Planned Battle Rating Changes for February 2025

Official News, Development Blogs and Updates
2674

It could go down again. but im waiting to comment on its placement until after it gets finished/fixed.

Buffs outstanding for the FRS1 (SQV):

1 Like
2675

I don’t disagree with that at all.

That just shows that air RB is poorly designed and can be much better.

1 Like
2676

I also have another suggestion, with the introduction of the Ja 37DI, you have begun adding premiums with active radar homing missiles, so I think it would be fine to give the MiG-21 Bison its R-77s which would be historically accurate, with its BR bumped to 12.7 or 13.0, same for the F-20 which was planned to carry the AIM-120, it never did in the end due to the program’s cancellation but it flew with mockups mounted on its wings, so a BR increase to 13.0 would be fine as well

2 Likes
2677

The F-14A IRIAF does need to be at 13.0. It is a post-millenium upgrade of the F-14; it is a modern aircraft with modern missiles. The 12.0s in the game currently face Fakours far too frequently. But it needs its R-73s desperately. At 13.0, the IRIAF is woefully outmatched in flight model, engine performance, and countermeasure suite. It does not need to also possess the worst IR missile at the BR when R-73 integration was successful, just never operationally deployed due to munitions shortages. If necessary, at least make it a choice between the R-27R1 and the R-73. And this brings to light that in fact every other F-14 is also hilariously outmatched in the IR department for their battle rating. Therefore, I propose the following balance changes:

F-14A Early: Receives the option to mount the AIM-9L missile. No BR change.
F-14B: Receives the option to mount the AIM-9M missile. No BR change.
F-14A IRIAF: Recieves the option to mount the R-73E missile. (Maybe in lieu of R-27R1) 12.7 --> 13.0
5 Likes
2678

Ground RB, QN-506. 10.0 > 9.7.

The QN-506 has been heavily nerfed since its release.
QN502CDD F&F Missiles

  • Penetration reduced from 1000mm to 900mm
  • A change added dispersion to missiles which had the side effect of causing the top attack missiles to occasionally bounce off turret roofs.
  • The missiles now have difficulty direct firing against targets at close range, instead of flying straight into targets, the missiles will weave over tanks and try to hit their engine exhaust (but never being able to), this can be easily reproduced in test drive.

QN201DD Laser Guided Missiles

  • Guidance capability has been reduced to only 1 missile at time
  • The infamous ATGM nerf has made the missiles wobbly after launch, often striking the ground in front of the vehicle or making it difficult to accurately hit a target at close-medium range as the missile attempts to adjust and level itself out.
  • The combination of the two above points makes it impossible to now spam the missiles (As was possible when the vehicle was released) even at close range, as firing more than 1 will cause them to lose guidance and strike the ground.

By comparison the same BR ZBD-04A is a far superior platform at actually killing vehicles as collaborated by vehicle statistics.

7 Likes
2679

idk, probably 12.3ish across the board?

2680

That’s pretty low for ARH

2681

I really wouldn’t mind if it got R-73s, I don’t fly it but face it often and it’s not the boogeyman some people make it out to be, it’s pretty average honestly

2682

Yep, wouldnt take much, just having 2 AFs per side so that players were taking off from a much wider front would help hugely.

2683

Su-39 with R-77s would be 12.7 at a minimum. Especially when the only relatively smaller upgrade in the FA2/AV-8B+ are at 13.0.

1 Like
2684

2S38 RB 10.3 - 11.0

this “light tank” is right now one of the most blatantly OP vehicles currently at its BR. it’s an more effective version of the Otomatic (smaller, similar rounds but at an entire BR lower while also having the ability to carry as many APFSDS darts as it wants). it’s almost a perfect light tank and it’s enjoyed two years of dominating all CAS/most MBTs/all light tanks even at 11.7+. it being 10.3 breaks the game as literally nobody gets a tank that comes close to it for universal lethality.
(and regularly facing it in 9.3 vehicles is just a travesty of fairness)

3 Likes
2685

maybe 12.7 in ARB then, but I can’t see it being worthy of the same BR as the Su-25SM3 or Su-34 in GRB

2686

GRB is a hot mess right now when it comes to top tier CAS BRs and it makes little sense and wont without massive reworks. Like why would you ever use the Tornado Gr1 once you have the GR4 and neither stand much of a chance vs any mutlirole another nation might bring in and in a 12.0 line-up, there is no reason to use them when you have the Typhoon in a 12.0 line-up.

1 Like
2687

I use gr1 quite a bit,
In downteir it’s insane
(I have gr4)

2688

I thought this was the standard honesty.

2689

I’ve gotten BRs mixed up. I keep forgetting the Gr4 isnt a lower BR in GRB (probably should do a suggestion for that) . Yep, you would use it at 11.7. But not in a 12.0 line-up though.

1 Like
2690

I’m glad we can all come to agreement to the thing we all already knew from the start. AirRB is an horrendous mode that needs a rework.

2691

so your only complaint is the guns? no offense but thats on you. some trigger discipline will help a lot. if you struggle with the t160s you can just play the f25 with .50 cals thats already at 8.3. I think the F-2 at 8.7 is totally fine, flight performance wise too

1 Like
2692

hmmm someone who’s second most aircraft is the IRIAF is mad that it gets moved up, truely suprising…

1 Like
2693

Thanks for proving it’ll be 13.0.
Just cause F-4F ICE is OP doesn’t mean we make F-14B back to 12.3 to make AAM-3 EJ Kai 12.7.