Thanks for proving my point that they’re performing on par with each other.
J10C Air RB 14.3-> 14.7
This change should only happen tif the J10C finally get its WS10 engine and also improved Pl12 missiles which would make it a bit more competitive in the top tier environment
2a4 has higher kd in tech tree ?
challeneger 2 OES 1.12 KD
challeneger 2 1.15 KD
on average there lower
F16I Air RB 14.0 → 13.7
Right now this plane for all intends and purposes is an F16C with more CM, worse FM and that gets access to the Aim120C (which is a sidegrade at best), that sits at a higher BR where its even more uncompetitive with it’s small missile load out.
If you want to avoid making that BR change, then maybe consider either giving it an ahistorical double rack for 2 more Amraams or giving it access to the next generation derby missiles such as the I-Derby or derby ER, additionally consider giving it as the first plane ingame access to the Python 4, even if I doubt that this will make the plane competitive at 14.0
1 Like
First of all, they weren’t added at the same time so comparing global stats is moot as both didn’t play in the same environment. In the last 9 months, premium version of 2A4 had better stats six times which is something that shouldn’t ever happen if premium players are so much worse than TT ones.
M1 KVT in the last 9 months had better stats five times.
From February 2025, OES is pretty much always the best Challenger at 11.7 for GB.
Your theory doesn’t look good, I must say that.
Even if we take this at face value for some reason, it’s a 2-3% improvement which definitely wouldn’t make IS-6 “straight OP” by any stretch. It’s quite sad to see people parrot this BS take instead of forming their own opinion based on available stats.
This premium has 0.7 K/D and is brokenly OP, but because premium players suck it has that awful performance and if it was in TT it would have 2.0 K/D.
Yeah, not really.
Proposed Change: Do not remove the Falcon/AMX-30 APDS belts.
I think that neither the Falcon nor the AMX-30 S DCA should see their APDS belts removed. Nerfing SPAAGs’ antitank capabilities will NOT make them go only after aircraft. People will still use them “incorrectly” by sitting uselessly in their own spawns while the planes have free reign over the middle of the map, due to perceived vulnerability vs nearly every single tank they could possibly encounter. And that’s if they get used at all. In the worst cases it’ll be as nonexistent as the Rapier is.
If you want AAs to go kill planes, you have to give them positive, not negative, encouragement to do so.
- Rewards for aircraft kills need to significantly increase.
- All SPAAG without radars need a shorter-range lead indicator even in Realistic (0-1.5km), to counter very unrealistic plane flight behavior. Planes benefit far more from mouse aim and 3rd person camera than AA do, thus giving non-radar AA a lead marker is justified compensation.
- Radar AAs with currently buggy radars need this addressed so they can actually track planes accurately.
But even fixing all of that won’t make average people actually do the most important thing - MOVE - because of the perceived vulnerability to most opponents. Which means they’ll still do rather poorly, but just a little less poorly.
So yeah…congrats, snail, you “solved” certain SPAAG, but at what cost?
1 Like
Vehicle : Superhind
Gamemode : Ground RB
Change : 10.3 —> 10.0
Reason : The Superhind only carries the ZT3A2 with a range of 5km. Other nations’ BR10.3 aircraft possess missiles with a range of 8km or carry AAMs, making them superior to the Superhind.
Even considering the Superhind’s capacity to carry eight ZT3A2s, BR10.0 is a reasonable rating.
Vehicle : Spitfire F Mk.22
Gamemode : Air RB
Change : 6.7 —> 6.3
Reason : The Spitfire F Mk.22 lacks 150-octane fuel and is inferior to the Mk.24. Despite this, both are rated at BR 6.7. Therefore, a BR of 6.3 is appropriate for the Mk.22.
3 Likes
It would also be fair if the VT4A1 was foldered with the VT4, considering that the Challenger 2 Black Night with APS and Challenger 2E are foldered while having a more significant difference between the two.
1 Like
Vehicle : Vijayanta
Gamemode : Ground RB
Change : 8.3 —> 8.0
Reason : Why does simply adding HEATFS to the Vickers Mk.1 raise its BR by one tier?
This vehicle’s appropriate BR is 8.0.
2 Likes
Vehicle : T-80UD
Gamemode : Ground RB
Change : 10.3 —> 10.7
Reason : If the T-64B’s BR is set to 10.3, then the T-80UD’s BR should be 10.7. These two vehicles have the same firepower but differ significantly in armor. While the T-64B is equipped with Kontakt-1, the T-80UD is equipped with Kontakt-5. The difference between these two ERA systems is substantial. Therefore, the T-80UD must be set to BR 10.7.
The T-64B is over br’d now. 10.0 was more than enough
Maybe with some fictional gen 1 thermals
1 Like
The reload speed is 6.0 seconds, and the ammunition is 3BM42, which feels too powerful for a BR of 10.0.
gen 1 thermals?
Sorry, I can’t make out the meaning of the sentence.
If it goes to 10.7 it should get thermals imo, even tho it might be fictional
the 2s38 has 23.3 hp/ton, leopard 2a4 25.8 hp/ton, and m1 abrams 27.3 hp/ton.
I mean if you are really really used to these two vehicles, sure, but the 2s38 is by no means slow. it’s on par with its competitors, such as the strf 9040 and ajax.
F-16A Netz/Netz mod
ARB
12.7→12.3
Frankly, it’s completely ridiculous that this shares the same BR as the F-15A/J. Why would it have the same BR when it can only carry Python 3 or 9L? Plus, the Netz doesn’t even have an MRAAM like the AIM-7. Yet there was no mention of the Netz in this update table. Does Gaijin really think the 9M/AAM-3 and Python 3 are equivalent missiles? It’s truly absurd.
1 Like
I see. That could certainly happen.
Guns