Planned Battle Rating Changes (January 2026)

[Shadow_Reign]

I notice that you often bring up skill issues on my side or on others’. I’m not an esports-level player, that’s true. A highly skilled player can make almost anything work, even without stabilization, thermals, or decent reverse speed.
But at 10.7, the T-80UD is clearly inferior to its peers in terms of characteristics. The T-80B and the T-80UD/BE both have thermal sights, and the T-80B also has a much better −11 km/h reverse speed.

@Beeschurger

Complete lie on your part. Abrams/2A4 have extremely small window of opportunity to deal with T-80UD that ponces on them on urban maps., made all the more worse by the usual gaijin shenanigans when it comes to post-pen effects.

Most of players destroy barrel or breech like this when only as soon as the tanks roof appears above the shelter:

And let’s be honest - if an Abrams misses, it can quickly move back. If a T-80UD misses and gets hit in the barrel or breech, with a −4 km/h reverse speed, it has no chance to retreat.

@Beeschurger

Indeed. Not from its hull armor which can be lolpenned by even 3BM22, a 9.3 shell.

Leopard 1A5 from 9.3 did the same with T-80UD many times.

@Beeschurger

That is another lie on your part as amount of spall is reliant of residual penetration

Ok, that could be my mistake, I believe in the realism of the game too much.

@Beeschurger

you imply T-80UD at 10.7 would be overtiered whereas in reality it would match the other two premium “Big 3” MBTs.

And playing almost always uptier, cause 10.7 means very often 11.7.

@Beeschurger

doesnt seem to be the case so far.

ok

@Beeschurger

its much better than either Abrams/2A4 has to offer.

And compensated by slow vertical and horisontal aiming speed with poor gun depression.

@Beeschurger

That is however player side issue, not tank one. You can lack both situational awarness and proper positioning in Leopard 2A4.

Again player side issue, ok.

@Beeschurger

Most maps also feature areas with “urban areas” where thermals arent as important.

You need to get to the city, and it’s not a fact that there won’t be fast Leopards in the city by that time waiting for you.

@Beeschurger

Now I dont know about you, but roughly three times faster would mean 22.6 x 3 = 67.8°/s, not 37.6/s.

Oh sorry, looks like at that moment I thought about difference in turret traverse speed between 2S38 and RDF/LT, you are right, no 3x times.

@Beeschurger

they both have the world famous NATO hump which affets their gun depression in rear aspect, something T-80UD does not struggle with

I don’t often see T-80UDs playing backwards but ok.

@Beeschurger

these two MBT families being only two MBT families in the game that currently have turret baskets, which massively negatively affects their post-pen survivability, because gaijin decided that undamaged metalic part of the basket without proper wiring is absolutey crucial to turrets ability to rotate

At least they dont explode when they are hit:

@Beeschurger

the unrealistic Leopard 2 gun safety override that prevents it from depressing its gun over the back, as it was recently discovered going by Ukraine war footage.

Should be fixed, why not?

@Beeschurger

yes, because Im not afraid to admit that both Leopard 2A4 and M1 Abrams do have advantages over T-80UD, which become most prominent on open maps.

In a game with mostly open maps full of fields, bushes, and debris, certain vehicles dominate very often. Yet, if the T-80UD performs well on urban maps, it’s considered overpowered and in need of a nerf - while Abrams and Leopards dominating open maps is treated as perfectly fine.

At this point, continuing the discussion seems pointless due to these double standards, combined with the shift towards personal attacks and emotional arguments.
It’s important for me to play comfortably and not sweat staring at the screen until I lost my pulse. So if T-80UD goes to 10.7, it should get non-historical thermal sight or non-historical -11km/h reverse speed, which the T-80B has, for balance purposes. Or even 2nd gen thermals like on T-80UD/BE.

[Yoshi_UA]

This is absolutely your opinion. Let me remind you that there is EJ both in the branch and in the premium. The Swedes - Viggen. There are precedents in the game. Even take premium su30s, why su27cm when there is su30MK2 with a better combat rating. JH-7A prototype. Su30MKK - (J-11A - which will be even worse in armament at the same combat rating), Netz, Italian 29Mig. This is already present in the game.

[PapaSnake509]

J-7D
Air RB/SB
BR 10.7 → 11.0
Reasoning: this plane has fantastic performance and strong missiles, the J-7E is marginally better and is at 11.3, 11.0 would fit it in line with the Mig-21Bis.

[BACKRAGE44428-live]

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

[Macron-Spokesman]

The choice should be to move the super Hornet down to 14.3, Gripen E being at 14.3 is fine.

[Shadow_Reign]

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.

[Dzhkグ]

@Yoshi_UA

Let me remind you that there is EJ both in the branch and in the premium.

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.

@Yoshi_UA

su27cm when there is su30MK2 with a better combat rating

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.

@Yoshi_UA

(J-11A - which will be even worse in armament at the same combat rating)

Better airframe + MAWS, same loadout.

@Yoshi_UA

Netz, Italian 29Mig

These are objectively P2W, and should be changed imo.
Especially the Netz, the TT one should have more CMs than the premium.

@Yoshi_UA

This is already present in the game.

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.

[Maratron]

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.

[UniqueScorpions-live]

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

[Beeschurger]

@Shadow_Reign

I notice that you often bring up skill issues on my side or on others’.

@Shadow_Reign

I’m not an esports-level player, that’s true.

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.

@Shadow_Reign

the T-80UD is clearly inferior to its peers in terms of characteristics

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

@Shadow_Reign

Most of players destroy barrel or breech like this when only as soon as the tanks roof appears above the shelter:

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.

@Shadow_Reign

And let’s be honest - if an Abrams misses, it can quickly move back.

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.

@Shadow_Reign

Leopard 1A5 from 9.3 did the same with T-80UD many times.

are you saying Leopard 1A5 can lolpen T-80UD hull armor?

@Shadow_Reign

And playing almost always uptier, cause 10.7 means very often 11.7.

If thats true, its funny you wish this fate only to Leopard 2A4s/ M1 Abrams tanks.

Hating them too much perhaps?

@Shadow_Reign

ok

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.

@Shadow_Reign

And compensated by slow vertical and horisontal aiming speed with poor gun depression.

which is secondary when playing on flat urban maps without long sightlines.

@Shadow_Reign

Again player side issue, ok.

Absolutely. Blindness does not discriminate between nations in Warthunder.

@Shadow_Reign

You need to get to the city, and it’s not a fact that there won’t be fast Leopards in the city by that time waiting for you.

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.

@Shadow_Reign

I don’t often see T-80UDs playing backwards but ok.

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.

@Shadow_Reign

At least they dont explode when they are hit:

But ammo in 2A4/M1 ready rack explodes just as well when hit that damages the door separating ammo bunker from the fighting compartment.

@Shadow_Reign

Should be fixed, why not?

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.

@Shadow_Reign

Yet, if the T-80UD performs well on urban maps, it’s considered overpowered and in need of a nerf - while Abrams and Leopards dominating open maps is treated as perfectly fine.

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.

@Shadow_Reign

due to these double standards

yes, YOURS double standards.

@Shadow_Reign

personal attacks and emotional arguments.

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?

@Shadow_Reign

It’s important for me to play comfortably

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?

[Maratron]

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.

[Maratron]

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.

[Yoshi_UA]

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)

[Maratron]

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.

[BACKRAGE44428-live]

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

[BACKRAGE44428-live]

italy low tier got brutalized cause of seal clubbers

[Maratron]

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.

[maxalhw]

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?

[Maratron]

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.

[BACKRAGE44428-live]

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