Very good! Love the new Sim EC brackets! = )
6 Likes
Why are the Early F15s moving down
Like they are better then the F/A-18C late and F-14A at the same BR
Why is the F-14A still got AIM-9Hs at that Br in comparison and the F-14B still only have AIM-9Ls at a higher Br with worse FM and radar
This is crazy
49 Likes
Vehicle: Tornado GR4
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 12.3 —> 11.7/12.0
Mitigation: Increase the SP cost of Brimstones notably on the Tornado GR4
Reason: The Tornado GR4 doesn’t currently present a massive upgrade over other Tornado IDS at it 11.3 and its hard to justify it being 12.3. Lets break it down.
It has the identical flight performance to the other 6x Mk103 Tornado IDS, 3 of which are actually 10.0 in GRB and the other 3 are considered fairly weak 11.3s. It does have superior A2A performance with Aim-9M but this would fine at 11.7 given the performance of CAP at 11.7 such as the Mig-29 and is still far weaker than aircraft like the F4F ICE or Su-27/Su-33 at 12.0. It also has more CMs, but those are rarely a deciding factor and shouldn’t have a radical impact on BR placement. it does also gain MAWS but so do many other aircraft such as the A-10C and the A200C is also due to recieve MAWS and Im not expecting MAWS alone to move it from 11.3 to 12.3.
This leaves A2G performance, the GR4 has the same Targeting pod and if anything weaker GBU options to that found on the A200C (MLU) Tornado currently at 11.3, so those shouldn’t have an impact. The PGM-500/2000s whilst being the IR version and so an upgrade over the TV version found on the GR1 aren’t radically better either and at most justify a 0.3 BR increase, so in this case, to 11.7.
That leaves the Brimstones, which are in a massively nerfed state currently with no fire-and-forget capabilities. They also have extremely limited range when used on the Tornado, and so you are often within range of even the weakest SPAA when using them and they require you to remain well within range of those SPAA for them to be used. Their greatest usage on the GR4 is to simply decoy the Pantsir whilst your PGM-2000s do the actual killing. Much like GBU-39s do on other aircraft. But they have a potential to provide sustained CAS, but so does the Su-39 with 16x Vikhrs vs the A-10C with 6x AGM-65Ds and the Su-39 is actually at the lower BR. So this shouldn’t be much of an issue either.
But that having been said, its the only reason I can think for the GR4 to be anything other than 11.7 in GRB. So if they are such an issue, increase their SP cost by a notable amount. This totally eliminates them being a major issue and balances them well.
When the GR4 is also directly compared to aircraft such as the F-111F with 6x AGM-65Ds at 11.7, it is hard to justify any reason for the Tornado GR4 to be at 12.3. I’d consider these aircraft virtually identical in terms of A2G in GRB
As a final point of note. Lowering the GR4 to 11.7 allows it to be used in an 11.7 line-up. In its current 12.3 placement, it will be directly competing against the 13.0 multi-roles 99% of the time and as a result, has little to no value over other more capable aircraft such as the Harrier Gr7 and Typhoon FGR4.
41 Likes
Vehicle: F-4F KWS LV
Gamemode: Air Sim
Change: 13.0 —> 13.3
Reason: The F-4F KWS LV should match the battle rating of its direct equivalent the Tornado F3 late and Mig-29SMT both of which are currently 13.3. With the introduction of a 13.3 bracket. It is time for 13.0 to begin a process of decompression and the F-4F KWS LV belongs at 13.3 and not alongside the 13.0 Fox-3 aircraft such as the Viggen DI and Sea Harrier FA2.
30 Likes
Vehicle: Leopard 2A4
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 10.7 —> 11.0 (Maybe)
Ammo Change: Add DM33 or maybe even DM43 and make it 11.0 with DM43
Reason: while it is still a solid tank, over time and due to BR compression we have Tanks at 11.0 which have K5, APS and 3BM60(580mm pen) while Leopard 2A4 is still stuck with 408mm pen
22 Likes
In response to my own suggestion, an alternative suggestion:
F-15A & related variants.
BR change to 13.3
Game mode air RB.
Reason: F-14B, Sea Harrier, etc are 13.0 while being inferior.
4 Likes
Shenyang F-5: 9.3 > 9.0 In ARB
Reason for wanting this change:
The Shenyang f-5 is functionally identical to the Lim-5P flight performance wise with the only differences being that it swaps one of the 23mm’s for a 37 and has the addition of 2x Aim-9B equivalents.
There is no reason for this plane to sit at 9.3 being the same br as Mig-19’s, F-104’s, F-100’s, and Mig-21’s when the Lim-5 and Mig17PF are at 8.7.
The Shenyang has the exact same flight performance as the lim 5 and the 17PF but sits 2 full br’s higher for no reason.
The Cl13B Mk6 which is simply a superior plane to the shenyang in basically every metric is still a BR lower, so it makes no sense why this plane is still 9.3.
Facing 10.3 planes and all aspect missiles is extremely unfun and not enjoyable at all.
Hence my suggestion and asking to move it back down to 9.0 at minimum, since its performance is identical to the Lim5p and the 17PF. Please show this plane some love and move it back to a BR where it can be relevant and fun again.
Edit* I see its going to 9.0 specifically in Sim battles, please make the same br change apply to ARB as well this plane really is not up to par or competitive at 9.3.
59 Likes
Vehicle: Hunter F6 (France)
Gamemode: Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.0 —> 9.3
Reason: Currently at 9.0 is the Hunter F1 in the British TT which has both a weaker engine and an inferior wing design. It is inferior to the Hunter F6 in every respect. In addition to this the Hunter F6 has 2x Aim-9Bs where the F1 has none. The F6 also has drop tanks, and can use these to dump most of its weight when entering a fight. In the Swedish TT is a Hunter F4 with 2x Aim-9B called the J34, which is currently located at 9.3 within ASB. The Hunter F6 needs a BR increase to 9.3 at the bare minimum to match the BR of the J34. The J34 then likely needs a BR reduction to 9.0
22 Likes
Su-30MK2/MKK
BR change to 13.7
Game mode air RB.
Reason: With Flankers and others ideally being moved to a more correct BR of 13.3, and F-16As currently being 13.3, there’s no reason for those aircraft to be 13.3 as well.
69 Likes
Vehicle: J34
Gamemode: Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.3 ----> 9.0
Reason: The J34 is a Hunter F4 with 2x Aim-9Bs but this just means it has a larger internal fuel storage than the Hunter F1 and gains no meaningful flight performance improvement over the Hunter f1, whilst the 9Bs are incredibly valuable to have, they don’t warrant a BR increase at this time and if needs be, the Hunter F1 can simply go down to 8.7 where it likely needs to be anyway.
20 Likes
Vehicle: HF-24 Marut
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: None
Change: Removal of Air-spawn / Move to Rank VI
Reason: It is a fighter aircraft with 4x 30mm ADENs and a high sub-sonic speed, comparable aircraft such as the Hunter F1 do not get air-spawn nor do significantly weaker aircraft such as the Buccaneer S.1 which has 0 A2A capabilities and is substantially slower than the Marut. There is 0 justification for the Marut to have air-spawn other than to make it better than all other options, if it’s air-spawn is to remain, then other aircraft, such as the Hunters should receive air-spawn.
12 Likes
Vehicle: Sea Harrier FRS1 (SQV) (And by extension the AV-8S Late)
Gamemode: Air Sim
BR Change: 11.3 ----> 11.0
Reason: The Sea Harrier FRS1 currently holds a Battle Rating in Air Sim that is 0.3 higher than it is in RB and a BR 0.7 higher than equivalent 4x Aim-9L carriers such as the A-10A Late. The Sea Harrier’s main competition at 11.3 is the Mig-23ML/MLD which are superior in every single respect to the Sea Harrier.
In the future, this BR may be appropriate for the Sea Harrier FRS1 but in its current highly unfinished state, it lacks much of IRL capabilities and so needs a lower BR.
It should be noted the Sea Harriers currently do not have basic capabilities that are highly essential for Air Sim. Such as a gunsight modeled.
23 Likes
The Chieftain changes are dumb, the Falcon needs to go down to like 7.7 is if loses the APDS round, also the BMPT needs to go to 12.3+
55 Likes
Vehicle: SPYDER AiO
Gamemode: Ground RB
Change: 12.7->12.0
Reason: currently its worse than many other anti airs; Pansir and CS/SA5, both at 12.0 outclass it by a mile; either downtier it or give it its DERBY-MR or DERBY-ER long range missiles, its completely outclassed currently
24 Likes
Wth is happening here, did they tell you to give your suggestions?
7 Likes
Vehicle: F-84F (US)
Gamemode: Air Realistic
Change: Remove Air spawn (Via Rank increase)
Reason: All the other F-84s in game do not get airspawn, however the US F-84 for some reason does. This is not only unfair on the Strategic bombers and jet bombers dependent on airspawn for their survivability, but also gives them an advantage over all other fighter aircraft at this BR, particularly the F-84s from other nations.
18 Likes
Vehicle: Shenyang F-5
Gamemode: Air Realistic Battles
BR Change: 9.3 → 9.0
Reason: No reason to only have this change happen in simulator, this plane is not fit to be at 9.3 currently. All other afterburning MiG-17s are at the same BR as the non-afterburning ones by which logic the one with missiles should be the same BR as the MiG-17AS, which is 9.0
It has nothing to offer at 9.3 over planes like the cl-13mk6 or the F4D that warrants its placement into all aspect territory, its flight performance is equivalent to planes that are currently rated at 8.7, two BR steps just for some PL-2s just doesn’t make sense.
*Edit: I see tpom was faster than me, go like their post above too.
35 Likes
kfir canard
11.0 ->10.7
air rb
2 9gs, 36 flares, no radar, mid rwr
13 Likes
T-72 from 9.3 to 10.0 br very strong tank with great armor and round with over 422m of pen
All R2Y2 needs a br change
T-32E1 needs a reload buff speed
Flankpanzer 341 from 7.0 to 7.7 reason good armor / aphe round pens 81mm
XM8 needs the m900 round still missing it !
B-66 9.0 to 8.7 both air / ground with bomber spawn. its so awful at 9.0 worst bomber in game.
15 Likes
Vehicle: AMX A-1A
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 10.7
Reason: The AMX A-1A is identical in nearly every single respect to the tech-tree version the AMX, except it has the MAA-1 Piranha Air-to-air missiles. These are notably different to the Aim-9Ls that the standard AMX carries but comparable in overall performance and I don*t believe justify any reason for the AMX A-1A to be any higher at this time.
All Ground Attack aircraft are underperforming notably with Air Realistic at the moment, especially sub-sonic airframes that routinely encounter super-sonic ground attack aircraft. Such a higher BR guarantees that they will encounter aircraft such as the F-4S which routinely clear any and all bases long before the AMX can arrive.
The only gamemode that the AMX A-1A performs “well” in is Air Simulator, but even within this gamemode it is notably underpowered and would be better suited at 10.7 alongside similar airframes such as the AMX and Buccaneer S2B. Whilst the MAA-1’s are little stronger with Air Sim due to their short burn time, making them harder to see, the lack of radar limits the AMX A-1A’s ability to ID targets at longer ranges.
The AMX and AMX A-1A are not strong dogfighters, with aircraft like the Sea Harrier FRS1e at 10.7 much more capable under most conditions and its hard to justify even 10.7 for the airframes if not for the on-going compression
With the introduction of the Hawk 200, located at 10.7 with 4x Aim-9Ls, the overall justification for 11.0 has only become much weaker
23 Likes