F-15A at 12.7 in air sim with AIM-9Ms is a joke right?
The only reason I can think of, that would make the devs move F-15A to 12.7, is that there are Fox 3s at 13.0 and Sparrows are bad kinematically too compared to them, but…
F-15A should stay at 13.0 and perhaps lose the AIM-9Ms. 13.0 is not a place for fox 3s, but it’s not really a place for AIM-9M/AAM-3s either.
whopping 1% better flight performance
I wonder if this is in advance of adding AIM-9X, AIM-120D, and AIM-174?
Whilst true, Id still run both pods, just for maximum defence. But it just gets fiddly thats all. The main way something slower could defeat it is a missile, flares eliminate that entirely.
I did try to write a reasonable argument ocne for the Buc S2 being lower, but I ended up going round in circles. for now im opting for:
I think BR changes for it at the moment just get a bit messy.
**Vehicle:**Buccaneer S.2
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.3 ----> 9.0
Reason: This is an incredibly hard aircraft to balance correctly and its BR is heavily dictated by what is considered the most important attributes.
If the Buc S.2 is looked at with respect to its performance to engage and destroy other players, then it is incredibly weak for its BR. Armed with only 2x Aim-9Bs and no Cannons of any kind. This puts its performance well below that of aircraft such as the Scimitar F Mk.1 or Sea-Vixen F.A.W. Mk2. Whilst it handles fairly well, it is hard to justify it being any higher than 8.7, maybe even 8.3 if it wasn’t for its decent speed and acceleration.
If the Buc S.2 is looked at with respect to its performance to make it to a base and drop bombs onto it, then it performs much better, whilst it is no match for super-sonic aircraft such as the Q-5 (early) or the Jaguar Gr1 in terms of reaching a base quickly, it certainly can make a decent pace with a very large bomb load, able to destroy 3.8 bases in a single sortie. It is able to give up some of this bomb load to run external countermeasure pods which carry Large countermeasures. This gives the Buc S.2 a notable amount of survivability to actually make it to a base. I do not believe that bomb load should ever be factored into BR placement, but the CMs do need to be and it could be argued that 9.3 would be semi-reasonable for it.
But when taken as a whole, its ability to fight back (which is mutually exclusive with the ability to take CMs) and the fact that either are totally optional if you wish to maximise bomb load. I would propose a half way point of 9.0. This still leaves it at a BR where other, faster and more capable aircraft exists, but it creates further separation between the very strong set of aircraft currently found at 10.0 and 10.3, which betters it’s chance of making it to a base.
Alternative Solution: The Buccaneer S.2 is currently missing it’s Napalm bombs. The introduction of these bombs would increase the S.2s ground attack effectiveness by allowing it to kill as many bases whilst still running the CM pods, which justifies the 9.3 rating in my opinion.
Potez 633 botters managed to lower Potez 633 to 1.3
Not sure if funny or sad.
T-64B should stay at 10.0, it has no right being the same BR as the T-80UD.
No, it’s much faster and has better angling. Turan III is personally one of my favorite minor nation tanks.
It isn’t. If it was then it would be done simultaneously.
Okay, lets do this instead. The soyuz we have in game is not the one in that picture, the one in game has armour that the russians couldn’t produce and have never been able to even to this day. At most the armour would have been 200mm of cemented armour, not the ridiculous 400mm number gaijin pulled out of their ass. So yes, the soyuz in game is fake.
Falcon and 30DCA staying at 8.3 without APDS is the most GAIJIN thing we’ve ever seen
Show me a seaworthy picture of the Ersatz Yorck, H-39, Amagi, etc.
Ground Realistic
Vehicle: Lvrbv 701
BR: 9.7 → 9.3
This SPAA only has Beam Riding missile, no radar, limited elevation, ok-ish mobility. Even the Chaparral got moved to 9.3.
The China Air placement changes are more questionable than this companies business models ngl
T64b really shouldn’t be at the same br as t72b. Even the 10.0 br change was a stretch but now its higher than leopard 2k is ridiculous. Armor at 10.0 wasn’t anything special and now at 10.3 it with vs 11.3 tanks and it will make this tank unplayable.
People grinding for the J-11 watching it just get moved to the bomber line for literally no reason:
Yaknow, im curious, what would people think to all SPAAs getting a OTOMATIC treatment (limited AP ammo to the point its not viable as a long term strat, but still an option as last resort defense)
Falcon and DCA staying at 8.3 without APDS is the most GAIJOOB thing we’ve ever seen
Ayit
Air realistic
9.7->10.0
Was playing it recently, and it’s still very strong. Harrier, but with extra missiles and greater maneuverability, and still a very small target. Only weakness is that you must carefully maneuver when doing your dives to not wing rip. Has a significantly better engine than other a4s and has a pretty solid climb rate for a non-afterburning plane.
I tried running both pods.
Because the flares fired in opposite directions, the rear aspect missiles fired at me couldn’t pick which direction to go and ended up hitting me anyway.
Aircraft: Netz and Netz(Mod)
Game Mode: Air Realistic
BR change: 12.7 ----> 12.3
Reason: Has no IRCCM missiles, no Radar guided missiles, yet sits at a higher BR than the F18s which has basically double the missiles and sits at a higher BR than the F16As while being basically the same in performance and sits at the same BR as the f16AM which has IRCCM missiles and now the f15s aswell that also has good missiles and basically double the missile count…