J7E infinitely beats the J7D there is nothing the J7D can do J7E is straight demon time in hands of someone whos somewhat skilled
its only actual counter is the MIG-23MLD
J7E got banned from tournaments for a reason
what needs to happen is MIG-23s be made 12.0 giving breathing room to that br range as J7D doesnt have a counter to mig 23s radar missiles as a rear aspect R24R is a death sentence
The choice should be to move the super Hornet down to 14.3, Gripen E being at 14.3 is fine.
If the T-80UD is truly the sole cause of all 9.3 suffering, then moving it to 10.7 should fix everything.
If that makes them happy, I’ll be happy for them. I’m not a bad person.
F-4EJ wasn’t an end of the line plane when the EJ ADTW was added.
Japan has better versions of the F-4EJ, The EJ Kai.
Currently, The F-2A is the end of line plane for the it’s branch in the JP Tech Tree.
Maybe when they add AAM-5s and AAM-4Bs they can move the F-2A and then add AAM-4s to the F-2A ADTW.
Su-27SM has better engines, radar, airframe, and more missiles.
The F-2A and F-2A ADTW are basically the same, but the ADTW only has Fox-1s.
Better airframe + MAWS, same loadout.
These are objectively P2W, and should be changed imo.
Especially the Netz, the TT one should have more CMs than the premium.
If you give the F-2A ADTW Fox-3’s you’ve made a Copy + paste top tier aircraft as a premium.
I’m fine with the F-2A ADTW EVENTUALLY getting Fox-3s, as long as the F-2A has a meaningful way to distinguish itself from the ADTW.
Vehicle: Hawk H-75A-2 (Germany)
Gamemode: Arcade Battles / Realistic Battles
BR Change: 2.7 —> 1.7 / 2.7 —> 2.3
Reason: Make the vehicle to be in line with H-75A-4 (France) with identical stats.
Oh I agree. The bad hull armor + bad turret armor leaves you weaker than a T-34-85
This and the T-44-122 should go down to 6.0 neither are good tanks
If argument stems from fundamental misunderstanding of how game is played, it is entirely valid to point out individual player performance.
If Magik, better player than me whose opinion I respect, comes around and tells me my conclussions are wrong and stem from my skill issue, I too would have to think about them.
There is absolutely no shame in NOT treating Warthunder as second job, but you do have issues with grasping how the game is played, made worse by the fact that you played only russia - theres no way around that. You can either acknowledge that and think about whats being said, or continue holding the hill that T-80UD is bad and at 10.7 it would be overtiered.
Your choice.
and its peers are inferior to T-80UD in some characterstics as well. Thats called tradeoffs and stems from different tank designs and how well they fit into meta and/or map and/or matchup and/or situation.
If you want perfectly balanced gameplay, everyone would need to get the exact same vehicles, such as Leopard 2A4s…
Wait a damn second
And T-80UD can do the same to Abrams, and can just point and click whenever on 2A4s hull.
Abrams/2A4 can target weakspots quicker but T-80UD doesnt have to be as precise in the first place, offsetting worse gun handling.
If Abrams misses, or doesnt land his shot properly and it doesnt penetrate, it more likely than not dies to T-80UD just farting in general direction of his turret ring.
are you saying Leopard 1A5 can lolpen T-80UD hull armor?
If thats true, its funny you wish this fate only to Leopard 2A4s/ M1 Abrams tanks.
Hating them too much perhaps?
What is there to take otherwise? Just in this very same response you claimed Leopard 1A5 can lolpen T-80UD which simply isnt the case. It has to go for weakspots.
which is secondary when playing on flat urban maps without long sightlines.
Absolutely. Blindness does not discriminate between nations in Warthunder.
You are making it out like T-80UD is only ever so slightly faster than Churchill VII, it is not. It might have worse acceleration, but max speed is only 8kmh worse than the max speed of Leopard 2A4.
It hinders their ability to react to threats in certain hemisphere, forcing them to turn hull and thus expose soft side armor, whereas T-80UD can take the gamble (albeit massive one) and just keep its engine pointed towards threat in hopes of engine and rear fuel tanks absorbing spall.
But ammo in 2A4/M1 ready rack explodes just as well when hit that damages the door separating ammo bunker from the fighting compartment.
It absolutely should; however this is gaijin were talking about. They decided they want to nerf 2A4 since moving it to 11.0 was out of question for them, hence the stupid safety override.
Because while 2A4/Abrams dominate on open maps, T-80UD steamrolls them on urban maps.
In thousand years I wouldnt push as aggressively with 2A4/Abrams as I do with T-80UD.
T-80UD dominates on urban maps, and makes life for 9.3s a living hell - whats Kpz70/MBT70 supposed to do on advance to Rhine? Go for the barrel in extremely narrow time window in which T-80UD can just click on their hull and banish them to the shadow realm.
Urban maps with certain matchups dont always allow for flanking playstyle 2A4/M1 thrive in, because in order for someone to flank, someone actually has to hold the line otherwise the enemy will just slice through it like hot knife through butter.
yes, YOURS double standards.
No emotional arguments, Im just pointing out that you havent played anything but russia and you dont even play russia well, which might invalidate your opinion on how the game is played.
If you fundamentally misunderstand how to play the game, how can you understand how to balance it?
And what does comfortably mean? Because that can mean lot of things, for example It can mean maximum gain for minimal effort.
Should unwashed peasants playing other inferior nations break their backs trying to take you down while you just point and click everyone? That would be pretty comfortable, no?
Vehicle: M13/40 (I)
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 1.7 —> 1.3
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 1.7, with mediocre cannon, low speed and unremarkable survivability. Used to be a reserve vehicle when originally introduced.
Vehicle: M13/40 (II)
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 2.0 —> 1.7
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 2.0, with mediocre cannon, low speed and unremarkable survivability. Used to be the starter premium when first introduced.
Also in life, ADTW first tests innovations, so whether you like it or not they are identical except for camouflage. J-11A carries RVV-AE(R77), premium version of PL-12. The only thing the developer could have done at the start of sales of the F-2A ADTW is to make it an early 90s version, where the difference is in the radar and instead of AAM3 - 9L. And this would be a really good premium on ± level with F-18(premium)
Vehicle: M13/40 (III)
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 2.0 —> 1.7
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 2.0, with mediocre cannon, low speed and unremarkable survivability.
6.0 maybe depends cause its better armored the than a T34-85 i dont think a 5.7 jumbo can do much to it until decompression i think it should stay where it is
as 85 mm cannon it has is very potent and can kill almost any heavy tank at the br only really struggles aagainst 6.7s id rather a whole br decompression be done
italy low tier got brutalized cause of seal clubbers
Vehicle: M14/41
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 2.3/2.0 —> 1.7
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 2.3/2.0, with mediocre cannon, low speed and unremarkable survivability. The miniscule +1km/h speed increase and tiny increase in power/weight ratio do not justify the increased BR over its predecessors, and this vehicle has no chance fighting against BR3.3 vehicles.
Nah man, the T-55A gets a dart and a stab two br steps before others for no reason. The T-10M is worse than it in every way except armor against APCBC and APDS rounds and thats basically it.
The 906 has a 4.3s reload on APCBC and a full stab before other nations even get darts. It can 1v1 almost every 9.0 MBT
the T-55AMD and T-62AM get laser rangefinders and darts before everyone else for no reason, that’s more important than having the slightly better turret armor the chieftains get
The FV barely does what the M109s do with double the reload for no reason
the vickers gets a stab and 5.0s reload at the same br other tanks get neither
the olifant gets a laser rangefinder and DM-23 at a BR other tanks get neither, like, what advantage does the M60 AOS has over it? a .50cal?
Vehicle: M14/41 (47/40)
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 2.3 —> 2.0
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 2.3, with mediocre cannon, low speed and unremarkable survivability. With maximum 62mm of penetration at 10m distance against flat armor, has no chance fighting against BR 3.3 vehicles.
B1 TER
ground RB
2.7->2.3
i know it has like extra 10mm armor basically everywhere but against 3.7s theres almost nothing you can do like a sherman or T34 can brutalize you without much trouble and youll struggle to pen
Vehicle: M15/42
Gamemode: All modes
BR Change: 2.7 —> 2.0
Reason: Low performance compared to peers at 2.7, with weak cannon for the BR, low speed and unremarkable survivability. The miniscule speed increase and tiny increase in power/weight ratio do not justify the increased BR over its predecessors, even with the small strip of 50mm armor on its hull front. With maximum 62mm of penetration at 10m distance against flat armor, has no chance fighting against BR 3.3 vehicles.
Bruh
It has worse power-to-weight ratio than 2S38, so unless you mean the 5km/h difference in top-speed, i honestly don’t know where you get the “faster” part from.
Begleit doesnt have better armour and is infinitely easier to disable through the turret (literally any penetrating shot will disable vertical and/or fcs + commander). All weapons can be disabled with anything (you can literally destroy the breech with <5.8mm coax MG’s at >1km).
Hull is a bit better, sure but this becomes entirely irrelevant against 25mm APDS or above (unless of course you try to intentionally shoot nothing but the transmission block, anything above or beside it will go straight through).
Also 2S38 has the massive exterior fuel-tank in the front which can (sometimes, its obviously not reliable) make darts pass straight through while only killing one crew-member as the fuel-tank absorbs the spall.
Also thanks for ignoring literally all other aspects of the vehicle that make it significantly worse compared to 2S38 as that vehicle has;
But hey, lets keep comparing two vastly different vehicles because they share the same gun-calibre and happen to both shoot quickly.
Since actually looking at a vehicle thoroughly and comparing the capabilites that matter is too much to ask for apparently.
It’s likely overperforming in the same way things like the alpha jet are.
Gaijin makes up data when they don’t have real data.
Point: Alpha jet is 100 mph too fast and sustains like 3G too many compared to the manual