The AV-8B NA is much better than the Sea Harrier FRS.1. The 11.3 ARB BR is warranted.
Its GRB BR should be fine as well based on the AV-8B+ and Harrier GR.7s BRs.
If they removed its APDS and left its belts untouched it would go from 110 to 58 pen. For a SAP round it never used.
In Air RB (ARB), moving top tier from 14.3 to 14.7 is going to pull more players into the new max bracket, which probably means the 13.3 Fox-3 premium Su-30MK2/MKK will see more downtiers into 12.3–12.7—and that’s the issue: 12.3 jets mostly don’t have Fox-3s (and the F-14’s Phoenix is a more limited/older Fox-3 compared to modern ARH missiles, so it makes sense at its BR), so you’re increasing how often that bracket gets dumped into an ARH missile environment with no real answer, and it’ll just lead to more lobbies being farmed by those two premiums (I’m already seeing it from the 12.7 side in stuff like the MiG-29 Sniper and F-18C with no Fox-3 options).
However, grippen can destroy su27 easily and after that get to destroying ground, without even changing loadout and it has nice resolution IR pod.
All Su27 has is R73 against it and with air to ground loadout it’s even worse in a dogfight, also everything it has, is unguided.
I also love Su-27, but let’s speak objectively
one where the average enemy is a steel jet fighter with 20mms and even larger calibers on some
They haven’t sold enough yet. Once the sales goal is reached, it will get nerfed. It’s their pattern.
I’m a fan of the proposed reorganisation of the Chinese air tree, for the most part. However, it doesn’t make sense to move the J-11s to the end of the bomber branch rather than simply add a second PLA fighter branch for the flankers (which would also allow the Chinese tree to finally have five branches rather than four) and save the bomber line for something that actually fits, such as the J-16 or even maybe the H-6.
1 Like
Why are you using the Su-27 for CAS? I keep.it as my CAP fighter for swatting the enemy CAS down. I keep 2 planes for ground 1 for CAS the other for CAP. Im not gonna hamper my Su-27 for a role.its not great at. It was made with air superiority as its focus unlike Gripen which is a light multirole fighter.
Could be argued it’s a little better than the Gr7/T10 with a much better tpod, though more limited loadout and weaker A2A (for the Gr7)
Why are the rank 9s not folded ? Why research both Eurofighter that will most likely cost almost if not 500k RP each ?
Doesn’t make sense at the moment but if/when they get better AAMs it probably will.
What is the logic of grouping two completely different airframes together if there’s a better match?
Grouping Kurnass 2000 and F-15A Baz makes no sense at all, they don’t even have the same Battle Rating even if it would matter. All it does is make tech trees look less organized.
Grouping F-15A Baz with F-15C Baz Meshupar would make much more sense, as the latter one is basically the same thing, but upgraded.
1 Like
Didn’t realise that. I thought it was similar to the AHS or AH-64DJP (the AHS having Hellfire Bs and the DJP lacking AMASE). The AH-64As are 11.7 as well though, so those would definitely have to go down in BR to 11.3, if the AH-64Ds went to 11.7.
Further, if the AH-64As go down to 11.3, the YAH-64 and Comanche have to go down to 11.0, other nations helis would probably also have to go down as a consequence.
Other than that, I believe 11.7 could be fine after looking at most other helis at that BR range.
Performance wise? No.
Based on the SPAAs at that BR range? Probably yes, but that’s a seperate issue.
Range difference. Atakas are limited to 6km, while Hellfires can reach 8km.
From my experience Hellfires aren’t unreliable at all and still work well up to almost 8km.
Sure, but unlike Hellfires, you can only guide a single missile at once, Hellfires (and SAL JAGMs) don’t have that limitation thanks to being laser guided.
I think you are underestimating the advantage of being able to sit outside of the older top tier SAMs (ItO, FlaRakRad, ADATS)
I don’t see any problem with moving the Ka-52 up in BR.
I understand what you are saying but it doesnt make sense research 2 vehicles and need almost 1M RP. We need economy and research changes and if its not coming with this BR changes I dont know why not folder them now.
They aren’t being foldered because foldering them would shorten the grind.
That’s the entire reason, nothing beyond that.
this picture show F-14A Early can carry AIM-9L and AIM-7M
its have same fins.
AIM-7 colour in F-14 picture show its was AIM-7M.
2 Likes
Having the F/A18C foldered before the F14 is crazy
2 Likes
Vehicle : Falcon
Gamemode : Ground RB
Change : 8.3 —> 7.7
Reason : I agree with removing the Falcon’s APDS. However, I cannot agree that the BR of this vehicle, which does not carry radar, should remain unchanged. 7.7 That seems like a reasonable BR.
1 Like
Because what happens when the AESA one gets ASRAAM and/or Meteor.
Or Brimstones 2/3s
Or P4E upgrades.
Etc etc
It shouldn’t be foldered then unfoldeded.
It needs more, some… Seasoning to better separate it from the M-Scans, but it has the potential to be far more different than say the F3 and F3 late in the future also not foldered.
So sure, it was a bit annoying, but not too bad. And besides, air is stupidly easy to grind compared to ground…so could be worse
Vehicle : Chieftain Mk 3
Gamemode : Ground RB
Change : 8.7 —> 8.3
Reason : Chieftain Mk 3 is a vehicle with extremely poor mobility. Furthermore, it lacks a laser rangefinder and is unsuitable for long-range artillery fire. Considering that other nations’ BR 8.7 MBTs are equipped with laser rangefinders and some can even fire APFSDS rounds, a BR 8.3 rating is appropriate for Chieftain Mk 3.
4 Likes