Vehicle: Challenger 2F
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 11.7 ----> 11.3
Reason: It is one of the weakest tanks at top tier currently. It is by far the slowest, has minimal armour, a relatively weak round, a huge profile and a heavily mitigated fire rate due to ahistorical ready rack size of only 4 rounds. There is no justification for it to be at its current BR and needs to be further separated from the tanks that outperform it so notably, such as the Abram Sep v2, Leopard 2A7 and T-80BVM
Vehicle: Challenger 2 Black Night
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 ----> 11.7
Reason: It is one of the weakest tanks at top tier currently. It is by far the slowest, has minimal armour, a relatively weak round, a huge profile and a heavily mitigated fire rate due to ahistorical ready rack size of only 4 rounds. There is no justification for it to be at its current BR and needs to be further separated from the tanks that outperform it so notably, such as the Abram Sep v2, Leopard 2A7 and T-80BVM
Whilst the Black Night does have a number of notable upgrades over the earlier Challenger 2s, such as better optics, thermals and the APS. It is still lacking in all other respects. It deserves to be 0.3 higher than the base Challenger 2s, but does not warrant being at 12.0 alongside the meta tanks.
KV-220 at 6.3 will be absolutely useless. It already struggled with poor penetration, especially against the premium tigers.
Placing it at the same battle rating as Jagdpanthers, in arcade, will outright kill the tank.
Vehicle: Challenger 2E
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 ----> 11.7
Reason: It is one of the weakest tanks at top tier currently. It is by far the slowest, has minimal armour, a relatively weak round, a huge profile and a heavily mitigated fire rate due to ahistorical ready rack size of only 4 rounds. There is no justification for it to be at its current BR and needs to be further separated from the tanks that outperform it so notably, such as the Abram Sep v2, Leopard 2A7 and T-80BVM
The Challenger 2E alone mitigates the Challenger 2s main weakness which is it’s exceptionally poor mobility, but it does not address any of the other weakness of the CR2 and thus, still does not warrant being at 12.0
A5c
Air rb
10.7 → 10.3
Bad airframe for the br, good missiles but cant use them bc its a brick
Vehicle: HMS Tiger
Gamemode: Naval Realistic
BR Change: 6.0 -----> 5.3/5.7
Reason:
On the surface, HMS Tiger looks like a strong ship, with 2x2 very high rate of fire 6" main guns and 3x2 Incredibly fast firing 3" secondary guns. But the reality is that HMS Tiger is far weaker than most light cruisers at 5.7 and especially 6.0.
HMS Tiger’s mains guns have 3s reload (80 rounds per minute), which sounds good on paper. However, this is actually pretty poor for the BR. This is marginally better than HMS Liverpool with 9x 6" guns with a 7.5 second reload (72 rounds per minute) but far lower than ships such as USS Atlanta’s 14x 5" guns with 2.8 second reload (300 rounds per minute) or Nurnberg with 9x 6" guns with 5 second reloads (108 rounds per minute)
With the BR increasing as well, she could also be directly compared to something like HMS Belfast with 12x 6" guns with a 7.5 second reload (96 rounds per minute)
On top of the fairly poor shells per minute of the main guns, they have massive shell spread, and will rarely all impact the target, Easily 25%-50% of shells fired miss the target due to shell spread. Even at shorter ranges. These guns are only good at taking down aircraft with HE-VT due to their spread, as they act like bird shot. In comparison. 95% of the rounds fired from HMS Liverpool will hit the target due to having a very tight grouping.
Based upon datamines. HMS Tiger’s main 6" guns have double the shell spread of all other British 6" guns in game and there is no justified reason for this increase. If anything, Tiger should be more accurate
Now her secondary guns are impressive, and 3" HE-VT spam will do a lot of crew damage to smaller targets, but these guns miss by a significant margin when used in combination with the main guns. This makes landing accurate fire with both guns at the same time almost impossible for all but the largest target. If this was corrected, then her secondary guns would be far more effective.
As a final note, HMS Tiger also has very poor survivability and cannot withstand fire for very long. She loses crew incredibly fast and due to having so few guns, can be suppressed and disabled very easily. Let alone if ammo racked leaving one or more guns being disabled for an extended period of time.
At a bare minimum. HMS Tiger should retain her current BR of 5.7, however, I believe she would actually benefit from a BR decrease to 5.3, rather than remaining at 5.7 or especially increasing to 6.0.
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Ariete
BR Change: 9.3 → 9.7
This is a downright terrifying vehicle to face in any other subsonic vehicle. It is by far the strongest 1v1 vehicle at its tier, and while vehicles like the Me 163 and Vampire can turn more tightly, the Ariete also accelerates/climbs fantastically well too. The Ariete can easily energy trap anything it cannot outmanouevre, and it out-manoeuvres essentially everything. It does absolutely everything better than the CL-13B Mk.6 (yes, it is faster too, the Arietes statcard is incorrect), and the CL-13B is an amazingly strong aircraft at 9.0. This vehicle is uncounterable to almost everything its sees in a 8.3-9.3 match and deserves to be a higher BR.
Vehicle: Javelin F.(A.W) Mk.9
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: ARB: 8.3 → 8.0 ASB: 8.7 → 8.0
Reason: The Javelin is easily one of, if not maybe the weakest aircraft at its respective BRs. It is slower than most, turns worse than most and its weapon systems are hard to use. After its recent nerfs in Firebirds update, it has only gotten worse and really needs to be moved down in Battle Rating. In an uptier of any kind, you are a free kill. Especially with the introduction of the Hunter F58 at 9.3, which you are matched against often. Your only hope to do anything in the Javelin is a full downtier, and even then, every match is a struggle. 8.0 May not actually be low enough for this aircraft to be competitive, but it is as low as it can realistically go.
Vehicle: SPz-12-3 LGS
BR Change: 6.7 ----> 6.7
Why not leave it alone? This is an analog of the FIAT 6614 on 6.7.
There is also a stronger (in my personal opinion) M50 Ontos on 6.7!
Vehicle: Wyvern S4
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: None
Change: Remove air spawn.
Reason: The Wyvern on paper is not that capable of an A2A fighter, it has a number of limiations that mitgates its few strengths. The one thing it does have is air spawn, which means it can easily intercept many bombers and a large ammo count of 20mm Hispanos enables it shread those targets. Its BR should not change as its equal in overall performance to other airframes at the same BR, but removing air spawn removes its only real advantage and the only reason it is considered “OP”
Sea hawk (both)
8.3 → 8.0
Its slow, it really has no place at 8.3
Please Do Not Weaken Tiger II family and T29.
Vehicle: Lightning F6 & Lightning F.53
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: 9.3 → 9.7
Reason: It is supersonic at a BR that quite often faces sub-sonics. It’s BR should match the 9.3 F-104s, so if they move up, so should the Lightnings
BUT:
Red Tops are currently missing their all-aspect capability. With all-aspect Red Tops, it would quite comfortably sit at this higher BR without issue and maintain its current level of performance
Given the Mig-21S (R-13-300) has 2x All-aspect missiles with similar performance at 9.7 alongside 2x rear-aspect IR missiles and a better FM. 2x Red Tops with all-aspect would be of no issue at the same BR
We need ground decompression too. There’s no reason the top ground BR should still be 12.0!
Vehicle: Harrier GR.3
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 9.7 ----> 9.3
Reason: The Harrier Gr3 is rather lacking in terms of performance when it comes to CAS and Britain has very little in the way of 9.7 line-up for ground. The Harrier Gr3 is weaker than the Buccaneer S2 already at 9.3 for CAS but would provide a stronger option for a CAP Fighter, which is a little lacking at that BR, with the only meaningful option the Hunter F1 on the TT or Hunter FGA9 if you have the premium.
With the Tornado WTD61, Tornado MFG and Tornado A200 only 0.3 BR above as well, with notably better performance in every single respect, the need to lower the Harrier GR.3 is only increased further.
The Harrier Gr3 could also receive a Phimat pod for increased survivability
F-4E Phantom II → 11.0 (All realistic)
The F-4E we currently have ingame for the U.S tree is an earlier model of the E family, and uses the J79-GE-17 engine, while the other phantom models (specifically F-4J, F-4J(UK), F-4S, F.G.1, FGR.2) have upgraded engines.
So while the F-4E features an internal gun (while the other mentioned F-4s don’t), it makes the aircraft heavier and decreases top speed. In the early stage of every match, most players at the 10.3 - 12.3 range will use whatever aircraft they can to get to a base first, which is, again, entirely dependant on the aircraft’s top speed and weight.
And since the F-4E does not feature the upgraded engines like the carrier version of the F-4, it will lag behind and perhaps not get to a base in time before it is destroyed by an ally in a much faster plane.
not to mention the enhanced air-to-air capability in Navy aircraft compared to USAF aircraft, where the F-4J and F-4S feature the AIM-7F Sparrow, while the F-4E is stuck with the AIM-7E-2.
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: AMX-32
BR Changes: 9.3 → 9.3
Reasoning:
The AMX-32 is the same/worse than other 9.3 light MBT, the only difference being the 120mm gun.
This difference means nothing because the APFSDS shell fired is a 105mm shell from the AMX-30 (8.7) at slightly higher speed, giving it better penetration but not better post-penetration effects.
And the engine power difference of a 100hp of the AMX-32-105 (9.3) doesn’t justify the BR increase either.
ok, here comes my useless opinion for ground RB:)
PS: My condolences to German mains:P
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: A 32A Lansen
BR Change: 9.0 > 8.7
The major reason why the A 32A was 9.3/9.0 was because of how it performed in air battles when seperate Battle Ratings for different game modes weren’t a thing.
Compared to the A-4 Skyhawks (specifically the A-4E Early and Ayit) of which are much slower than the A 32A, they still feature some type of guided weaponry, aswell as flare countermeasures. The A 32A does not have access to any type of guided weaponry guided at the moment.
and like the Skyhawks mentioned above, they have recieved a seperate BR rating because of their weaponry, and the A 32A could benefit from a seperate BR placement aswell.
Vehicle: Harrier GR.1
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 9.7 ----> 9.3
Reason: The Harrier Gr1 is rather lacking in terms of performance when it comes to CAS and Britain has very little in the way of 9.7 line-up for ground. The Harrier Gr1 is weaker than the Buccaneer S2 already at 9.3 for CAS but would provide a stronger option for a CAP Fighter, which is a little lacking at that BR, with the only meaningful option the Hunter F1 on the TT or Hunter FGA9 if you have the premium. Additionally, the Harrier Gr.1 has no CMs and is unable to defend against any of the IR threats at this BR
With the Tornado WTD61, Tornado MFG and Tornado A200 only 0.3 BR above as well, with notably
a better performance in every single respect, the need to lower the Harrier GR.3 is only increased further.
F-4C which has just been moved down also outperforms the Harrier GR1 in CAS in every single respect