Eh… Maybe. Really on the fence with that. So long as it doesnt increase to 12.0.
But just its BOZ-ECs would maybe just barely be enough to justify being 11.7
F-15A is fabulous, I’ve got no idea what you’re talking about.
not saying moving down, im saying move rafale etc higher up. I dont see a single reason why we cant have a 14.7 or 15.0
1 Like
Vehicle: Shenyang F-5
Game mode: Air&Tank RB
Br:9.3＞9.0
Reason: Shenyang F-5 is just a Mig-17 with WEP and PL-2 missile,
Its max speed is not enough for a 9.3 br;
It has no flares/chaff;
Its combat performance is simply unable to support its fight against Mig-21S or a Mig-21SMT/MF (when uptiered);
F-106A is gonna stay at 9.3 with AIM-4G;
F-86F-40 and F3H are already moved to 8.7/9.0;
Honestly I just really dont understand why Shenyang F-5 is still staying at 9.3, it should get a lower br.
19 Likes
Kurnass 2000
12.3>12.0
Reasoning:
No radar missiles, so why is it the same BR as the EJ Kai, or the F-16 or F-20?
3 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: A-7D
Change: 10.3 → 10.0
Reasoning: Reminder, with BR separation between Air RB and Ground RB now implemented, the A-7D should no longer be tied to its outdated, legacy placement. As a subsonic aircraft with a mediocre flight model and limited ability to compete against supersonic opponents at its BR range without all-aspect AAMs, it is more appropriately placed at 10.0 in Air RB.
4 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: A-7E
Change: 10.7 → 10.0
Reasoning: Reminder, with BR separation between Air RB and Ground RB now implemented, the A-7E should no longer be tied to its outdated, legacy placement. As a subsonic aircraft with a mediocre flight model and limited ability to compete against supersonic opponents at its BR range without all-aspect AAMs, it is more appropriately placed at 10.0 in Air RB.
11 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: A-7K
Change: 11.3 → 10.7
Reasoning: Reminder, with BR separation between Air RB and Ground RB now implemented, the A-7K, which uses the same powerplant as the A-7D and A-7E and is subsonic, should be lowered to 10.7 and retain its AIM-9Ls. Currently, its flight performance hinders its ability to compete against more advanced supersonic opponents at its BR range.
5 Likes
New SIM brackets!? Holy moly can’t believe it. Su-33!!! JF-17!!!
Well it’s such unfortunate that for the upcoming update we don’t have any hint of F-14D, so I stick with current thing first.
Tornado ADV, F.3
12.0>12.3
Reasoning:
Great armament and avionics, too strong for 12.0. Please note this is all part of decompression and it shouldn’t end up fighting current 13.3s!
Decompression huh? Well that’s only .3 but that’s still decompression I guess yall are happy
Ah yes the 9040C, so much deadlier than the 2S38 that can frontally kill a 2A6 no issue. We all know why you won’t push it up, we’re not stupid. It makes money, simple as. It’s been suggested every single change, it never moves. It can deal with anything on the field no issue. Player stats balancing is a joke. Ah yes this insane vehicle is not going up because loads of people don’t know how to use it, even if it can delete anything in the hands of anyone half-competent. Makes sense.
JA-37D
12.0>12.3
Reasoning: AIM-9L and otherwise still decent performance. please note decompression.
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Shenyang F-5
BR Change: 9.3 → 9.0
The Shenyang F-5 is essentially a Lim-5P/MiG-17PF but with R-3S missiles. The R-3S missiles do very little to improve the overall effectiveness of the vehicle, and it makes very little sense than the F-5 is 0.7 BR above its counterparts. The MiG-17AS is 0.3 BR above the MiG-17 whilst also being a simple missile upgrade. 9.3 → 9.0 also brings about a massive gap in vehicle effectiveness due to the compression at this region. The difference between the ‘average 9.0’ and the ‘average 9.3’ is massive compared to the difference between 8.7 and 9.0. The F-5 deserves 9.0
6 Likes
F-14D won’t be that hard to implement, externally its almost identical to F-14B. The biggest differences that I know of were to the cockpit and radar so it would make sense for the 3rd and final production series Tomcat to have updated weapons
1 Like
In the case of the Tornado FGR.4 its likely based on perceived payload. She carries a boatload of Brimstones into Ground RB as well as a whole lot of guided bombs as well, and for base bombing she carries enough bombs to flatten at least two bases and likely going as fast as its counterparts if not faster. The two Aim-9Ms are literally just there for defense and I personally would rather take two Aim-9Ms over four Aim-9Ls.
The FGR.2 should stay where it is and get its historic Aim-9Ls.
The FGR.1 and JUNK can move down.
1 Like
Vehicle: Buccaneer S.2
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.3 ----> 9.0
Reason: This is an incredibly hard aircraft to balance correctly and its BR is heavily dictated by what is considered the most important attributes.
If the Buc S.2 is looked at with respect to its performance to engage and destroy other players, then it is incredibly weak for its BR. Armed with only 2x Aim-9Bs and no Cannons of any kind. This puts its performance well below that of aircraft such as the Scimitar F Mk.1 or Sea-Vixen F.A.W. Mk2. Whilst it handles fairly well, it is hard to justify it being any higher than 8.7, maybe even 8.3 if it wasn’t for its decent speed and acceleration.
If the Buc S.2 is looked at with respect to its performance to make it to a base and drop bombs onto it, then it performs much better, whilst it is no match for super-sonic aircraft such as the Q-5 (early) or the Jaguar Gr1 in terms of reaching a base quickly, it certainly can make a decent pace with a very large bomb load, able to destroy 3.8 bases in a single sortie. It is able to give up some of this bomb load to run external countermeasure pods which carry Large countermeasures. This gives the Buc S.2 a notable amount of survivability to actually make it to a base. I do not believe that bomb load should ever be factored into BR placement, but the CMs do need to be and it could be argued that 9.3 would be semi-reasonable for it.
But when taken as a whole, its ability to fight back (which is mutually exclusive with the ability to take CMs) and the fact that either are totally optional if you wish to maximise bomb load. I would propose a half way point of 9.0. This still leaves it at a BR where other, faster and more capable aircraft exists, but it creates further separation between the very strong set of aircraft currently found at 10.0 and 10.3, which betters it’s chance of making it to a base.
If the Yak-28B which is substantially faster than the Buc S2 can be lowered to 8.7, then the Buc S2 should at least be 9.0 as it has CMs
Additional Solution: The Buccaneer S.2 is currently missing it’s Napalm bombs. The introduction of these bombs would increase the S.2s ground attack effectiveness by allowing it to kill as many bases whilst still running the CM pods, which justifies the 9.3 rating in my opinion.
5 Likes
The Viggen UP are you joking lmao. Have you FLOWN it? It loses ALL speed after a turn and loses all rudder authority. Awful radar, nothing makes it need to go up.
1 Like
F-16A
12.3>12.7
Reasoning: There’s no reason for this 4th gen to be fighting F-4Es. 12.7 is generous.
2 Likes