How about its a extremely fast (for its BR) super-sonic fighter that can quite happily defeat most aircraft at its BR.
With its triple Gunpods and Aim-9Es its well equipped as well. The lack of CMs might make in vulnerable to aircraft like the Sea Harrier or A-10 with Aim-9ls but its speed means it can stay out of range with ease.
At 10.0 it would be facing aircraft like the Hunter F1 with no CMs, sub-sonic and no AAMs and a fraction of the turn performance. Even at 10.3 it would be broken to try and fend one off in any 9.3 and even at the moment, quite a few 9.7 struggle to fight it.
(and thats just ignoring the fact it does actually have SARH as well and most dont even have RWRs below 9.7)
How are the Leclercs and Challengers going up but still have not received a new shell.
These are still not comparable to Abrams/T-series/Strvs/Leopards. they need a new shell considering they are still lacking in this area to be competitive, especially Leclercs with lack of spall liners and weaker shell
SU-27 with 4x R-73/ 4x R-27ER and the french F-16A with 6x AIM-9Ms (imo AIM-9M is better than R-73) at 13.0 is okay ? Doesn’t make sense to move one and not the other.
And yes I agree they should introduce 14.0 and not move any of these down.
edit: my bad didn’t notice they added another 2 missile slots to the SU-27 I didn’t play it since Dance of Dragons came out
Air RB, He 219 A-7, 4.3 > 3.7. This plane caught my attention again due to its final promotion. I tried to play several days and I believe this plane did not play well in AIR RB battle. Apart from firepower, its flight performance isn’t stronger than BF 110 at 3.7. At least in AIR RB, it should receive lower BR for a better gaming experience.
Hello Mr. Gaijin. I see there is decompression and this is good news! However, I must implore you to not move the CV90120 up with the rest of the tanks as it has a very poor turret traverse speed and depression, making it the most clumsy light tank at high tier. This tank is better suited to rear line duties, which every MBT with turret armor currently does better even at lower BR with turret cheek protection and gun depression giving it an edge despite the 90120’s “Dome of Doom” high resolution commander sight.
Ground Realistic, 2s38, from 10.0 > 11.7 cause has the capability to stand… on the br … the thing on 10.0 is unbalanced and abusable from everyone. and the same time the worst …HSTV-L is at 11.3…( as one of the many UP BR tanks that are not russian…) without the same potential and capability as the 2S38…
Honestly they keep bumping it in BR, im starting to think well never see any other CV90120 models lol. Gues we are forever stuck with the early 2000 model
and its 4-6x R-73s and/or 4-6x R-27ERs. (10 total)
(So it can carry as many IRCCM missiles as the F-16 and then take 4x SARH ontop of that)
R-27ERs are easily the best SARH in game currently (and can even quite happily take on AMRAAM if used right)
R-73s are better than the Aim-9M in a dogfight, especially as the Su-27 has the HMD and can fully utelise the R-73s strenghts.
Su-27 is going down to 13.0, which might be a mistake actually, but easily claps an F-16 with only Aim-9M so long as you dont play to the F-16s strengths.
Mig-29SMT might be weaker than the Su-27 in some respects, but the Su-27 doesnt have R-77s and I really dont want to be fighting R-77s fired from a supersonic platform in something like the Phantom FGR2 with only 90 CMs, a weak RWR and only Skyflash DFs.
Yes KV-1E should definitely go up BR but not as drastically, I’d put it at 4.3 and see what it does, after all you will face panthers there so there will definitely be more of a challenge to it, but I don’t understand what you mean by kv1B, the German one is 5.0 and that’s honestly really fitting, the Sweden one is going down already so what’s the point?
The XM885 round simply does not have enough pen or spalling to contend againt the likes of Leopard 2A7s and Strv 122s, shooting at targets with composite armour means if you dont hit the EXACT placement of crew members then you will do no damage. Having a 1.5 second reload rate doesn’t compare to the 2S38’s 0.5 second reload with comparible penetration and spalling yet firing ammunition with over twice the mass, this means that the 2S38 is far more capable at killing targets from the side yet the 2S38 currently cannot face the HSTV-L in the current matchmaker even though they are extremely comparable if not counterparts in the Russian and US tech trees. In fact it is extremely common to see players purposely bringing the 2S38 to current 11.3 battles, yet it is at a BR 1.3 lower than the HSTV-L
The HSTV-L may have higher mobility and better gun handling, making it more suited for tank on tank combat, even with the addition of XM884 it’s multi-purpose capability pales in comparison to the 2S38 due to the extremely limited ammo capacity of the HSTV-L meaning that realistically you can only bring 2-3 rounds of XM884 and still be effective against tanks throughout the battle. If the HSTV-L’s XM885 round was buffed to the historical like M774 performance then I believe it would be fine at the current BR proposal, as with the additional penetration it will be more apt to deal with the likes of the leopard 2A7 frontally, making the same weakspots slightly larger and more reliable to penetrate.
Lowering the HSTV-L’s BR will not negatively affect many tanks, to my knowledge there arent currently many tanks that are at 10.0 where XM885 will out strongly out perform 3UBM22 (2S38 apfsds), meaning both tanks still must aim for the same weak spots. For example with the T-80B and T-72B series of tanks there are no additional weakspots to aim for in comparison to the later T-80 and T-72s series of tanks. Also to note is the extreme prevalence of autocannons at BR 10.0 which is the main counter to the HSTV-L meaning it is even less likely to have a negative impact on other vehicles and players experience whilst also making the HSTV-L less likely to face BR 12.0 vehicles and thus more balanced and enjoyable to play, whilst not overperforming.
Someone feel free to let me know if I am missing anything that I am oblivious to that may make this change problematic.