The cannon, despite not having that much flexibility, does not have any issues when you are facing the jet / heli in question head-on, which is what most helicopters do anyway. (yes, even the ones with chin-mounted guns) If you do not look head-on towards the heli or jet while shooting your main gun, you aren’t playing helicopters correctly; it is as simple as that.
The Vikhirs have been nerfed, that is correct; however, saying that using vikhirs as ‘A2A missile’ being ‘unreliable’ is dishonest. Sure, it can no longer easily track jets (although it still can hit them in a head-on fairly reliably), but it definitely does not have any issues with tracking helicopters and tanks. The Ka-50 may not have good thermals or good RWR etc… but when they do find them, it does not depend on luck on whether or not their AGMs track through bushes / trees / smoke, unlike Hellfires, and has a much better chance of getting the first shot off than Hellfires or even Mokopa AGMs.
The Ka-50s aren’t that much better off than the AH-64A, for example, but it is still better in most scenarios. That being said, 11.3 seems fair enough, especially since the other helis are getting uptiered to 11.3 too.
yet they literally dont, the best they got is a crap 51mm pen belt but because they model the belt as a fragmentation round when its meant to be duel purpose, hence the thing does next to no damage against anything with armour but KAs have an actual APDS belt which has nearly double the pen and will do some post pen damage hence it will dump on anything at ranges even MBTs. if you think Apaches have a better gun your clueless.
Technically I should have clarified as a “duel warhead” is Tandem specifically which while not modelled per say the entirety of the penetration is, Hence Vikhrs/9M113/ZT6 Mokopa/114Ks have over 1200mm+ of pen but I meant more in the sense of duel purpose (my bad) but Vikhrs are literally the only ones capable of such on a Helicopter and this cannot be ignored simply because it gives it a far better capability at defending its self against air threats OR can engage other helicopters from at least 4.9 mile ranges.
And after ANY missile changes which inherently broke SAMs at top tier and made them utterly trash beyond the Pantsir basically. so 11.0 is still not enough.
NOW that they have just set a precedent on comparing the YAH64 against the KA50 by having them at the exact same BR yet YAH64 has NO proxy/tandem ATGM, the114Bs are neither proxy OR Tandem. They dont have ANY flares/MAWS so have basically no awareness on threats and have no reliable way of countering potential air threats in both a countermeasure sense and an actual missile sense (AAMs or proxy AGM)
If you are seriously trying to argue a YAH64 and a KA50 are equal then this conversation is done, one is a multipurpose attack helicopter with the armaments to back it up + defensive systems while the other is simply relegated to ground attack with no defensive systems.
Again Im not saying the YAH64 isnt 11.0, the KA50 is now needing a higher BR because the meta/mechanics have changed that make it more potent
I am mainly going to focus my opinion around the BR ranges of 8.0+ for RB ground .
These changes are terrible and that is for one reason, you are decompressing one BR range but further compressing the BR of vehicles further up the tree . Can the developers please already increase the MAX battle rating for ground forces to a BR of 12.0+ already ? The max BR should be 12.3/12.7 if not 13.
Let me further elaborate , for example 8.3-10.3 is now a over compressed mess, how is it fair for early cold war tanks with a 105mm and no armor to be facing vastly superior MBTS like the Abrams,2a4,T-80.vickers, challengers ?
You previously moved a large amount of vehicles from 8.3-9.3 up in their battle-rating but did not do the same for vehicles further up the BR range sitting at BR of 10.0-10.7 that are vastly superior in all aspects then the lower BR vehicles they can now go up against .
These 120mm MBTS outclass everything they can potentially face at 9.3 by a huge margin and I do not think this is fair in any way . 8.7-9.7 used to be fairly balanced but you ended up moving a huge amount up vehicles up by .3-.7 of a BR without increasing the BR of other vehicles further up or expanding the MAX BR for ground.
Can the developers please stop repeating these same mistakes and doing slow incremental changes and increase the max BR for ground to 12.3 or 12.7. Why do we have to spend months with entire BR ranges being terrible game-play wise before any reasonable changes are then made ?
Have the developers forgotten that they made similar changes on previous patches where early Cold War tanks in the 9.0 range were facing Abrams/2a4s/t80s and it was extremely unbalanced?
It is not fair to expect early cold war tanks with practically no armor and lesser mobility to be going up against these vastly superior MBTS that outclass every 9.3 vehicle in the game in every aspect, armor/firepower/mobility .
The Abrams, 2a4,t-80 and vehicles at 10.0+ should all have their BR increased but you also need to increase the max ground battle rating in order to move everything else up respectively. Can the developers please increase the MAX Battle Rating to 12.3-12.7 already so that the entire BR range is decompressed .
I don’t get
According to you, shell has more pen at 60° than at 0°?
Armor effectiveness is increased when plate is angled which means shell has to pass through more material.
Statcard already shows 60° penetration and that’s 203mm
You are completely wrong about those round stats.
Also, every tank you mentioned is or used to be overpowered. All pay-to-win tanks to be honest.
No, it shows you how thick the plate is in the statcard.
It doesn’t show you how much material the round is going through.
A 203mm plate angled at 60 degrees is 406mm line of sight.
@TheCloop123
That’s 51mm of HEDP, which kills crew very fast.
APDS doesn’t fragment so it’s less lethal against MBTs than HEDP.
Vikhr has 800mm of pen, not 1200. Likely due to that proximity fuse taking up space that could be a better warhead.
what part of HEDP being modelled as fragmentation did you not understand… literally do gun strafing with KA50 and YAH64 and see which comes out ahead because it isnt the YAH64 once it fins a semi meaty target, its literally only good against Light vehicles and personal.
APDS literally has post pen fragmentation kek… considering you can pen nearly twice what the HEDP can its far greater against armoured targets AND armoured tops of tanks which you mainly see on MBTs… good luck getting HEDP through the top of a Russian Tanks unless you are directly above, any slight angle your not gunna pen anything
That might be true that HEDP can kill crew easily, but APDS can penetrate at further ranges more reliably, has a higher velocity, and is way more accurate than the apache’s gun ever will be. The HEDP only has 51mm of pen, so you can only top-down stuff (which can sometimes be difficult), while the APDS on the KA-50 can pen the side armour and rear / side turret armour of NATO MBTs.
I still doubt that 105mm shell will go through 406mm of armor at 60° but you are welcome to test it out
That’s pretty insane
203mm seems more likely per statcard
R60M (and most other IRs) got a massive buff in rear-aspect shots.
I’ll reliably kill through flares now with R60M in rear-aspect
HEDP gains penetration the slower it is
@TyphoonCro
Pens the 205mm thick plate of Maus at 56 degrees.
Huh? T-69 2 G to 9.0? that makes no sense as T55-AM1 is at 8.7 with more mobility, and more ammo options including quicker reloading Missiles. The T-69 2 G is perfectly fine at 8.7, and you have effectively at the same time likely screwed all those who recently purchased it from the discount. And don’t even get started on the 279 being at 8.7.
All the changes to the 8.7 Chinese vehicles are awful, effectively ruining the 8.7 lineup in a nonsensible way when compared to other nations. Pushing them to 9.0 is awful for compression and there is a big jump in vehicle performance at 10.0.
The Pershing may have finally had a spot at 6.3 just to be ruined again.
Not really sure how the AMX-50 TO90 with its piss poor pen and no stab will be 7.7 when the Object 906 is lower profile, has better pen, fully stabilized etc. at 8.0. But this is probably the least pressing.
Really don’t understand how the AMX-30 got raised to 8.0 and is staying there, bad armor, no stabilizer (in fact horrible stability/unrealistic suspension characteristics), trash unreliable standard HEAT rounds etc. The AMX-30 series should either get buffs or move down at least a bracket. the 8.0s to 7.7 and the 8.7s to 8.3. I do not understand how these vehicles were overlooked.
Like others have said, lower tier AA need to stay at their lower tier and not move up, if they are too capable against other ground vehicles then nerf their belts. Low tier CAS strength is an issue and will only get worse if AA gets worse.
All the vehicles that got moved to 6.7 in RB didn’t make much sense, especially the Tiger 2 (P) being at the same BR as the Tiger H
Honestly most the other ground changes are decent though. Other than taking away the historical thermals of the ZTZ59D1.
The two vehicles could not be any different. The M18 is more of a light tank than a conventional TD, so comparing it to the M36 is like comparing the B-29 to the Ar 234. Sure, they are similar in BR, era, and historical role but performance is so dissimilar that the two cannot be directly compared.
not doesnt… HEDP has a 2 stage warhead… its literally got a fragmentation outer core that acts like fragmentation when it hits and has a second anti armour function (similar to like a HEAT shell) with a shaped liner that is designed to collapse into an amour piercing jet you literally cannot gain penetration the slower something it is NOT when it has an actual penetrator internally by design it can only penetrate what the maximum molten jet allows for… which going of some sources its 25mm (not sure if thats flat or angled but as it matches gaijins 60 degree slope ill say angled)
I feel that all of the mid-range BRs should remain the same. As an example if the Tiger E moves up to 6.0, which means in a full up-tier it will face the IS-3. Which, at point blank, the Tiger E can only cause significant damage in a small area above the IS-3’s mantelet. Which essentially means if the IS-3 is facing the Tiger, the Tiger 99% of the time cannot kill the IS-3
When? The last missile changes made R-60MKs FAR worse in my experience. I’ve had non-maneuvering, non-flaring F-4S’s dodge rear-side aspect shots from 1.5km, with lead-off and radar slaving.
Part of that is premium bias but part is also the R-60M just being a bad missile compared to nearly every other all-aspect IR.
I’m not comparing the two, I’m pointing out that the 90mm is not any more capable against the Panther than the 76mm.
I’m generally okay with this BR change, but I think VIDAR should go to 8.3
Frontally? Because it definitely is. APHE cleaves cleanly through the turret and APCR can go through the UFP of even a Tiger II at close range.
Have you never used it? It’s the most useful APCR in game with higher performance than the APCR of the KwK43.
90mm APCR cannot touch the front glacis of a Tiger II.
Yes, at point blank range, it can pen the glacis of a Panther but you’d be better off using APHE through the mantlet
The 90mm should be much more potent but suffers due to Gaijin’s generous nerfs.