wow sorry f1c to 4.3
2 Likes
I know but I wonder if it will affect panther 2 because it has a tiger 2 engine and transmission
Either a loadout of 4x 120s and no guns, or 4x 9Ms & 2x 120s and no guns, 60x countermeasures furthermore it has poor airframe performance for a 13.0. Yes, it should be 12.7 minimum.
A-10s are worthless since they are S-L-O-W. Every battle I’ve faced these things on the enemy team, I’ve dunked on them without fail. My team with these–have always failed.
I’ve played them and they are worthless, stock even more worthless. They can’t reach the BF to bomb bases, they can’t compete against fighters, they are SLLLOOOW. Only lucky moments when the enemy isn’t aware is when the A-10 catches a kill or two.
Are you EVEN aware of the BR’s of other Phantoms? Each having the same performance as the Kurnass 2000 & having Fox-1’s.
Most blatant egregious example is the Jap F-4EJ Kai which has 4x 9L’s & 4x 7F’s with a great radar to boot… and its 12.3 BR! & F-4J/S at 12.0 with HMS and 7F’s.
The Kurnass has 6x non-irccm Python 3’s, no Fox-1’s & its 12.3?! it gets matched up with F-16s, MiG-29s, F-15s, F/A-18s & Gripens etc, etc. It doesn’t have the airframe performance nor the missile capability.
Just 2x PL-12, and non-irccm missiles. Yes, it should be 12.7
Clarification, only F-16s that exclusively have Fox-2s and no Fox-1s. In a world of non-irccm missiles, and every jet with countermeasures available–the F-16 with only Fox-2s at 12.0 makes perfect sense.
Theres enough competition at 12.0 to match against the F-16 performance. Get gud if can’t compete with a non-irccm F-16!
Exactly, R-60Ms and short range, non-irccm, easily flared, and weak airframe performance.
Su-17’s & 22 with R-60Ms are nothing as the entire bracket of jet ranks are now fully experienced and knowledgeable players that know how to use countermeasures.
The performance of these jets in combination with R-60Ms are utterly pathetic. Furthermore the MiG-27’s which have superior performance and a better gun WITH R-60Ms! are at 11.0
There is no logical reason to put a weaker jet at a higher BR.
No, in fact they don’t have 9Ms (so you don’t even have the knowledge of what you speak or you’re a lier and troll yourself).
They have 9Ls only and their airframe performance is not upto par with their competition at 11.7 and up-tiers.
2x 9Ms only, & utterly weak airframe performance–its a “Striker” not a “Fighter”. Can’t compete in its current BR bracket.
Now that I mention it, I think it should be 11.3 min, 2x 9Ms with a weak airframe is not 11.7 or 12.3 capable.
So you think just 2x Magic 2’s are enough to warrant 11.3 BR? You’re an utter fool who thinks that Jaguar has the performance to compete at 11.3 when the competition includes Fox-1s + radars, equally better IR missiles and more of them, and better airframe performance.
J-7D is 10.7! F-5E 11.3! same as the Jag IS. F-4E’s 11.0-11.3! (“Tell me you haven’t played these BR without telling me you haven’t played these BR.”)
MiG-29s currently ingame nvr used R-27s (exception SMT) they only used R-73s irl. Their current BR is 12.7, so they can either remain at 12.7 or go even down to 12.3, either is fine with 73s.
Your opinion. Its 20mm with 50-60mm of pen is not uptier material.
R-27ERs, the ‘normal’ R-27R could be used. MiG-29S added ER capability.
How many Me-163s do you see in the MM? do you see them often in uptiers at 9.7? Hunters with better airframe & 9Es are found at 9.3, MiG-19s, F-100s, MiG-21 F-13s are 9.3… but even they don’t see 163s.
Zero thought put into your comment.
Three things:
- You are obviously not aware of that this is no discussion thread.
- If you would play more MG 151/20 aircraft you would be aware of that the cannon is underperforming compared to any other 20 mm cannon.
- If you feel the need to share your opinion - use this thread:
2 Likes
The Ger MiG-29 (9.12A) & MiG-29G nvr used 27s.
The Hun MiG-29 (9.12B) nvr used 27s
zero thought was put in your original comment
why would you put a plane with aim9l A HIGH PERFORMANCE ALL ASPECT MISSILE at 9.7!?
dont even come out at me saying this is somehow balanced
1 Like
Never used, OR physically could not use because the 27R capability was removed?
whats that
3 Likes
fr bro as if there arent a bazillion flareless planes at 8.7-9.7
1 Like
tbh i would rather remove the 9l from the bucc and lower it to 10.0
I mean I saw one guy who ran nothing but bombs get 3 kills in an uptier match shomehow. I feel like it would be fine /s
Seriously ? ? ?
UP BRing the french 7.0 that can be easily killed by panzer 4 from BR 4.0 is crazy, totally unnecessary
The AML 90 has worse round than the german Spz 12-3 , So if the aml goes to 7.3, SPz can goto 7.7 ?
Also why Vt5 goes to 11.0 while the object 292 casually sitting in at 10.7 ?
Dear gaijin please fire those low IQ people from the company or consider my uninstall
1 Like
Mode: Naval Arcade & Realistic Battles
Ship: RN Zara and RN Pola
Change: 6.0 → 5.7
Reasoning: One of the longest reload times for 203 mm guns among its counterparts, weak damage from their 203 mm shells, low accuracy of the same 203 mm guns, lack of torpedo armament, not the best armor.
2 Likes
idk? what is that? which ver? i need more then just a single pic.
Dont bring down the tiger family hp to 600, they are already heavy, especially the jagdtiger being the heaviest. Even if you do lower it keer it at 690hp
SPz 12-3 LGS
Ground realistic
should remain at 6.7
Reason: It would be the only vehicle at 7.0, with the overtiered Kugelblitz, having no real lineup
(no, 2 vehicles are not a lineup)
Other nation also have recoilless rifles at 6.7.
- M50 in US
- Type 60 SPRG (C) in Japan
- FIAT 6614 in Italy
all of them have recoilless rifles at 6.7
Therefore the SPz should also remain at 6.7.
And if the 20mm is the problem: The Ratel 20 has a 20mm and MILAN ATGMs at 6.7.
8 Likes
its historical bro they arent changing it bc they felt like it
2 Likes
690 is historical