Planned Battle Rating changes for August 2025 (updated 16:00, 15.08)

Official News, Development Blogs and Updates
2548

Ships:

(NAB) Saeta 4.7 > 4.3 (an outdated boat considering how many SKRlikes have been introduced at 3.7-4.0, which will easily destroy it). All its counterparts sit at 4.0-4.3 and also have torpedoes.

(NAB) Freccia P-493 4.7 > 4.3 – similarly, the additional gun does not provide an advantage, and it is rarely encountered in battles.

(NAB) MPK Pr.11451 4.7 > 4.3 – an unjustified BR increase; its maneuverability is impossible due to the poorly implemented hydrofoil, just like all ships with hydrofoil (it tilts forward when turning, whereas videos show that the stern should tilts and the turning radius should be smaller, with less speed loss during maneuvers). On half of the maps, it immediately runs aground, and its torpedoes in current realities cannot even sink a corvette. You can’t just rely on one speed.

(NAB) USS Cyclone 3.3 > 3.0 (from Rank V to Rank IV) – ineffective slow-firing guns with grenade launchers combined with his guns which wasn’t implemented, is easily destroyed by opponents with calibers of 40mm and above.

(NAB) Richelieu and RN Roma 8.3 > 8.0 (or increased rate of fire) – they do not have advantages; they don’t survive long, don’t shoot often, and their guns are among the worst of all top-line battleships — honestly, even at 7.7 they would be much more viable given current implementation realities.

(NAB) HMS Tiger – keep at 5.7 (no advantages over Atlanta, which lives at 5.7 and is not affected). Fix its gun accuracy, which was set with a typo (0.5 instead of 0.25), in the last patch’s accuracy adjustments.

Air:

In Naval Arcade Battles (NAB), you raised the BRs of modern aircraft in the patch; but forgot reduce the overinflated ones cause of AAB — this will add more variety to naval battles:

(NAB) A2D-1 9.0 > 7.7 (this aircraft isn’t much better than the A-1H, which is at 6.3)

(NAB) Canberra B.Mk.2, Canberra B(I).Mk.6 – from 8.7, 9.0 to 8.3 (BR is overinflated; American Canberras are at 8.3; this change will give British aircraft to a set with Vanguard ship, which lives at 8.0)

(NAB) Ki-84 Hei 7.7 > 6.0, Ki-84 Otsu 6.3 > 5.7, Ki-84 Ko 6.0 > 5.3 – these aircraft do not have advantages in MAB; their BRs are overinflated for AA capabilities.

(NAB) J2M5, J2M3, G.56 – from 6.7 > 5.7 – same as above

(NAB) J6K1 from 6.3 > 5.7 – same as above

(NAB) Tu-4 from 8.0 > 7.7 – similar to B-29 with comparable payloads that actually live at BR 7.0

1 Like
2549

Vehicle: Haruna,Kirishima,Kongó
Mode: all
Rank: all to V or VI

Reason: as of righ now only the Kongó sits at Rank VI while its sister ships Haruna and Kirishima are Rank V for no reason and sharing the same BR.
Therfore i propose that either Kongó moves to Rank V with a RP reduction or its sister ships move to Rank VI so all of them are in line.

This just Bugs me that their Rank is not the same despite beeing basiclly the same Ships since either option could help with the Naval grind for Japan in Form of a RP reduction or less ships needed for Rank VII if you got one of the event ships.

1 Like
2550

You need to do 1 post per suggestions. That way people can vote on each suggestions and they can get meaningful feedback

Ive also got a suggestion up for Tiger

2551

It’s already OP at 10.7, but I think a BR change would be better for it rather than nerfing something that made it different.

2552

(NAB) Saeta 4.7 > 4.3 (an outdated boat considering how many SKRlikes have been introduced at 3.7-4.0, which will easily destroy it). All its counterparts sit at 4.0-4.3 and also have torpedoes.

1 Like
2553

(NAB) Freccia P-493 4.7 > 4.3 – similarly, the additional gun does not provide an advantage, and it is rarely encountered in battles.

1 Like
2554

(NAB) MPK Pr.11451 4.7 > 4.3 – an unjustified BR increase; its maneuverability is impossible due to the poorly implemented hydrofoil, just like all ships with hydrofoil (it tilts forward when turning, whereas videos show that the stern should tilts and the turning radius should be smaller, with less speed loss during maneuvers). On half of the maps, it immediately runs aground, and its torpedoes in current realities cannot even sink a corvette. You can’t just rely on one speed.

2555

Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Tiger II (P)
BR Change: 6.7 > 6.3
Reasoning: There is no point having it at 6.7 since the Tiger II (H) has way better Armor at the same BR, the Tiger II (P) can easily be disabled by guns of even lower BR, the Turret has only around 100mm Armor at the central portion of the curve. The same gun is also featured on several vehicles on even lower BRs with little Armor and mostly way higher mobility to stay alive. The Tiger II (P) can easily be disabled by most vehicles it faces frontally.

4 Likes
2556

Also worse turret armor, the basic BMP-2 is resistant to 50 cal but the 2MD which needs to get on the side can be nuked by any 50 cal.

Also heavier and slower than the BMP-2

All around just a worse BMP

1 Like
2558

Hunter F.1 - ARB - 9.0 → 8.7
The worst Hunter in the game, yet sits at the same battle rating as the Swedish J34 Hunter which has more engine power AND missiles. Badly needs to come down in BR.

4 Likes
2559

Venom - ARB - 8.7 → 8.0
Now that we have the Mig-15 and A-5 Sabre at 8.0, the Mig-15bis at 8.3, and the Mig-17 at 8.7, it’s time the Venom came down to a more sensible battle rating for it’s performance. Compared to other 8.7 jets it’s got appalling performance, and in a full up-tier it’s practically useless.

2 Likes
2560

(NAB) USS Cyclone 3.3 > 3.0 (move from Rank V to Rank IV) – ineffective slow-firing guns with grenade launchers combined with his guns which wasn’t implemented, is easily destroyed by opponents with calibers of 40mm and above.

1 Like
2561

(NAB) Richelieu and RN Roma 8.3 > 8.0 (or increased rate of fire) – they do not have advantages; they don’t survive long, don’t shoot often, and their guns are among the worst of all top-line battleships — honestly, even at 7.7 they would be much more viable given current implementation realities.

6 Likes
2562

(NAB) HMS Tiger – keep at 5.7 (no advantages over Atlanta, which lives at 5.7 and is not affected). Fix its gun accuracy, which was set with a typo (0.5 instead of 0.25), in the last patch’s accuracy adjustments.

1 Like
2563

Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: M26 (regular Variant, any Nation)
BR Change: 6.7 > 6.3
Reasoning: The Pershing is nowhere near the performance of a Tiger II for example and sits at the same BR, also especially in the US Tree there is no point in playing it since you have the “Jumbo” Pershing with way better Armor and the Prototype (Premium) with the long 90mm at the same BR of 6.7. It doesn’t have the Gun, Armor and Mobility to justify beeing at 6.7.

8 Likes
2564

(NAB) A2D-1 9.0 > 7.7 (this aircraft isn’t much better than the A-1H, which is at 6.3)

2565

(NAB) Canberra B.Mk.2, Canberra B(I).Mk.6 – from 8.7, 9.0 to 8.3 (BR is overinflated; American Canberras are at 8.3; this change will give British aircraft to a set with Vanguard ship, which lives at 8.0)

2 Likes
2566

(NAB) Ki-84 Hei 7.7 > 6.0, Ki-84 Otsu 6.3 > 5.7, Ki-84 Ko 6.0 > 5.3 – these aircraft do not have advantages in MAB; their BRs are overinflated for AA capabilities.

2567

TAM 2C has literally 430 mm of pen with 105 mm dm63, has 6.1 sec reload only if aced, and to top It off its the worst light tank of its category at the br being outmarched by stuff like 2S25M wich yes has worst armor but better mobility and an insanely good 125 mm cannon with 3BM60, the only remarkable thing about the TAM2C Is the good resistance among light tanks but its still a light tank not an mbt

2568

it will mog 3.3