Reasoning: The F-4E Phantom gets all the advantages of an F-4E platform in game. It gets Agile eagle upgrade, AIM-7E-2 missiles with better performance and CW seeker, guided bombs, guided AGMs, vast arsenal of dumb munitions. This is set at the same low BR of an F-4C which lacks behind in every way compared to the F-4E. I agree with the BR placement of F-4C at 10.7 given that the earning potential of a phantom is higher than other planes (because of their ability to take A2G and A2A load outs without sacrificing each other). F-4E should be placed at a one step higher battle rating.
Either that or the premies that fly in perfectly straight lines trying to get to bases and dont make any effort to defend, even when they have the loadout to do so easily (like the guy complaining the Tornado WTD61 couldnt defend against a F-14A (not the IRIAF one) because he would have to turn if one shot at him
No they don’t. Check the files, stats are 100% identical in all regards. Any perceived difference isn’t actually there. The stat-card shows a different lock range for no reason (Stat-cards lie anyways). Under the hood they are identical.
irl the only difference is the seeker anyways, but all SARH in WT perform like they have an inverse monopulse regardless.
Air RB, J-11A. 13.7 > 13.3.
The J-11A when added in Seek and Destroy could at best be seen as a side-grade of the Su-27SM, as both platforms had functionally identical loadouts, but one had a MAWS while the other had a superior Radar and RWR mounted to it. However since then the 27SM has gotten 2 extra R-77s on top of the significant advantages that it already had (Radar/RWR). When compared to the 13.3 Roster the J-11A stacks up as follows. Weapon wise it is similar to the Su-34, however with a superior flight model and an HMD, at the cost of a far worse Radar and RWR. The F-16D Barak II meanwhile has superior Fox-3s, flight model (in most situations), and radar in exchange for a lower selection of those weapons and situationally worse flight performance.
The J-11A’s downsides at the end of the day are very large for the BR that it’s situated in. Being unable to identify the targets you’re engaging, and being unable to guide multiple missiles simultaneously the way your peers can is two big restrictions on that aircraft.
No I didn’t get that from your message as I didn’t assume what you were saying, I took the literal.
But that’s a thing with plenty of premiums, but nor do I think the 2s38 would be good at 11.3, just as an LAV-AD wouldn’t. A 2s38 would fit in a balanced role at 10.7 tbf
Also why the heavy tank hate? Many heavy tanks are nearly worthless, while some are excellent
AB 7.3>7.0 RB 7.0>6.7 Kugelblitz
panzer IV chassis protection is not very good and speed just have enough to use.The steering speed not fast.Attack capability on ground vehicles will not better than zsu-57-2 （BR7.0）. This way, it can be well matched with other vehicles with the same br.
Why should an inferior plane stay at a higher BR then?
From what I’ve seen, the 104S’s are actually quite powerful and much faster than the other 104s. They have 6 9Js total, compared to the 2 or 4 that’s found on other planes.
Did they change the flight model? I tried looking it up, but most posts I’ve read said that the D Baraks flight model was mostly the same as the C Baraks
Air realistic battles , Hunter F6 Great Britain. 9.7> 9.3 .
the fact the F104, mig29, J35D now, arietes, yak38s all sit down at 9.3 while the hunter F6 sits at 9.7 is absolutely disgusting. While at the same Br as the F58 which is arguable better than half the 10.0s right now is madness.