Arcade, Crusader AA Mk I. 3 > 3.7. Crazy good penetration, you don’t even need to flank to spank panzers with this.
Vehicle: Pz.Bef.Wg.VI P
Gamemode: Ground AB RB
Change: 5.7 —> 6.0
Reason: It has thicker frontal armor than the tree Teiger, making it difficult for other vehicles to penetrate this vehicle’s armor. Its maneuverability is not so great in forward movement, but extremely good in reverse, and its maneuverability is excellent.
Even including the fact that it does not have an APCR, I consider it to be in the same class as the Tiger E.
Arcade, Wirbelwind. 4.7 > 4. Genuinely totally agree with your decision to change BR. Wirbelwind and Ostwind I are just no good in arcade with very poor anti-air performance. All hail the snail x3
Arcade, Leopard 40/70. 5.7 > 6.7. Pen too high + good acceleration + good hull armor + fast turret slew rate = people use this as a flanking anti-ground vehicle.
1 Like
Arcade, Zerstorer 45. 6 > 6.7. Pen too high + good acceleration + good hull armor + fast turret slew rate = people use this as a flanking anti-ground vehicle. You guys aren’t going far enough in balancing this. Really good anti-air performance too.
what do you mean? it has better armor all around: high hardness armor has a better armor multiplier, especially against autocannons, smaller frontal weakspots and even the lower plate has additional composite armor unlike on the t72b series.
15% more hp/t is noticeable difference and -.6s from the reload time is life saving.
the T-80UD is a straight upgrade to the T-72Bs
Just shoot the corners brother, right above the tracks. Even head-on they’re only like 130mm in effective thickness and 80mm in actual thickness. The Porsche Tiger thus can’t angle like the TT tiger. It’s the same way you take out the Ferdinand because it’s the same hull.
Arcade, AMX-10P. 6 > 6. stats alone may justify a change but it would put it into an awkward BR island with only the AMX-13, which is just a bad place to be for an AA/IFV
Arcade, Staghound AA. 2.3 > 3.3. already a viable sneaky flanker AA to sealclub with, lowering BR would only exacerbate this. Very good AA performance, needs to go up, not down.
Lmfao so you think the Block 10 with ZERO BVR capability and the Iranian Tomcat with a 2010s long range missile should have the same BR?
Arcade, AEC AA. 3.7 > 4.3. Good fire rate and above-average all-aspect armor makes this a survivable SPAA with very good anti-air performance
Arcade, ZSD63/PG87. 5.3 > 5. Armor thin enough to be killed by MG, Painfully slow reload, generally slightly below average performance all around, super high visibility so easily spotted
1 Like
90% of Tiger II games are on 7.3-7.7 where you are fighting the US. HT USA will attack the tower and you are basically dead. If you are lucky, you may damage the cannon or the castle and that’s it. Currently, Tigers II can be countered even with machines running 5.7.
2 Likes
I can’t understand why Staghound AA need to go up at 3.3
while it has same 2x 50cal as same as M13 MGMC does…? (which is 1.3 on Ground Arcade)
can I get a piece of extra information?
I feel a bit strange about this.
Vehicle: Falcon
Gamemode: Ground RB
Change: 8.3 —> 7.7 (APDS deletion)
Reason: The APDS on this vehicle is extremely threatening and I believe it needs to be modified. I suggest that instead of removing the APDS for this vehicle, the BR be set to 7.7.
1 Like
didn’t say that
Since the Mirage 2000C S5 goes up to 12.7 is there any chance that it gets its 4x Magic 2?
3 Likes
Dont worry dude, the A10C only reaches the battle in time every 1 in 10 games
The difference, I think, is that the staghound has enough armor to make it survivable to strafing runs + being faster.
Your opinion is correct. If you shoot the chipping, you can indeed penetrate it. However, if the opponent is facing the front, it is difficult to penetrate that area consistently. It is clear that it has less weaknesses than Tiger in the tree. I think it performs as well as 6.0 deserves.