IMO id rather take the Alpha Jet TH over the A-10A any day of the week.
Ya missiles won’t do you good if all the bandits r dead and you just arrived to the battlefield.
Sure the P-4s got worse range n maneuverability but its made up for by the platform being good.
Just wait till they add the Alpha Jet TH Phase 2 with AIM-9Ms 😈😈😈😈
Now explain that to the people who think it should be 10.3 ARB…
it’s better than the likes of the A-10A Early or Su-25K.
I don’t feel like going datamining, but I’m 80% sure they aren’t.
In ARB it is just as bad, if not worse, since people see exactly what you are from miles away and can take the weirdest approach angles to deny you any chance of counterattack.
At least in ASB you can fly low and even at 10.7 you avoid reliable detection from some radars, so players have to get closer to see you. Same with A-10A, except in A-10A you will actually know that those planes with radars are there and looking in your direction.
See missile spreadsheet.
AIM-9Gs have 50% more DeltaV (faster), with a motor that burns over twice as long (that speed is reached later, i.e. closer to the enemy), G pull is only 2G worse (18 vs 20).
All you lose is all-aspect capability which you can’t really use in Air Sim because you have no way to do IFF from the front, not without collecting teamkills reliably.
And in Air RB people just see the big red MSL coming for them. To use such a missile effectively there you’d have to climb and drop them on top of players, and you can’t really climb because the few radar missiles there are entirely invisible to you.
Ok, but these are ground attackers. A-7E can actually do ground attack, and does it very well.
Su-25s are about on par to Alpha Jet Th for acceleration and top speed, that speed difference is ~40kph. Su-25s also bring far better CAS loadouts to the fight. A-10A is slower but also far better equipped with an RWR, AGM-65s, a better gun with a lot more ammo.
That’s just an Air RB problem. At 10.7 there isn’t much you’re gonna be doing in an Alpha Jet to a J-7D.
EDIT: and perhaps most importantly… neither A-10A nor Su-25 lose their CAS loadouts by bringing A2A missiles. Alpha Jet TH has to give up ALL 4 of its pylons to carry them.
Stirling B Mk III
ARB & GRB
4.7 → 4.3/4.0
The Mk III is near identical to the Mk I, but somehow that justfies a BR difference of 0.7, instead of them being same BR. It is not even because they have any difference in armaments. They are more in effect, the same aircraft, and there is no reason to research and play the Mk III, when you are going through the techtree.
B-239
ARB & GRB
2.7 → 3.0/3.3
This is very powerful for its BR, it nearly outturns the early spitfires, and it have a good climb rate at that. Its 4x .50 cal, that easily shreads anything it fights, be it air targets or ground targets.
Fair arguement to make, Su-25 is better at CAS but the Alpha jet is a better flight model (slightly faster, better at turning)
As you have mentioned, if you want to carry air to air missiles, you have to sacrifice your air to ground loadout.
9Ps are all aspect, not limited to rear/side shots. at 10.7 you can still see flareless planes that are nearly hopeless about you, but could otherwise potentially avoid the seeker of the 9G.
In air sim, the lack of IFF would hurt it.
In air realistic, the Alpha Jet TH is just another all aspect slinger at a relatively low BR.
Moving it down, at least for realistic, is a horrible descision.
As for simulator, I don’t play it enough to argue in favour or against, so I’m going to leave the arguement here.
They just need to drop the BR of every WW2 heavy bomber by 0.3-0.7 and add them onto the Split BR system so they dont become too OP in GRB.
Less than 5%, maybe 10% of WW2 heavy bombers are probably at teh correct BR
Pbv 501
GRB
6.7 → 7.3
It is a BMP-1 more that a whole BR lower. I mean, normally the cannon is also the main armerment of the BMP-1, and that performs very well with that cannon at 8.0, however somehow this sits at 6.7, with exactly the same cannon. It just doesn’t make sense why this is so low of a BR.
Such as? Unless on a full downtier or a failsquad, I can’t think of any 10.7s without flares. Certainly not ones you’d meet with any regularity since they’re just as weak to every other jet at these BRs.
But when are you gonna find someone at 10.7 who doesn’t flare a missile fired from well within 2km against them? Even when coming from above they will very often see it, firing from the same altitude is near guaranteed to have it countered.
9G is more useful since they can miss their shots on you, and you launch it when they fly past you. Firing them from A-7E is already extremely effective, many who thought they could just outrun my A-7E in Air Sim suddenly found themselves exploding a few seconds later.
Sure, they can also flare 9G… but firing from greater range means many players just ‘filter’ you out of their perceived threats and don’t actually flare them.
It’s a subsonic ground attacker with 20G missiles, at a BR where everything is faster, has flares, and can probably just go fast enough to avoid them anyway.
They were funny that one time in Ground RB when I blasted an F-104A who wanted to come in a head-on with me, but they’re not very useful otherwise.
Already does, F-4E is 10.7 and visually identical to F-4EJ which will always be a friendly. That’s its competition BTW, a supersonic fighter that has better ground attack capabilities than the Alpha Jet TH, and very good radar missiles.
FV102 Striker
GRB
8.3 → 8.0 + Add spotting
It is part of the CVR(T) family, where the R quite litterally stands for Reconnaissance. It is a scouting vehicle, that doesn’t have the ability to scout. At the same time, it is like an alternative to the Swingfire vehicle, since it trades the ability of being able to be hull down for a lot more mobility. It is probably one of the hardest vehicles to use effectively, since you have to expose a lot of your vehicle to guide your missile on target, all the while the 2-5 seconds you are guiding the missile, you are exposed.
sea hawk(mk.50 and mk.100)
ARB
8.3->8.0
slow plane that does ok in a downtier but gets obliterated on an uptier, this plane should not be able to face f104s,f100s or mig19s
Would love spotting to be added to it.
also the fact that this is going up in br and not the mig15bis ish that is still somehow 8.0
Its pretty strong i wont lie, too bad its about the only good thing Finland has to offer and Swedens only good CAP plane, it probably should go to 3.0 for ground but it would immediately become unused as sweden 3.0 is essentially pure suffering ground wise.
Also, adding back the commander controls would be a nice idea considering IRL the sight could be used by a person off the actual carrier and guided by a 3rd party.
Literally no lineup, would be a worthless vehicle
Instead it should have its autoloader removed to be historical so that it could be much slower when damaged in terms of reload speed. Would guve it about a 4-5 reload as thats what the Swedes pulled when hand loading with more room.
F4F Early, F104G CN, F104J
You think the Alpha Jet TH should be the same BR as a flareless F104?
Since you’re in favour of moving the TH to 10.3 in both realistic and sim, what 9.3 (bar ayit and a few outher outliers) is going to be DODGING your AIM-9P4?
Sure facing 11.7 is rough, especially without an RWR, but it’s better than facing the fking bogeyman in your 9.3
I’m referring to RB here, not sim as I don’t play sim enough to form actual arguements.
Id like them to buff the wire tbh, snaps very easily for a missile that IRL can be fired round corners
Putting the R in CVR(T)
Vehicle: F104S.ASA
Br change: 12.0>11.3
Its is well-know that the f104 is poor at higher tiers especially at 12.0 with Aspide-1A missiles at that tier with 9Ls which doesn’t help. Continuing on to that you need to sacrifice your gun to use the radar missile. Compared the J8B which practically has the same kit with better maneuverability and at a lower BR
