new AAs are not that strong, most 12.0 CAS can deal with them pretty well
I’ve seen someone using 11.3 CAS to bully them
MBT-2000, 11.3 > 11.0
Unlike the Al-Khalid or ZTZ-99s it doesn’t have high quality thermals on the gunner sight and doesnt have thermals on the commander sight. Also its armor is extremely weak compared to the ZTZ-99s.
Its a slightly more mobile sidegrade to the 99s with an actual reverse gear.
9 Likes
yeah im definitely looking for a relationship on a forum, nice one
historic moment
8 Likes
All of them need to be higher than 10.0
wont change anything tbh
if i can have ~1.2k kd at 11.7 then 9.7 wont do anything
we love a good balance change
Its chaos day, i guess devs don’t even play their own game huh?
Only tam IIP deserves an uptier really. And still not that high. 9.7/10.0 at most
1 Like
PT-16/T-14, 11.0 > 10.7
Its a leopard 2K without the angular turret that makes the 2K survivable, no thermals, just DM23 as its best round (being moved up to a BR with M829A1), and has no lineup whatsoever at 11.0. Its an upgrade over the 2K just because of the autoloader but its not a 1.0 BR worthy upgrade. Arguably a sidegrade to the 2A4.
3 Likes
You think we’d still have this level of br compression if they did?
ofc they don’t, ground is still capped at 12.0 and they answered our pleas for decompression with a .3 increase in Air.
1 Like
If they did then this game wouldn’t be having the issues it does now.
We’d have proper maps, CAS would have been balanced years ago and we wouldn’t be getting new top tier premiums constantly
Air RB, Ju 388 J. 4.3 > 3.0
This is an event vehicle and was never popular, so after one BR change from 4.7 to 4.3, this aircraft was forgotten. This aircraft needs a drastic reduction in its BR because the BR at which it was introduced was extremely overrated. In short, it is a slightly better Ju 88 C-6, which is at 2.3.
detailed reason (very important for everyone who has never played this aircraft):
It’s a slow and heavy aircraft with average weapons for its size and low ammo capacity, even compared to light aircraft. The Ju 88 C-6 (2.3) is very similar and suffers from the same issues. Both have downward-angled guns and their rudder is bad for vertical aiming. Just a little maneuvering by the enemy makes it impossible for you to hit them. Compared to the Ju 88 C-6, the Ju 388 J has more engine power and more powerful guns. But the drawbacks are too substantial and are cumulating in a very negative way:
examples
- Downward-angled guns + low-velocity 30 mm
Two bad factors that make each other even worse. - Downward-angled guns + weak rudder
It is already harder to aim horizontally. Most players will not engage in a head-on with the Junkers, so you have to try to hit them while they are evading (vertical aiming). Because your rudder is too weak to make quick adjustments, you have to roll your aircraft. Now imagine trying to aim a downward-angled gun while rolling. Hitting an aircraft becomes almost impossible. - Low and rare chances of hitting an aircraft + low ammo per gun
Two conflicting limitations: You have to take every small chance of landing a hit, but you can’t spare the ammo for it.
All that comes on top of the low speed, climbrate, turnrate and rollrate.
All the peculiar limitations of these aircraft and their role in the game as bomber-hunters that can’t hunt bombers due to a way too low airspawn and horrible climb rate still apply. Even with an airspawn, fighters that take off from the airfield will reach bomber height twice as fast! So you are forced to fight the fighters, which can always easily avoid you. Overall, the improvements of the Ju 388 J over the Ju 88 C-6 are small and don’t affect the aircraft’s performance by much.
PS: Don’t get fooled by the stat card of the Ju 388 J:
- Two of four 20mm cannons with 400 rounds are “Schräge Musik” (in WT, dead weight).
- 612 km/h at 10,600m!!! - the game doesn’t even last long enough to reach that altitude. At lower altitudes, your speed is very similar to that of the Do 217 N or Ju 88 C-6.
Please don’t forget about the existence of this aircraft.
3 Likes
Merkava Mk.2D, 10.3 > 10.0
All i can say here is its just not that good, its a slow and huge unarmored target that people apparently don’t know where to shoot. It has a good top shell and gunner thermals but besides that i don’t see how its 10.3 worthy.
I have no clue why it goes up every other BR update.
4 Likes
It will. Now my unstabbed 8.0 tanks wont get touched by a tandem charge atgm that was fired on the move from 2km away
Leopard 2AV, 10.3 > 10.0
Its a leopard 2A4 without the armor, with a 105mm gun firing DM33 as its best round, and no thermals. There is no universe where this is a peer equal to the T-80UD or T-72AV.
2 Likes
18 Likes
which player statistics? average stats or stats from good players?
ARB, Fw 189 2.3 → 1.3/1.0
This aircraft has just 2x7,92mm with 1000 rounds at 2.3. That is crazy and it can only be explained by it being played only by at most experienced players. Its real performance is that of a 1.0 aircraft or even worse.
It is a recon plane. In War Thunder it’s designated as a bomber but it can only carry 4x50kg bombs.
You are forced to play this “bomber” as a fighter. So why don’t you just make it a fighter to remove the airspawn and put it at 1,0. This way it has at least a acceptable armament. While it is maneuverable for a twin engine, it paid the price for that by minimal armament and ammo. Reserve plane fighters will still be superior. Its flight performance and speed is average for 1.0.
3 Likes