Air Realistic Battles & Simulator Battles, Mirage 2000D-RMV, 12.7>12.3
This plane is very limited in its air to air armaments to justify being at 12.7. It doesn’t get a useful radar for finding air targets, doesn’t get in-built guns and the external gun pod is placed in an usual location and affects performance, only two IR missiles.
Air Realistic Battles, F-16A OCU. 13.7 > 13.3. Low amount of countermeasures and no HMD, this aircraft is too weak in comparison with aircraft on its BR.
Vehicle: Tornado F3 Late
Gamemode: Air Sim
Change: 13.3 —> 13.0
Reason: It moved down in RB. When the ICE moved down to 13.0 it moved down in both gamemodes. It is unplayable vs 14.0s and there doesnt seem to be the new brackets expected this change to accomodate 14.0s properly into sim
RB, All M26 variants, including T99: 6.7 → 6.3
There is no reason that the Pershing should be at the same BR as multiple directly superior variants. It is in no way on par with the heavies of 6.7 whilst having similar mobility, and lacks the mobility to act as a competent medium at the BR.
RB Ozelot 9.7> 9.3 He has no advantages over his rivals and he perfectly fits into the seitap of Germany at 9.3
With the introduction of 14.0. It should be possible to add new Sim Brakcets that accomodate 12.3 and 13.3 properly within the sim brackets.
It is rediculous this is another BR change with no proposed SIM changes and especially no new Sim brackets.
Here is my proposal for new Sim brackets to be introduced this update
why J-7D should play with SU-25SM3 and fight R-73? I think it’s a bit unfair sort of…
F-20 (RB) 12.7 → 12.3
its worse than the f16 As while sitting at the same br
Thank the LORD the F-4C went down atleast.
Vehicle: Hunter FGA9
Gamemode: Air Sim
BR Change: 9.7 ----> 9.3
Reason: It has almost identical performance to the Hunter F6 (France) and yet sits 0.7 BR higher in SB and 0.3 higher than it does in RB. There is no justification for this BR increase and its BR should be lowered to 9.3
(9.7 is also the same BR as the Hunter F58 which has better AAMs, A better engine, an RWR and CMs)
This^^^ with the F16A going down, this should follow it
Yep, sad to see that the T-80UD isn’t going to 10.7, it’s more armored, faster reloading, better optics, better mobility t72. Love it
Never carried R-73
Guys, I think it’s one of the worst decisions to give higher b. R. Basically, it’s the worst IFV for my opinion.
Vehicle: Sea Harrier FRS1 (SQV)
Gamemode: Air Sim
BR Change: 11.3 ----> 11.0
Reason: Going from 2x Aim-9Ls to 4x Aim-9Ls does not justify a 0.7 BR increase. The Sea Harrier has extremely low performance currently and is fairly defenseless vs many other 11.3. Most notably aircraft like the Mig-23MLD also at 11.3 in Sim, outperform it dramatically.
(Additional note: Both Sea Harriers are underperforming significantly due to missing features. Adding radar gunsight, Replace placeholder HUD and fix the incorrect RWR on the SQV. Additionally, all Harriers have a sooty exhaust that needs to be removed and an IR signature that is 10x hotter than it should be)
(as a minor side note, please reclass the Sea Harrier’s to be naval fighters not strike aircraft as this would be a more accurate description of the Sea Harrier. Additionally, this would enable it to be used as a CAP without increasing the SP cost of far better CAS aircraft such as the Jaguar Gr1A or Buc S2B at the same BR in GRB)
Simulator Battles, SU-25SM3, 12.3 > 11.7
A subsonic attacker with very limited air to air capability is unfair to be placed at 12.3. This plane sits at 12.3 while the SU-39 which gets twice the IR missiles and a very potent radar pod is going down to 11.3. The competition at 12.3 get good radars + SARH / ARH missiles, IRCCM IR missiles. I request the current proposed battle rating change to apply to simulator battles as well.
Vehicle: Sea-Vixen F.A.W Mk.2
Gamemode: Air RB
BR Change: 9.0 ----> 8.7
Reason: It has no guns and extremely easy to defeat rear-aspect only IR Missiles. Anything with flares renders it unplayable (not that you need flares to defeat the Red Tops, turning slightly is enough). Increasing its BR increases the number of aircraft with flares it can encounter and therefore it is rendered unplayable.
Alternative solution: Give Red Tops their missing All-aspect lock ability and add the Sea-Vixen’s Missing Napalm (2 year old bug report for those)
A-5c (rb) 10.7 → 10.3
slower than all strike aircraft of the br while having low CM amount and lacking flight performance for the br
Vehicle: Harrier Gr7
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 12.3 ----> 12.0
Reason: The Harrier Gr7 has no radar and sub-sonic flight performance. It is well equipped with a defensive loadout but has limited ability to survive against a smart and determined attacker. Its BR also renders it extremely hard to use it within its main role of A2G attack. Additionally, there is no 12.3 Bracket. So the Harrier Gr7 is always at a minimum fighting 12.7s and therefore has a Psuedo BR of 12.7 not 12.3. Lowering it to 12.0 would massively increases its playability.
In ARB, its now going to be directly facing aircraft like the F-16 on the regular with their BR reduction.
Alternative Solution: Give the Harrier Gr7 its native MAWS and not the C&P from the F-111A. Add the missing 2x Aim-9Ms and 2x AGM-65s . Fix the exhaust being sooty to reduce visiblity. Fix the IR signature being so hot its nearly impossible to flare anything and overhaul BOL so that its modeled correctly and not at 1/4 strength
Since the Israeli F-16C Barak II is going to 12.7 in ground, does it mean it will get mavericks or something? I think the current CAS payload for it does not deserve a +0.3 in GRB.
Also, any chance stretching air vehicle GRB BR to 13.0 so players could avoid playing with 11.7 prem players?
