Vehicle: Tornado IDS (1995) (Italy)
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Sim
BR Change: 11.7 ----> 11.3
Reason: It has identical performance to the earlier Tornado IDS aircraft (Tornado A200, Tornado MFG and Tornado WTD61) in every single respect and therefore has no justification for being a higher BR within air gamemodes
Vehicle: Tornado ASSTA1 (Germany)
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Sim
BR Change: 11.7 ----> 11.3
Reason: It has identical performance to the earlier Tornado IDS aircraft (Tornado A200, Tornado MFG and Tornado WTD61) in every single respect and therefore has no justification for being a higher BR within air gamemodes
Vehicles that need to go up in BR panzerhaubitze 2000 7.7 lrf, good mobility and reload whilst one taping 6.7s?? Really? Needs to be 8.0 all day long, bmd4 it’s mobility, auto cannon, atgm, reload, and scouting ability makes it far more suitable for higher BR where other vehicles have similar mobility and can react on par with it. The bmp3 can follow tbh, 2s38… Nuff said, vidar 8.3 similar to the pnzer 2000 but with great thermals, The PT-16/14 going up in BR is fire provided it gets a better round and it’s composite armour in the turret which was bug reported over a year ago now. Also the Hunter needs to go up in ground, that thing out ranges most of the AA’s available.
Vehicle: Tornado GR4
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.3 —> 11.7
Mitigation: Increase the SP cost of Brimstones notably on the Tornado GR4
Reason: The Tornado GR4 doesn’t currently present a massive upgrade over other Tornado IDS at it 11.3 and its hard to justify it being 12.3. Lets break it down.
It has the identical flight performance to the other 6x Mk103 Tornado IDS, 3 of which are actually 10.0 in GRB and the other 3 are considered fairly weak 11.3s. It does have superior A2A performance with Aim-9M but this would fine at 11.7 given the performance of CAP at 11.7 such as the Mig-29 and is still far weaker than aircraft like the F4F ICE or Su-27/Su-33 at 12.0. It also has more CMs, but those are rarely a deciding factor and shouldn’t have a radical impact on BR placement. it does also gain MAWS but so do many other aircraft such as the A-10C and the A200C is also due to recieve MAWS and Im not expecting MAWS alone to move it from 11.3 to 12.3.
This leaves A2G performance, the GR4 has the same Targeting pod and if anything weaker GBU options to that found on the A200C (MLU) Tornado currently at 11.3, so those shouldn’t have an impact. The PGM-500/2000s whilst being the IR version and so an upgrade over the TV version found on the GR1 aren’t radically better either and at most justify a 0.3 BR increase, so in this case, to 11.7.
That leaves the Brimstones, which are in a massively nerfed state currently with no fire-and-forget capabilities. They also have extremely limited range when used on the Tornado, and so you are often within range of even the weakest SPAA when using them and they require you to remain well within range of those SPAA for them to be used. Their greatest usage on the GR4 is to simply decoy the Pantsir whilst your PGM-2000s do the actual killing. Much like GBU-39s do on other aircraft. But they have a potential to provide sustained CAS, but so does the Su-39 with 16x Vikhrs vs the A-10C with 6x AGM-65Ds and the Su-39 is actually at the lower BR. So this shouldn’t be much of an issue either.
But that having been said, its the only reason I can think for the GR4 to be anything other than 11.7 in GRB. So if they are such an issue, increase their SP cost by notable amount. This total eliminates them being a major issue and balances them well.
As a final point of note. Lowering the GR4 to 11.7 allows it to be used in an 11.7 line-up. In its current 12.3 placement, it will be directly competing against the 13.0 multi-roles 99% of the time and as a result, has little to no value over other more capable aircraft such as the Harrier Gr7 and Typhoon FGR4.
@Stona_WT Can you get the balance team to sort out the Sovetsky Soyuz, it is outperforming everything. Stats gleamed from stat shark here:
Vehicle: Su-22M3/M4
Gamemode: Air Simulator Battles
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 11.3
**Reason:**It has very good handling and decent top speed and can be armed with 6x All-aspect IR missiles. When the average is 2 or maybe 4 all-aspect IR missiles on sub-sonic aircraft like the Sea Harrier or A-10 at this BR or supersonic aircraft like the Tornado IDS armed with only 2x Aim-9Ls at 11.3. It is insane to me that the Su-22M3 can operate with 6x All-aspect IR missiles at such a low BR. It’s low CM count might be why it is at this BR in Air Realistic, but in Air Sim, its just too OP.
Vehicle: Su-22UM3K
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Simulator Battles
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 11.3
Reason: It has very good handling and decent top speed and can be armed with 6x All-aspect IR missiles. When the average is 2 or maybe 4 all-aspect IR missiles on sub-sonic aircraft like the Sea Harrier or A-10 at this BR or supersonic aircraft like the Tornado IDS armed with only 2x Aim-9Ls at 11.3. It is insane to me that the Su-22M3 can operate with 6x All-aspect IR missiles at such a low BR. Unlike the other Su-22s, this airframe has no such CM issues and thus, should be a higher BR in both gamemodes and is on-par, if not superior to the SU-24 currently at 11.3.
Vehicle: AMX A-1A
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 10.7
Reason: The AMX A-1A is identical in nearly every single respect to the tech-tree version the AMX, except it has the MAA-1 Piranha Air-to-air missiles. These are notably different to the Aim-9Ls that the standard AMX carries but comparable in overall performance and I don*t believe justify any reason for the AMX A-1A to be any higher at this time.
All Ground Attack aircraft are underperforming notably with Air Realistic at the moment, especially sub-sonic airframes that routinely encounter super-sonic ground attack aircraft. Such a higher BR guarantees that they will encounter aircraft such as the F-4S which routinely clear any and all bases long before the AMX can arrive.
The only gamemode that the AMX A-1A performs “well” in is Air Simulator, but even within this gamemode it is notably underpowered and would be better suited at 10.7 alongside similar airframes such as the AMX and Buccaneer S2B. Whilst the MAA-1’s are little stronger with Air Sim due to their short burn time, making them harder to see, the lack of radar limits the AMX A-1A’s ability to ID targets at longer ranges.
The AMX and AMX A-1A are not strong dogfighters, with aircraft like the Sea Harrier FRS1e at 10.7 much more capable under most conditions and its hard to justify even 10.7 for the airframes if not for the on-going compression
Kfir canard air rb 11.0 → 10.7
2 9gs, low flares, no radar, bad rwr
Vehicle: Phantom FG1
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: 12.0 ----> 11.7
Reason: It has one of the worst A2A weapon loadouts at that BR and is being carried by the fact it has decent engines and slightly more CMs than most. But VS equivalent F4s like the F4S, it stands no chance, let alone aircraft on its own tree like the Tornado F3 that is universally better in almost all respects at the same BR.
Vehicle: Phantom FGR2
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Simulator
BR Change: ARB: No change, ASB: 11.3 ----> 12.0
Loadout Change: Add Aim-9L and/or Skyflash SuperTEMP
Reason: Unlike the Phantom FG1, the FGR2 actually used Aim-9L when it was in service with the RAF, this would give the FGR2 the performance it needs to operate at 12.0
Vehicle: Phantom F-4J(UK)
Gamemode: Air Realistic and Air Simulator
BR Change: ARB: 12.0 ----> 11.7 ASB: 12.0 —>11.3
Reason: It is an identical airframe to the F-4J(US) but unlike it does not have the Agile Eagle or HMD upgrades, lowering its performance notably. It is one of the weakest 12.0 aircraft in RB at the moment and doesnt belong at 12.0.
In Sim, its equivalent TT aircraft are currently at 11.3 and there is no justification for it to be at 12.0 given it is weaker than both with less CMs and weaker engine
The A7E in Air RB is currently sitting at 10.7, the same as the A10A late, while the A10 has more and better missiles, a better gun, and more countermeasures, as well as better maneuverability.
Vehicle: Harrier Gr1
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 9.7 -----> 9.3
Reason: The Harrier Gr1 has no RWR and no CMs. It is extremely vulnerable to any and all attacks, especially by those with All-aspect IR missiles. The “issue” with all Harriers that make them unrealistically hot, means that the Harrier Gr1 has no chance of survival when it encounters one of these aircraft. SRAAM performance is also extremely limited at the moment and is one of the weakest IR missiles at that BR. When compared to aircraft even like the Harrier Gr3 which has 2x Aim-9Gs, RWR and 60CMs at the same BR, the Harrier Gr1 looses most of its value. Within sim, you are totally blind to what is going on around you and you are spottable cross map due to the incorrect sooty exhaust, in sim especially, it needs a BR drop
Alternative solution: Fix SRAAM (2km range and fix the buggy TVC at short range)
Vehicle: Buccaneer S.1
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: Air Realistic: 8.7 —> 8.3 . Air Sim 9.0 -----> 8.7.
Rank Change: Rank VI ----> Rank V
Reason: This change would enable the Buccaneer S1 to get its Air Spawn back. Unlike even later Bucs, it has a notably weaker flight performance and absolutely no A2A performance (No AAMs and no CMs). It is extremely vulnerable to any attack and rarely if ever can make it to a base to drop its bomb on target. Lowering its Rank to V would enable air spawn and fix a LOT of issues for the Buc S1
The Buc S1 is also substationally slower than the Yak-28B and far less armed. These 2 aircraft should not be the same BR
BR change in SIM is due to the lack of any sort of A2A. 9.0 places it above a lot of other aircraft when its closest equivalents are at 8.3
Vehicle: F3H-2
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: 9.0 —> 9.3
Reason: This aircraft has a very high speed, great climb rate, good handling and a very capable loadout of A2A missiles and 4x decent guns. When directly compared to many other 9.0 aircraft such as the Sea-Vixen, J34 or G9.1 Y, its hard to justify it being so low. 9.3 would be a far more fair BR for this aircraft
P-51 d10
Air rb
4.3 → 4.0
Basicaly identical to the p51 d20 exept it has a tiny inisgnificant extra engine power in wep, not enough for it to be 4.3
Vehicle: Challenger 2 (base)
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 TES
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
But in addition to the base version, it is even heavier and slower due to the ERA, but the ERA provides no meaningful protection despite its weight and thickness, and only serves to weaken the Challenger 2 further
why MSC goes 11? meanwhile leos, m1 and t80 still in 10.7?? even t-72 had a better armor… dont know why they do that
