you honestly think an F-16 with up to 6 AIM-120s should be 13.0…
It’d be overpowered.
You know what’s more crazy?
12.0s having to fight an F-16 with fox3s.
They actually do. They choose not to change the Tiger I E.
It’s for accuracy?
it should get nerfed to the correct, historical figure,
having the ags be 11.7 with less than 400mm pen is insane
RDF LT and other high tier light tanks have less that 400mm.
Anyway it’s more than enough pen to easily go through most weakspots.
amx32 is just another leopard 1a5 with 20mm autocanon, just rollback the br ffs
1 Like
f5a is close enough in performance to f5e that it shouldnt matter.
f5e has very slightly better max speed, but has worse sustained turn at medium-high speeds.
f5e only wins the fight at very low speeds where you shouldnt go anyway.
NF5A is close enough.
Regular F-5A/Cs can’t keep up with the E performance wise.
XM800T going up again while 7.7 France is left as it is
Yea, years ago when the game introduced these vehicles for the first time. Back then it was OP. Today the game is developed to the point where its no longer an issue for giving Strikers and Bombers an airspawn by default–maps are bigger, saturation of prems, every vehicle has high top speed and acceleration and weapons to beat down these Strikers and Bombers.
Rest of my suggestions is within context of what is going up and what is going down and what is staying where they are.
type 90 > type 10. the round makes no difference at 12.0 and type 90 is faster, stronger and has more rounds in the rack.
1 Like
Did the rate of fire and mobility of the Tiger II (10.5 cm Kw.K) remain unchanged because they were omitted?
yeah, it cant just consider how powerful it is when fully researched the modifications
Object 140
BR: 8.3 (NO CHANGE)
The object 140 offers no significant combat capability advantage over its 8.3 russian cousin and counterpart MBTs.
It is simply a mix of T-55 and T-10M’s capability, giving up 3BM25 APFSDS and reload time, to trade for an optical range finder a better APHE around, marginally armor and 14.5mm HMG.
It is a tank comparable to M60A1 AOS, which has better APDS options when it comes to a universal situation. Better at dealing with up-BR situations or heavy armour situations such as suddenly facing another m60 or t72, with better ballistic to aim for weakspots and angled penetration to deal with said targets.
At the same time, Object 140 lacks gimmicks (auxiliary features) or so called “the tools” to combat 9.3 environment comfortably, compare to other MBT of this BR, such as laser range finder and DM23/m111 level of APFSDS (Type 59D1, Olifant Mk.1 or M48GA2).
You are consistently playing the game of “what shell do I pick”, using a mediocre APDS, BR-standard HEAT or a good but not perfect APHE around and calculating the trade off consistently. This requires more thinking and planning, map knowledge and aim management as you can not simply aim center mass at every tank.
This tank rewards its players for being careful and patient, with the same trade-off in any other 8.3 medium. At the same time, being inferior to every 8.7 tank out there, lacking the equipment or specialty like 122MT, M60A1 RISE or AMX-30 BRENUS, no thermals, no APFSDS, no laser range finder, no active protection, no ERA. It is just an all-rounder of 8.3 and does not deverse nor have the ability to fight 9.7s.
As we already know, player statistics do not fully correlate with tank capability, as Object 140 sits at a good but niche BR with better premium options to go for at 9.3, 10.3 or 11.3/7, If the devs truly believe it is over-performing, then i would recommend removing the optical range finder and that’s about it.
31 Likes
Upon further googlin, I can only find a few comments stating that the German 9.12A just used the R-27R (not T/ET/ER). No information backing this claim so I’ll take it at face value for now.
Our current ingame early 29’s ver didn’t use ER or ET Alamo’s. Except the 29SMT & we don’t have the MiG-29S specific ver.
The rate of fire of the Tigers wont even be changed, and like many asked befor and got answered. NO, because the 105 Tiger II has a different engine, the HL 234 900 PS.
m50 even have better mobility and much much better firepower, and it doesn’t need to worry about its flanks.
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: Me 262 A-1a, Me 262 A-1a/Jabo, and Me 262 A-2a
Change: 7.0 → 6.3, 7.0 → 6.3, and 6.7 → 6.3
Reasoning: These were the world’s first mass-produced jet aircraft. They have poor maneuverability and take a long time to build up speed, which means they can only rely on their velocity - something that is rarely achievable at BR 7.0 (where they very often face 7.7 and 8.0). In addition, they are equipped with a very specific armament: four 30 mm MK 108 cannons with extremely poor ballistics.
It should also be noted that at BR 6.3 there is already the Me 262 A-1/U4, armed with the 50 mm Mk.214a cannon, which offers far superior ballistics and aiming performance, and yet it does not cause any balance issues.
10 Likes
Kugelblitz
Ground Realistic
Should be lowered from 7.0 to 6.7
Reason:
- Insufficient Firepower: The Kugelblitz’s HE rounds (MK103) have a lower velocity and energy retention than the Ostwind II’s Flak44. Furthermore, without a staggered firing mechanism, its firing intervals are longer than the Ostwind II, making it less effective against fast-moving late-war and early jet aircraft.
- Weak Anti-Ground Capability: Following the nerf to its AP rounds, the MK103 can no longer effectively penetrate medium tanks of the same BR from the U.S. and Soviet tech trees. Its Panzer IV chassis also gives it poor mobility, making it difficult to threaten ground targets.
- German 6.7 AA Gap: The German 6.7 BR, a core lineup, lacks effective anti-air vehicles to counter powerful CAS aircraft (e.g., A2D, F8F, AD4, AM1, Yak-9). Keeping the Kugelblitz at 7.0 creates a BR imbalance, leaving key German ground forces (like the Tiger II) without proper anti-air support in 7.0 matches.
12 Likes
Jagdtiger
Ground Realistic
Should have its reload speed increased
Reason:
- Mobility Nerf: In the upcoming update, the Jagdtiger’s engine power will be significantly reduced, lowering its power-to-weight ratio to 7.97. This change will severely impact the vehicle’s battlefield mobility and strategic positioning.
- Unrealized Design Advantages: The Jagdtiger’s design includes several features that should logically lead to a faster reload time, but these are not currently reflected in the game:
- Dual Loaders: The Jagdtiger was equipped with two loaders, which should allow for a much quicker collaborative loading process.
- Spacious Fighting Compartment: The large fighting compartment provides ample room for the crew to maneuver and handle the massive ammunition.
- Two-Piece Ammunition: The use of two-piece ammunition is generally easier to handle and load than a single, large round, especially with a two-man loading crew.
besides, is2 need reload buff too
12 Likes