It was until Gaijin changed that for some unknown and undocumented reason. Instead of popping 1 at a time, they now only pop in pairs.
I hate how they can nerf a plane for no documented reason.
2 Likes
BMP-3 has Gen 2 thermals actually, same as BMD-4 and 4M. Despite that I still think the increase is justified. But Begleit also deserves an increase in BR as well, that fast firing 57mm is great and puts the swedish 40mm’s to shame in comparison.
1 Like
Game Mode: Ground RB
Vehicle: ELC bis
Change: Give the ELC bis the ability to scout. It fulfills the same role of a light tank tank destroyer as other vehicles which get scouting, such as the M50, M56, ASU-85, ASU-57, Pak Puma, etc.
19 Likes
Please remove the R27ER from the mig29 and give it the R73, the mig29 was designed to use the R73 and the early models did not use the ER, keep it at the same BR and it would actually be good, dont move up to 13.0, it is not equivalent to the Su27, keep at 12.7 with rebalanced missiles
5 Likes
Yep. But it’s true tho.
here i am doing yet another shameless plug
4 Likes
I highly doubt it’s the premium players that lower the stats this much.
2S38 isn’t the only premium but it has weirdly bad stats.
What’s wrong with the SPYDER? Genuinely haven’t played it yet and I’m curious since I’m grinding out Israel right now
Here a list with all the vehicles (I can think of right now) that should have better RoF:
- IS-2 & IS-2 1944: 20.8s → ~15s (Shouldn’t take more than twice the time to reload than a long 88)
- IS-4M → Same story. The IS-4 has a turret the size as a bathtub, unlike the IS-3, which achived it’s protection level from making the interior incredibly cramped and should have a longer reload time.
- M48 tanks: 6.7s → 5.0s (They put a giant turret on a Patton tank with easy to reach ready racks)
- M60 & Leopard 1 → Same story
- ARL-44: 10s → 5.0s (Literally has a reload assist in the turret. 10s reload and BR 5.3 for a 1945 tank is simply stupid, it should be much more effective)
- ARL-44 (ACL-1): 7.5 → 4.0s (Same story. If a Sherman can reload its 75 in 5s, then this 47.5t heavy tank should be at least as effective or better)
KV-85/IS-1 → 7.4s → 6.7s (It’s a King Tiger sized turret but a gun comparable to the short 88mm. Makes no sense to reload that long. The 100mm gun has a reload of just 8.5s, using even heavier shells than the long 88) - Jagdtiger: 18.2s → 12.5s (Has two loaders, standing next to the gun in a casemate and after the engine nerf it’s just a worse Ferdinand without an appropriate reload time)
- M26E1: 11.1s → 7.5s (Has the final iteration of the long 90mm, that has shells that are as short as the short 90mm. 11.1s compared to the German long 88 makes no sense.)
12 Likes
Same thing applied for British armour during the war, pretty much everything had speed governors applied which are also applied in WT and have been since inception IIRC. Most famously Crusaders and Cromwells especially being limited (IIRC the CVRT fleet also have limiters as does Fox).
But dont see Brit mains complaining, the double standard is Germans getting the theoretical capability while the UK and others well, dont, lol. This is more the Germans falling into line with the rest of us.
5 Likes
Calling the R-60M a 12.0 missile is a joke
1 Like
Doesnt change that the Bagel is obnoxiously op at 9.3…
Compared to vehicles that should not have a buffed RoF:
- T-34 1940: 7.1s → 12s
- T-34 1941: 6.9s → 11s
- T-34 1942: 6.5s → 10s
The PT-76 used to have a 10s or longer historical reload. Why does Gaijin think, a 1940 based tank with the same two man turret should somehow have a better RoF than a 1950s light tank, using practically the same cannon?
The T-34 was known for their low RoF, due to small, cramped turret, with the commander serving as the loader and only periscopes to aquire targets.
The same story with the KV-1. Except for the KV-1S, the turret design was very poor.
Again the reload rate should be at least 10s. With the exception of the KV-1S, which has an actual “modern” three man turret, with a cupola for the commander and a loader that can easily load rounds into the breech.
Likewise the KV-2 reload buff makes like no sense. It’s a meme vehicles. Buffing the reload to some unrealistic level, potentially raising the BR in the process, makes no sense.
It shouldn’t be an effective vehicle, that’s the whole point of it. You hit, you kill, but then you better get into cover or have support.
8 Likes
Guess the point is that those missiles are f*cking OP for 10.3.
Ok but they are available at 11.0 why call them 12.0 missiles lmao
yeah, more vehicles should get APDS/APFSDS and get higher BR. HVAP is pain.
Ofc thats the problem, not that those missiles are OP at 10.3 or that those two planes are destroying flareless 9.3 planes, the problem is that I wrote 12.0 instead of 11.0.
they serve as underwing pylon decorations for me at 12.7
2 Likes
Its a compression problem if anything, SU-25 doesnt belong at 10.7…
Once again, and I hope for the last time on this forum: Attack aircraft are not supposed to be competitive with fighters in Air RB. That is not their purpose and never has been. They are meant to destroy ground targets, not to be the best fighter against aircraft that are decades older.
1 Like