It has 150 more hp. Thats about 10% more than the D-20/D-5, and it makes a massive difference.
1 Like
Not to mention that it’s already a bit undertiered as it is.
1 Like
2s38 during the past 1 year has not been overperforming at all it is a victim of slants against it. If you are facing tanks 9040c will outperform the 2s38. The complaints were most probably coming from those that played 9.0br tanks and faced it quite a lot in the past. Otherwise it has not been overperforming at br.10 and above. Against incoming planes and helicopters it did really well that is where it excelled in.
1 Like
Some of these battle ratings appear to be made by those playing world of tanks (maybe) not war thunder.
1 Like
That tiny amount of extra hp in wep that makes no difference whatsoever in gameplay unless its against other p51s since it will still get clapped by a spitfire or a yak, or bf109f4s or g6s i think, idk i havent played the 109g6 in like a year and a half.
But it doesnt make a huge difference in gameplay, at most you will be at like 100 m higher than a p51d20 would be which doesnt matter since the yak and spitfire will be +600m above you by that point.
And this has nothing to do with the d10 or anything but gaijin really fucked up the p51 flight model or instructor in it bc there is no fucking way the irl p51 wobbled so much like it does in game
The Merkava Mk1, in terms of firepower, armor, and mobility, does not meet the standards expected of a BR 9.3 MBT. I believe raising it to BR 9.3 is a mistake.
For starters, you can’t balance vehicles by comparing them to the strongest vehicles at their tier. You have to consider eveything that vehicle can face. Spitfires, Yaks and 109s outclimb the P-51D-10 and beat it in a 1v1, but they are also much slower than it.
The reliance on top speed gives the vehicle a high skill floor, so it is more difficult to do well in than a Yak-3 or a Bf 109 F-4, but that does not mean the vehicle is worse. Those vehicles may start above you, but unless you allow yourself to get jumped by them, your speed gives you a lot of defensive options.
But secondly, A 10% power difference is immense at this tier. Thats a bigger difference than the gap in power between the F4U-1 and the F4U-4.
The P-51D-10 is closer to the P-51D-30 in performance than it is to the P-51D-5, and you are suggesting it be a full BR lower than the D-30, and the same BR as the D-5.
If you’re unsure how to use the D-10, I urge you to listen to some people who do have the knowledge to use its strenghts effectively
2 Likes
It’s also more complicated than just “only 10% more power”, there’s also the element of what altitude it’s tuned for.
I have the D-10 and I’ve used the TT D-20s, the D-10 is much, much better.
Look at the graph of PWR vs Alt I attached above. You can see that the altitude tuning between the variants is quite similar
The F-104S.ASA must be placed at 11.7 or 11.3.
The F-104S.ASA can carry two AIM-9Ls and two Aspide 1-As, or four AIM-9Ls and an M61. The RWR is sound-only, and the radar can detect targets up to 37 km in MTI mode, but locking is unstable, and ACM is effective up to 4 km, but performance is extremely unstable. Only 60 countermeasure munitions can be carried.
These performance characteristics are generally inferior to those of the MiG-23MLD deployed at 11.7. They have higher-performance SARHAAM and better maneuverability.
This is extremely unreasonable. The F-104S.ASA should be deployed at 11.7 or 11.3.
3 Likes
That’s like a 700m difference in supercharge gear change altitude. Hardly "quite similar. Especially when everything above 5000m basically doesn’t matter for WT.
ok I concede, but my point still stands, the D-10 power curve is always closer to the D-30 curve than it is to the D-5 curve
Oh I wasn’t arguing that point, it’s absolutely closer to the D-30. Part of that is just the altitude tuning though, you can see in the graph that the D-30 even more tuned for low altitude than the D-10.
1 Like
Bait used to be believable.
For the nth time:
R-73s for the MiG-29 9.13s in exchange for the R-27ER.
Reasoning: The R-60M is a pain to use against the likes of an F-16.
1 Like
Pt.2
Forgot to say the (M-51, M-51 (W)) 6.0 → 6.3 is fine.
(BMD-4, BMD-4M) 9.3 → 9.7
BMP-3 9.0 → 9.3
These are good changes.
Added reload, shell and Kungs changes are good.
1 Like
Vehicle: Ariete pso - Ariete and ariete amv
Mode：Gorund Realistic Battle
BR: 11.7-12.0→11.3-11.0
Arete tank need to fix its a slow tank with now armor and normal reload speed its a 2a5 with no armor or speed to run and to face 2a7 They are not equal at all.
4 Likes
Vehicle: All aircraft with 20 mm MG 151/20 as main armament
Game Mode: Air RB / Air Realistic
BR change: All aircraft gets a BR decrease of ./. 0.3
Reasoning: Gaijin nerfed the (historically correct) highest damage output of the MG 151/20 mineshells (due to highest HE filler/TNT equivalent ) indirectly with ballistic upgrades (which made them way harder to use) whilst all other 20 mm received a massive buff with RS 2.0 & 3.0 as their damage output increased significantly whilst they have way superior ballistics.
The main reason for the BRs of MG 151/20 equipped aircraft was that the flight performance was never really outperforming or dominating enemies - it was based on the powerful mine shells which hit like trucks and allowed “one-pass, one kill” play styles or realistic chances to be successful with long range head-ons.
Since the mentioned ballistic changes they are way harder to aim and are useless at longer ranges due to wrongly implemented SD (=self-destruct) fuse which results in premature SD of the shells before they reach their targets. Just watch random replays and you will see this effect.
13 Likes
They absolutely do. Gaijin themsleves said they were already pior performers at their old BR. Moving them up made no sense but was suppose to include a forwar air spawn so they could still be somewhat viable. And they haven’t been given that air start so they should go back down.