 4.0, or add air defense fighter spawn, or add MG 151/20 cannon modified parts.
This plane has good climb rate and speed, but this is only advantage it has. The maneuverability of this aircraft is so poor that even bombers like the B-25 are more agile than it. Although it has four MK108s as weapons, it is very difficult to use due to its poor trajectory and velocity, this gives it no advantage against any fighter at same BR unless your enemy didn’t notice your attack.
In summary, 1. this terrible airplane really needs a lower and more suitable BR to improve its experience;
or
It should have a air defence fighter spawn like Hornt Mk.III in game.
or
MG151/20 cannon modified parts should be added, so the MK108 can be replaced for better shooting experience.
Japan has no other ground vehicles at 11.7. This change essentially up-tiers every 11.3 Japanese vehicle to 11.7.
And why are other over-performing tanks such as the Begleitpanzer 57, TAM series, Gepard, and ItPsV Leopard staying at their BR? The TKX (P) dies to a Begleitpanzer when shot from the front.
I hope the people at Gaijin will one day realize that there is an issue with over-BR’ing minor nations while major nations can get away with similar performing vehicles simply due to quantity-over-quality.
Panther D
RB
5.3 → 5.7
The Panthers A and G are now at 6.0. The Panther D offers the same protection, improved mobility, but a harsh reduction in turret traverse. It should not be able to face 4.3 tanks (such as the KV-1S), many of which have no chance in a frontal engagement, which becomes even more severe at range.
VK 30.02(M)
RB
5.0 → 5.3
Although certainly weaker than a normal Panther, its firepower makes it very dangerous, and against many 4.0 and 4.3 tanks it is still far too powerful. Most 75mm and 76mm guns from 4.0-4.7 cannot reliably fight it, while its armor and firepower can easily wipe the floor with them. It should not be facing 76mm T-34s or 75mm Shermans.
Vehicle: Su39
Proposed Br: 11.3 > 11.7 (air RB)
With the current vehicle in game it is the same as the Su25TM despite being able to carry fox 1/3 missiles. My proposal is give it the r-27r missile and raise the br of the plane to create more uniqueness to the vehicle
Vehicle: Merkava Mk.1(USA)
BR: 9.0 to 9.3 in GRB/GAB/GSB
While I disagree with changes to earlier merkavas with reasons that people has mentioned, the American merkava Mk.1 was not on the list alongside other Isreali and American merkavas.
Reasoning: Just so much armor. They can even ignore many flanking vehicles by angling. At comfy 45 degrees a Sherman 75mm cannot penetrate any part of it’s side or rear.
KV-1 (ZiS-5) and KV-1 m1942 both have 10mm more penetration and slightly less armor, yet they are BR 4.7.
Yes, but I have a feeling with r-77 it would be around 12.7 which would make the vehicle worse to play, but giving it just the r27r would make it very competitive at 11.7
Change: 12.7→ 12.3 Remove the following ahistorical loadouts, as the 9.12 never carried these: R-60, R-27ER1, R-27T1. Add its historical loadout option: R-73
Reasoning:
The MiG-29 (Hungary) historically only had R-73 IR missiles and R-27R1 radar missiles with R-60MKs inherited from MiG-21s strictly for training practices. The R-60, R-27ER1 and R-27T1 are fake, ahistorical loadouts for the Hungarian 9.12 MiG-29 as these missiles were never available for the jet.
Move it to 12.3 with its historically accurate air-to-air loadout options of R-27R1 + R-73 + R-60MK missiles.
Or
Leave it at 12.7. Remove the following ahistorical loadouts, as the 9.12 never carried these: R-60, R-27ER1, R-27T1. Add its historical loadout option: R-73
