Personally I’m all in favor to make these SPAAs actual SPAAs instead of TDs cosplaying as SPAAs by removing their AP belts and balancing their BR around that, but whatever. What’s certain is that the AMX-30 DCA is worse than every Gepard-like SPAA due to its awful radar so it sure as hell shouldn’t be above them now that the one element that caused the DCA to be above the other has been removed.
You absolutely can and gaijin absolutely does. Simple example that comes to mind is the Mephisto being limited to HOT-1 and HOT-2 when it’s also able to fire the HOT-3.
Besides, game balance > being historical. Gaijin does this in multiple ways, like nerfing the performance of certain missiles that would be too good if added with their IRL stats in the current state of the game.
Vehicle: BMPT (both of them) Gamemode: Ground Realistic Change: Nerf of some kind Reason:
They still grossly overperform. You need to stop using kid gloves when balancing them.
For starter: Their ammo belts are internal. That’s a literal physical fact, you need to accept it. And if hitting the ammo of vehicles with similar layout as it results in them getting destroyed (like the Marder, AMX-10P, etc…), then so should the BMPT. Simple as. Either that or change the mechanic for those other vehicles as well.
Asking gaijin to add turret baskets to russian tanks is like asking them to fix anything to do with naval. itll never happen, the autoloader should disable traverse on russian tanks but you just know they wont add it lol.
to be fair there should have been two different bmps in the first place, one that is cold war spec (no thermals, no atgm autoloader) and one that is modern (bmp3m with both of those things)
I also expected them to add baskets to all new vehicles at least. But it really seems they just did it to nerf Abrams and Leopard tank trees. Its just not fair and no one saying anything against it. Tanks without baskets just declass the ones which have this mechanic.
The internal ammo issue @BMP-T is just a hoax…Still don’t get how they spin it to make it internal.
Reasoning: The turret frontal armor of the tank has long been only 127 mm, not 152 mm, which makes it vulnerable to most guns at BR 6.0. The vehicle’s survivability is low, as 3 out of 4 crew members are located in the turret, and any hit to it often results in the tank being destroyed.
The gun has good nominal penetration; however, due to the use of sub-caliber and solid-shot rounds without explosive filler, it deals poor post-penetration damage. The high rate of fire is further limited by the 5+1 round mechanic, which negates its advantage in combat.
In addition, the tank’s mobility is unsatisfactory - its maximum speed is only 36-38 km/h, which does not allow it to maneuver effectively on the battlefield.
Taken together, these drawbacks indicate that the Centurion Mk.1 does not fit BR 6.0, and lowering it to 5.7 would be a more balanced solution.
Aircraft: Me 262 A-1a, Me 262 A-1a/Jabo, and Me 262 A-2a
Change: 7.0 → 6.3, 7.0 → 6.3, and 6.7 → 6.3
Reasoning: These were the world’s first mass-produced jet aircraft. They have poor maneuverability and take a long time to build up speed, which means they can only rely on their velocity - something that is rarely achievable at BR 7.0 (where they very often face 7.7 and 8.0). In addition, they are equipped with a very specific armament: four 30 mm MK 108 cannons with extremely poor ballistics.
It should also be noted that at BR 6.3 there is already the Me 262 A-1/U4, armed with the 50 mm Mk.214a cannon, which offers far superior ballistics and aiming performance, and yet it does not cause any balance issues.
Reasoning: One of the longest reload times for 203 mm guns among its counterparts, weak damage from their 203 mm shells, low accuracy of the same 203 mm guns, lack of torpedo armament, not the best armor.
It won’t hurt it at low speed. Why do you think so? All gears will become a bit longer, but this means you’ll be able to use more power, before you had to swtich gear at 2600 RPM. Now you’ll get additional 400 RPM range with more power at your disposal. Which is excellent news.
Reason to give france more of a vehicle br spread from 10.7 - 12.7
Multiple vehicles from other nations already sit within this br range some with better shells than what is currently offered to these tanks at 12.7 already.
Now, I havent played top tier in a hot minute so I’m not gonna dispute what you’ve said, but next time, please please please write what you’ve just written directly in reply to whatever suggestion regards the Abrams.
If people know why you’re suggesting, a debate can happen on whether it is reasonable.
