Well I’m looking at my IS-7 in the hangar right now and it clearly says 8.3 for GRB
1 Like
Just a reminder that the T-44-100 has a 10.5s reload and Gaijin planes go increase the reload time of the T29 with its giant turret and two loaders to 14.9s.
How does that make sense?
The T29 is simply the better Tiger II H.
I rather see it at 7.3 with a reload buff then having it at 7.0 with some unrealistic RoF.
This RoF nerf seems to justify the BR balance of the reduced mobility of Tiger II tanks.
3 Likes
Since Tigers II get their engine corrected to historical levels how about removing the fake 10.5cm APCR of the 10.5cm Tiger II?
Germany never built any 10.5cm APCR shells while there was actually a 12.8cm APCR, that never entered service.
No one uses that shell anyway.
1 Like
F14A add AIM9L, now 12.7 only has one aircraft without All-aspects IR AAM.
F14B add AIM9M, now 13.0 there is only one aircraft without All-aspects IRCCM IR AAM.
F16A ADF/MLU add AIM9M, they have been moved to 13.3. It is unacceptable to be without AIM9M at this level.
why people keep praying at 9L and 9M as it’s some sort of act of the divine? F-14 doesn’t use sidewinders as a main weapon, there is literally zero reason to pick 2 more of them over a Sparrow or Phoenix. Similar thing with F-16A, you will get AIM-120 why would you ever think about AIM-9?
I have a slightly different interpretation.
A while back Gaijin wanted to raise the T29 to 7.3 and the Tiger II to 7.0. There was a lot of community pushback against it. In the response to feedback, Gaijin said something that sounded broadly like, “we want to underline that these two tanks are outliers. Stats support them going up, but since there’s overwhelming opposition to them going up, we’ll make an exception and leave them alone”.
Now they have an opportunity to “normalise” their efficiency through two “unappealable” means - one a historical bug report, and the other a reload nerf since loading times are a soft balancing factor in game.
1 Like
close range dogfights, ambushing someone without alerting their RWR. at these BRs, unless youre in dedicated IR slinger, IRs will always be a secondary weapon, but they do have their case uses.
Vehicle: BI rocket plane USSR
Game Mode: Air RB / Air Realistic
BR change: 6.7 to 7.3
Reasoning:
The rocket plane is outperforming every opponent at its current BR. Even as the fuel load looks rather small the fuel efficiency is highly unrealistic - with low throttle the fuel lasts for ages.
In addition the 2 x 45 rounds of 20 mm ShVak are enough for any non-rookie player to score 3-5 kills with one ammo load - thanks to the damage output buff for the weakest 20 mm cannon in irl (WW 2) with RS 2.0 / 3.0.
In order to kill a BI there are just 2 viable strategies:
- Swarm it aggressively with multiple planes at the same time in order to enforce them to use 100% power to evade the attacks - this has to be repeated until the BI runs out of fuel and can’t escape as their rip speed is too low.
- Wait in orbit until the BI scored 2-3 kills and is heading to rearm refuel to his forward airfield and strafe it on the runway.
This is no subjective observation - these threads deal with the current op status of the BI - highly experienced Air RB players confirm this in detailed analysis spread amongst more than 200 posts (with together more than 10k views):
BI at 6.7 is April Fools event,. only it's going 24/7 for the last few years
14 Likes
Addendum: I also want to point out that the Jagdtiger with a large casemate and two loaders is staying at 18.6 aced reload even as it gets a mobility nerf. Casemate TDs truly never catch a break in the meta of this game, with few exceptions.
4 Likes
This post won’t be looked at if it contains more than one vehicle per post.
2 Likes
I already suggested to buff the reload rate.
With the mobility nerf it will be worse than a Ferdinand at 6.7.
A reload buff makes sense and is appropriate.
4 Likes
that’s why i don’t understand this demand for them. 9L\M is not great at dogfights and for ambush purposes current IR missiles on these platforms are more than capable. If F-14 didn’t had ability to carry Phoenixes or 6 Sparrows - sure thing it would require better Fox-2s, same goes for F-16, but with current loadout i don’t think it’s really needed.
AIR RB :
Mirage 4000 needs to go 12.7 BR
at the moment, its not on par with anything 13.0
the plane weight is too much, only when the plane has 3m of fuel is actualy able to fight and move correctly
the missiles : magics 2 are great, but only able to shoot enemy at 2km from you, the Super530D, great missiles but only good at 10km from you enemy has missles 50km-90km against you (thats 10x-90x times more than your missles)
6 Likes
AIR RB :
Mirage 2000 RMV needs to go 12.0 or 12.3
what is that plane going to do with only 2 magic (1.5km range) missiles against enemy that has 100-150km range missiles ?
its a CAS in a all air battle, and also that the fact that killing ground in AIR RB rewards you nothing, this plaen should be almost a WHOLE BR lower
9 Likes
Why are you trying to compare a CAS aircraft based on a light close range fighter with dedicated anti-air missile busses? At 12.0 Mirage 2k airframe, even heavy 2-seater one gonna dominate against anything despite being, again, a dedicated CAS aircraft.
Sadly looks like it isn’t happening.
Maybe someday.
The performance of Tiger II‘s and the Jagdtiger is going to decrease.
Gaijin is probably making changes in the next BR update, accordingly.
2 Likes
And it is inconceivable for any of them to go down in BR instead. So reload buff for the Jagdtiger seems like the natural conclusion to help it out. While I have no idea whether the Tiger II will stabilise or plummet in stats. It will probably maintain similar lethality, but with reduced ability to influence matches, more vulnerability to CAS, and not many mobile alternatives at the BR, the win rate of that lineup will drop for sure.
So, if anyone is interested, here is the Sla.16 engine specification.
On page 4 you can find the engine performance, and on page 8 there is an explanation of how the power is delivered.
The engine, through the reduction system, reaches higher RPM, and additionally drives the blowers (I assume these are turbochargers, if I understood the manual correctly), which causes a loss of about 80 HP. So we have power losses at the engine output, which apparently are not taken into account in the game.
At least I haven’t noticed it when analyzing, for example, the T-34/85 engine, although in this case I couldn’t find any information on how much power the engine loses when transferring it to the tank’s drive.
1 Like
Not but okay lol. Always blame me.
Don’t forget the ecm jammer and so on.