The Thai F-16 OCU just became even weirder.
It’s an aircraft that suffers from artificially inflated BR from ahistorical AMRAAM and missing more than half of its countermeasures, and instead of fixing any of that they decide to add HMD it never had…
1 Like
In the British tech tree the premium Harrier GR.1 sits at 9.7 but lacks any effective air to air weaponry(just it’s funny missiles) especially considering it’s peers and the availability of countermeasures. The Harrier GR.3 sits at the same 9.7 br yet has countermeasures and a proper set of air to air missiles(as opposed to the SRAAMs).
This plane as a result is entirely useless out of getting lucky and hitting a base with a tiny bit of ordinance. Can it be looked at to move down to 9.3 or even 9.0 considering it’s lack of maneuverability and countermeasures?
I forgot F-16C Blk 50, JAS 39 EBS HU, Gripen C (RTAF) and F-15I Ra’am might received AIM-120C-5
AIM-9X (Blk I) for F-15C MSIP II and F-16C Blk 50
But AIM-9X Block I inferior to AIM-132 (Blk I) and AIM-2000 (analog)
AIM-132 (Blk I) for Typhoon FGR.4 after decompression max BR to 14.3, and AIM-2000 (analog) on F-2000A & EF-2000 (Tranche 2 Blk 10)
F-104S.ASA (air rb) 12.0 → 11.3
SURELY this aircraft is equal to the Tornado F.3 at the same BR currently. It’s ridiculously overtiered and next to unflyable currently. It must be moved down to match similar aircraft. While having AIM-9L over base F-104S, you lose 2 of your 6 pylons and the RWR. Trying to play 13.0 games all the time with 0 situational awareness is awfully difficult.
When you send a message on forums you have multiple icons over the message box, the third one to the right allows you to change the colour of messages but you need to first select a message before you click on said icon and find the colour code of what colour you’d like to change said message to.
yes the pen of type 87 rcv P is horrible but i dont know if lowering the br helps the tank because on 6.3 are a lot of tanks with more amour and in my opinion for tanks like rcv is 7.7 or 8.0 pretty good because of all the bmp, leos, ikv 91, fox, Aubl bradley, Marder etc and less IS 2 King Tiger T34 etc
Although off-topic… I shall remind everybody (your message had red numbers in it) that:
3 Likes
Mode: Ground Realistic
Vehicle: AMX-13 (FL11)
BR Change: 4.3 > 3.7
This machine is a competitor to the Chaffee (M24), but unlike it, it does not have a stabilizer and an anti-aircraft Browning.
8 Likes
Yeah with autocannons, going down a BR can be more of a nerf than buff. Once you hit 8.0 or so armor fairly consistently goes down (To an extent).
1 Like
- Realistic Air Battles
- Seafire LF Mk.III
- 5.0 > 4.3
It has no performance advantage over the Spitfire F Mk.IX (4.3) and is outmatched by almost everything at it’s BR like the Spitfire MK XVI, A7M1 and Fw 190 D9.
1 Like
AMX A-1A
11.3 → 10.7 (Air Realistic battles and Air Arcade battles)
Despite being an excellent ground attack aircraft, this vehicle’s air-to-air capabilities leave much to be desired. Moreover, since it is currently the only option for researching the entirety of the Italian tech tree, its performance in this regard is questionable. The AAM-1 “Piranha” missiles also fail to perform well against targets equipped with countermeasure payloads, and its speed does little to improve its situation. Lowering its battle rating in air battles could make the vehicle more appealing to potential new players.
Due to its strong air-to-ground capabilities and excellent weaponry, its battle rating in ground arcade, realistic and simulator battles and air simulator battles should remain unchanged due to its air-to-ground effectiveness, as previously mentioned. I hope this is a moment when the developers carefully consider their choices regarding this aircraft, making it a more viable option both for researching the Italian aviation tech tree and for gameplay itself.
2 Likes
Air SB, MiG-27K. 11.7 > 11.0. With the RB bracket of MiG-23’s having gone down recently, and the flight model changes as well, the MiG-27 family remains anemic in simulator games, victims to BVR combat regardless of multipathing, and their optical seekers are quite limited compared to their contemporaries. Though in a dogfight they can hold their own, it is surviving long enough to force a dogfight that has become near-impossible for them. I hope you folks at Gaijin consider moving the MiG-27K down in SB to reflect the RB changes, along with hopefully extending this change to the MiG-27M and the Fitter family (Su-17M2, Su-17M4, Su-22M3, Su-22M3 (Italy), Su-22UM3K (Germany), Su-22M4 WTD61 (Germany), and the Su-22M4 as they are within the same family at the same BR of high-speed fighter bombers of the Soviet Bloc.
Didn’t know, thought it was falsely flagged or something thanks.
1 Like
This would be good, to help deal with the big AA gap the UK has from 5.3-8.3. The APDS is what’s stopping Falcon from coming down in BR to where it would be more useful as an SPAA.
Side note, please add its LRF and target tracking!
1 Like
Sorry it looked like you posted the same message multiple times because of the images, but I should’ve double check that ones on me.
Mode: Ground RB
Vehicle T-55AM-1.
Change: 8.7 > 9.0
Reason: The T-55AM-1 is undoubtedly the most powerful tank at a battle rating of 8.7, dominating opponents from 7.7 and above. Unlike other tanks in the 7.7 to 8.7 BR range, which lack stabilizers, laser rangefinders, and composite armor, the T-55AM-1 boasts all these features. It’s comparable to the T-69 II G, which is already rated at 9.0.
6 Likes
Mode:AirRB
F-16D BarakⅡ
This aircraft should remain at 13.7.
The F-16D has more CMs than the F-16C of the home country, and can carry the same number of Derbys, which have better acceleration than the AMRAAM.
Also, the equivalent F-16C BarakⅡ in the same tree is a single-seater with the AMRAAM, which is compatible with the Derby, included as an option, but no BR change was planned.
The difference in performance between them is within the range of trade-offs between the same BR, and does not cause a difference that would change the BR.
Air Realistic Battles, A-5C. 10.7 > 10.3.
why?
1, gets uptierd very often
2, gets outspeeded by Tornados and F-4,s and other Striker,s
3, low flare count
4, low ammo count
5 Likes
This is semi-related to the BR changes but if you’re gonna move the Iranian Tomcat to 13.0, can you at least give it BOL pods? It doesn’t have to be the same amount as F-14B’s but anything more than 60 would be nice.
Air Realistic Battles. F-4J UK Phantom II. 12.0 → 11.7
The F-4 Phantom placement has long since been a contentious topic, previously the reason for their high Battle Rating placements has been their Pulse Doppler radars (a completely valid point) back when they sat at 11.3 and the F-4E with no PD sat at 11.0. However since then many vehicles were added, buffed, or moved around which brings this in to question.
For starters at 12.0 the F-4J and F-4S Phantom 2s posses the same IR missiles as their British counterparts, while having effectively the same or superior SARH’s for the BR. They also have superior flight models, and the presence of an HMD to facilitate more flexibility from the frame in combat.
Now while the FG phantoms at 12.0 might have the selling point of new engines to try to justify this placement, this simply is not the case for the F-4J UK. It has none of the advantages the British phantoms provide at its BR and all of the downsides that they have relative to their american counterparts.
As for comparing lower BR vehicles to it, at 11.3 we currently have the Ja37C has a similar counter measure count (48 vs 60), the exact same SARHs, a better radar, “worse” IR missiles (albeit not by much), and a superior flight model.
As it stands by comparison alone the F-4J UK just does not compare to its competition at its own BR, and even planes 2 brackets lower, compare favorably against it.
3 Likes