These changes for the most part look awful what is this crap?
1 Like
As usual Razervon/AlvisWisla is baiting and trolling for attention in popular threads
At least his messages make it easy to instantly know the worst possible opinion on any topic
4 Likes
but i don’t see what is wrong with what he is saying their
20 pounder APDS has only better penetration below 25° at point blank, and L7 APDS has lesser shattering issues. Difference in reload is also about half a second (0.42 seconds with maxed out reload, 0.54 seconds with level 0 stock crew).
The gun on the SU-122-54 is a lot weaker than that of the T-10M. BR-471D goes 800 m/s and has 230 mm of penetration while the T-10M’s BR-472 goes 950 m/s and has 295 mm of penetration.
SU-122-54’s UFP is angled at 50°, when T-54’s have it at 60°. This gives it 156 mm LoS, which is very far from the 200 you mentioned.
100 mm at 50° makes the UFP roughly 219 mm effective against 88 mm APCBC, meaning the long 88 starts to struggle at about 600 meters. Comparatively, the T-44 has 90 mm at 62°, which makes it 192 mm LoS, and 282 mm effective against 120 mm APCBC, so the T34 heavy tank cannot penetrate unless point blank.
Additionally the mobility of SU-122-54 is nothing special, at 14.44 hp/ton. It’s average, not really “high”.
It likely could go higher BR but 7.7 is exaggerated.
2 Likes
I am not going to entertain someone who thinks R-3R is incredible missile by typing out every single plane around SPS-K for comparison.
YOU presented NO arguments for SPS-K going to 10.0 beside vaguely implying it has great flight performance (it doesnt, as stated above) and R-3R is incredible missile (it isnt).
At the same time you are for some reason heavily opposed to the idea of moving the SPS-K to the BR you suggested in the first place but giving it double rack for missiles it already carries. 21MF/SMT would end up being only 0.3 higher while being massive upgrades over SPS-K.
1 Like
The gun is far from useless. It shreds planes and tanks.
You’re right, they’re not the same gun, just extremely similar. I simply made the comparison since the top shell (HEAT-FS) are functionally identical and the APDS is similar. I guess if you really wanted to be precise, it’s a better (faster firing) cannon firing 7.7 ammunition (IS-4/6) alongside 8.3 ammunition (T-10M) and ~8.0 ammunition (3BM-7). Disregarding the stabilizer I think the nearly 22% higher fire rate is more significant than APDS or APHE penetration making (again not considering stabilizer, the main reason for the T-10M’s higher BR) the D-49 better.
char25t → 8.0? Are you guys smokin crack ? Like really? In what realm is it 8.0 worthy?
9 Likes
Magic 2 is extremely limited compared to the R-73 let alone the 9M. It’s only an effective missile against inattentive targets (like every other missile) and when fired rear aspect below 1.5km. Any other time it’s a one-flare missile. It still has too much drag, not enough pull, and not enough IRCCM. It can barely even catch a mach 1 jet in a chase if it’s above 2.0km on the deck. Crazy long fuze arming time too.
1 Like
Well we got starfighters and phantoms in 12.3, it shouldnt be a huge deal, I suppose.
To arms citizens let’s make this tank 8.7 and clap leopard 2k and t72as
ok and most they were low br then those planes with them
I think the changes are looking great except for one plane and that I’d say is the J8F, I think it should stay at 11.7 as it is arguably better than the Kfir with a similar loadout but the Python 3’s can be pretty lack luster compared against IRCCM missiles, however if the change means the radar missiles will be coming in the near future I’ll gladly wait as I think it’ll be an amazing plane for even top tier.
Alternatively I think more advanced PL-5 variants would be suitable for 12.0 as it currently stands
1 Like
ok, but what is a 6.3 T20 going to do against 7.3 uptiers? at 6.0 it is already fighting 7.0’s which includes T-44-100’s and IS-3’s. not exactly something the 76mm gun is going to do too well against.
2 Likes
Surprised to see no one has brought these guys up:
Well I suppose there is always the option to play the best wheeled tank in the game instead of those sad stuff.
7 Likes
I’m not going to list every mechanical detail that makes this extremely manueverable, supersonic aircraft with a decent gun or countermeasures and exceptional missiles more than .3 better than aircraft without any of those advantages.
You have presented no arguments for the SPS being 9.7 besides “it’s not 10.0” and “MF/SMT better”.
MF and SMT are very strong for 10.3, but their only really significant advantage is 2x R-60s and flares alongside a gun. They don’t even have R-13M1s, by far the SPS’s better IR missile.
And skill issue with R-3Rs, those things slap, I don’t know why you struggle.
And I’ve already said I’d be ok with (fictional) APU-60-2 if necessary, please read before get all pissed.
You know what? Let’s actually do the comparison. Every 9.7 I could think of.
Spoiler
MiG-21 SPS-K
Top Speed at Altitude (13km): 2,240km/h (Mach 2.10)
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,300 km/h (Mach 1.05)
Max Climb Rate: 145m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 0.78
Turn Time: 36s
Static g: +11/-5
Flares: optional
Armament: 1x GSh-23L, 4x R-3S, 4x R-3R, 2x R-60, 2x R-13M1
MiG-21S (R-13-300)
Top Speed at Altitude (13km): 2,240km/h (Mach 2.10)
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,361 km/h (Mach 1.10)
Max Climb Rate: 160m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 0.97
Turn Time: 35s
Static g: +12/-6
Flares: no
Armament: 1x GSh-23L, 4x R-3S, 4x R-3R
G.91YS
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,121 km/h (Mach 0.91)
Max Climb Rate: 75m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 0.73
Turn Time: 29s
Static g: +11/-4
Flares: no
Armament: 2x DEFA, 2x AIM-9B
Milan
Top Speed at Altitude (12km): 2,194km/h (Mach 2.06)
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,441 km/h (Mach 1.17)
Max Climb Rate: 160m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 1.05
Turn Time: 27s
Static g: +11/-4
Flares: no
Armament: 2x DEFA, 2x AIM-9B
T-2
Top Speed at Altitude (11km): 1,710km/h (Mach 1.76)
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,314 km/h (Mach 1.06)
Max Climb Rate: 140m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 0.90
Turn Time: 33s
Static g: +10/-4
Flares: no
Armament: 1x M61A1, 2x AIM-9P
Hunter F.58
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,148km/h (Mach 0.93)
Max Climb Rate: 70m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): <0.5
Turn Time: 25s
Static g: +14/-6
Flares: yes
Armament: 4x ADEN, 2x AIM-9J
MiG-23BN
Top Speed at Altitude (12km): 2,200km/h (Mach 2.07)
Top Speed at Sea Level: 1,425 km/h (Mach 1.15)
Max Climb Rate: 155m/s
TWR (20min for consistency): 0.93
Turn Time: 36s
Flares: no
Armament: 1x GSh-23L
As you can see, the SPS-K is tied for the fastest at altitude, with one of the highest sea level top speeds and highest climb rates. It has by far the best armament, and is only one of two 9.7s with the ability to carry flares. Its maneuverability is good, especially instantaneous turn. Finally, the TWR is above average. Overall it comfortably outperforms every other 9.7, hence why it deserves 10.0.
Edit: APU-60-2 is apparently historical, problem resolved :)
1 Like
You wrote as if the F-15 is the most blatant case of compression, when usually the first list that Gaijin shows about BR balance already has some players feedback + considering stats that they have.
If the plane not there in the first sheet its because its probably underperforming by its numbers, not else. If you disagree, get the numbers to back your statement that is overperforming for its BR, like the planes they’ve added in the first place.
Just suffer, in 6.0 is just fine but Gaijin are not going stop until the game is destroyed.
Is the same story in all game aspects, changes nobody wants or suggested are implemented meanwhile the community suggestions are ignored.
1 Like
I’ve been thinking about the SB brackets and I think there is room for improvement.
Original for quick reference:
2 Major issues come to mind
- 11.0s get kinda screwed with no bracket where they are top BR
- 10.7 see a full uptier twice.
To that end. Some possible tweaks
Changes to R3 and R4 to create an additional 10.7 top bracket. But this doesnt do much to help 11.0s unforutnately.
Possibility 2 (and my main recommendation)
Adds a 10-11 bracket
Number 2 is my main recommendation because:
- It adds a 10.0-11.0 brakcet
- 10.7s only see a full uptier once.
- 11.3-11.7 bracket actually sounds kinda fun. (I think we have plenty of 11.3s to fill that)
3 Likes
Planning BR changes, what about fixing SARH missiles that aren’t the R-27
What the actual shit did you guys do to them to bust them up this hard to the point its an actual diceroll whether it hits a picture perfect shot
1 Like