Planned Battle Rating Changes for February 2025

gagatyn1244 · February 4, 2025, 10:08am

Hello,

I would like to raise the issue of reconsidering the battle rating of the new Mi-8AMTSh-VN helicopter and its inclusion in the 10_2 simulator battle setup. Currently, the helicopter’s BR is clearly overestimated, especially when compared to its counterparts.

The Mi-8AMTSh-VN can be directly compared to the Mi-35M, which has a BR of 10.7 but is already included in the 10_2 SB lineup. However, the Mi-8AMTSh-VN is objectively inferior to the Mi-35M in several aspects:

1. Armament

The Mi-35M can carry 4 9M39 air-to-air missiles and 8 Ataka ATGMs simultaneously, whereas the Mi-8AMTSh-VN cannot equip both 8 Ataka ATGMs and air-to-air missiles at the same time, significantly reducing its combat effectiveness against both aircraft and ground targets.
Mi-8AMTSH-VN

MI-35M

The Mi-35M has access to S-13OF heavy unguided rockets, while the Mi-8AMTSh-VN lacks this option.

Additionally, the Mi-35M features a chin-mounted autocannon turret, which provides superior firepower. The Mi-8AMTSh-VN does not have such a turret.

2. Targeting System

The Mi-35M has a better zoom capability (3.7x–73.7x), making it more effective for engaging targets at long distances. In comparison, the Mi-8AMTSh-VN has a more limited zoom (12.3x–67.0x), making precise long-range shooting more difficult.

3. Mobility

The Mi-35M is more maneuverable and accelerates faster, making it less vulnerable to enemy SAMs and aircraft. In contrast, the Mi-8AMTSh-VN is bulkier and less agile, making it an easier target for enemy attacks.

The only notable advantage of the Mi-8AMTSh-VN over the Mi-35M is the presence of an IRCM system and radar. However, these features do not compensate for its numerous disadvantages. The radar, while present, has very limited usage, and most players do not even use it.

Reducing the BR to 10.7 and including the Mi-8AMTSh-VN in the 10_2 SB setup would make this helicopter more viable and balanced. Players would gain access to a unique vehicle that can compete at its level without disrupting game balance.

Assigning a BR of 11.0 and placing it in the 11_2 SB setup just because of its IRCM and radar (which is rarely used) is unfair. The helicopter is otherwise inferior in terms of performance and weaponry compared to aircraft with lower BRs, not to mention those at its own BR.

I urge players to support this proposal, and I kindly request the developers to consider implementing these changes.

YaKu_444 · February 4, 2025, 10:08am

Air simulator battle, Su-27/J-11 13.3 > 13.0

It’s complicated to face off the 14.0 plane with them

ItzMikeyzWRLD-psn · February 4, 2025, 10:13am

It needs WAY more than Aim-9M to see 13.3. They need to unnerf the Aim-54Cs, make the TCS function how it’s supposed to, and unnerf the engines.

Edamameh · February 4, 2025, 10:14am

Air Simulator Battles, Mirage F1C, 11.7 > 12.0

At 11.7, the armament of the Mirage F1 is significantly better than opposing fighters. Magic 2s become functionally impossible to flare once they’re within about 1500-2000m, and the MTI capability of the radar makes it capable of look-down shots that almost no other planes have until 12.0. While it is inferior to many other planes in a dogfight, it has much better capability to not just win before the merge, but to be un-counterable before the merge.

ItzMikeyzWRLD-psn · February 4, 2025, 10:18am

Anybody who wants the Magic 2 at an even lower BR while the IRIAF has to go to 13.0 with Aim-9Ps has 0 sympathy from me. No.

Tagnoch · February 4, 2025, 10:23am

The cv 90 mk iv must go down in rank.

AWACS_Ghost_Eye1 · February 4, 2025, 10:24am

Chat GPThunder moment
Just as a note, most AIs were pretty dumb when it comes to video games. ChatGPT does not know that MiG-29s were in the game, while someone fiddeling with deepseek found out the game has the KV-8(it doesnt).

Peta7781 · February 4, 2025, 10:26am

F-20 and every other F-16A (Except ones with AIM-9M or AIM-120) then should go down too.

ItzMikeyzWRLD-psn · February 4, 2025, 10:26am

I actually tested it for AI and it came at zero.

jandaro · February 4, 2025, 10:29am

simulator, Sagittario 2 8.0 > 9.0

that aircraft has absolutely no business in 8.0, awesome turn, awesome speed, awesome climb rate

Tagnoch · February 4, 2025, 10:45am

Move the Kugelblitz 7.0–>6.7. Germany needs an spaa at that br. Germany doesn’t have a tech tree fighter at that br and the next lower spaa is 6.0. The Kugelblitz also doesn’t even have a lineup at 7.0 so it’s useless even more so because the Wiesel is 7.3 so up tiering it isn’t worth it.

One_Nut_Wondah · February 4, 2025, 10:46am

Make the match maker br +/-.7 instead of 1. That would fix alot of compression and would make the biggest difference. I promise a majority of your playerbase is willing to wait a minute to find a match to not face vehicles a full br higher.

KhorneFlakez1337 · February 4, 2025, 10:50am

Where’s the decompression? Almost all of these changes are compressing the BRs even further…

KhorneFlakez1337 · February 4, 2025, 10:53am

The Kugelblitz is fine at 7.0, the 6.7 lineup still works at 7.0 as 8.0 up tiers are almost non-existent

ProximaB1 · February 4, 2025, 10:59am

Finally F-14 iraf on 13.0

Farlexgamer · February 4, 2025, 11:01am

Vehicle/s; Su27/J11

Mode; Air simulator

Battle rating; 13.3 → 13.0

Reason; These 2 aircrafts in the current Bracket system are forced into constantly fighting Vastly superior opponents such as F15E/C’s, Eurofighter’s, Rafale’s… the Su27/J11 is already at 13.0 in Air realistic battles, but in sim this aircraft still sits at 13.3 while being outclassed by every vehicle it faces.

The fact that the F4F ICE with amraams and 9L/I’s got lowered from 13.3 down to 13.0 IN ALL MODES, is alarming considering the su27 was and is in a much worse situation.

Nenemon · February 4, 2025, 11:03am

Realistic Battles, R2Y2 (V1,V2,V3). 8.0 > 7.0-7.3

The multitude of nerfs over the years have left this plane struggling to perform anywhere close to on par with the other aircraft found at 8.0.

The accelleration and flight performance of this aircraft resembles more closely to what you would find around the 7.0-7.3 BR range with late war/ early 50’s jets and will have a chance of performing just about OK here.

ILiketosuffer · February 4, 2025, 11:10am

General Naval decompression is needed 6.0 to 7.0 Br range is too saturated with ships as most 6.0 ships I have played in recent time have been forced to play with superior 7.0 ships. There are many 7.0 ships that are not comparable.

Naval realistic Battles

Scharnhorst 7.0 > 7.3 Has modern fire controls reload and ammunition, Its turtle back at close range makes it nigh unkillable if played properly. It is a bullet sponge that can take the damage and deal it out despite it only having 11 inch guns, thanks to its fast reload it is possible to deal with multiple battleships at once. Facing cruisers in the Scharnhorst is a joke. Not to mention the torpedos and the speed makes it deadly against slow dreadnaughts
Izmail 7.0 > 6.7 Has great guns but the armor is very lacking even on the turrets, It is debateable if it should go down but it does struggle against other 7.0 battleships.
Kronstadt 7.0 > 7.3 Generally survivable, guns pack a punch, is great counter against Scharnhorst generally, Shouldn’t be facing cruisers.
HMS Renown 7.0 > 6.7 Firepower is lacking, should be 6.7 like its sister ship, armor is poor can be killed by cruisers.
HMS Rodney 7.0 > 7.3 16 inch gun and armor scheme make it competitive over other 7.0 battleships
Hyuga 7.0 > 6.7 Has great guns but can still be easily killed by other 7.0 battleships. It is easy to deal with a Hyuga even in a 6.3 dreadnaught with 12 inch guns. The armor seems to have larger weakspots then the Ise.
Amagi 7.0 > 7.3 Has ten 16.1 inch guns can easily deal with any battleship it faces, decent armor shouldn’t face any current 6.0 or 6.3 ship.
Mutsu 7.0 > 7.3Has eight 16.1 inch guns can easily deal with any battleship it faces, decent armor shouldn’t face any current 6.0 or 6.3 ship.
Kongo class, (Haruna, Kirishima) 7.0 > 6.7 Other 7.0 Jap ships have more guns and better armor this class should not have any reason to be at 7.0 as cruisers can still pen critical components.
RN Francesco Caracciolo, project 6.7 > 6.3 Only having a sap shell make this ship a joke against 7.0 even 6.3 battleships, I would say that it would be better if a AP shell was given to it so that it could be useable.
Bretagne class, (Lorraine) 6.7 > 6.3 poor firing angles, armor, dpm, This class can struggle even against 6.3 german ships.

(Sorry for any spelling errors)

Nenemon · February 4, 2025, 11:11am

Air Realistic, Sagittario 2, 9.3 > 9.0

The aircraft lacks a significant amount of engine power compared to it’s upgraded counterpart (the Ariete) also found at 9.3.

It sat comfortably at 9.0 and is now hard to justify playing if you already have the Aerfer Ariete

OliverXRed · February 4, 2025, 11:12am

Ground Realistic

Pe-8

4.3 → 5.0

It doesn’t make sense for this aircraft to be this low of a BR in ground, when effectively it is the same in regards to gameplay as the Lancasters which sits at a BR of 5.3.

What i meant with similar in regards to gameplay, is that both aircraft typically, fly over the battlefield, drop their big bomb and turn around. This is similar between the two aircraft, however on the aircraft return trip, the Pe-8 is much more likely to be able to fend off enemy aircraft since it is equipped with 20mm & 12,7mm weaponry compared to the 7,7mm machine-guns of the Lancaster Mk I.