😂😂😂
F-14D should be 15.0BR. Too OP. 😉
1 Like
Bit of a side tangent, but I disagree that the M48A2 C situation was a result of nation based match making. It’s the first tank Germany gets after their very strong 6.7 lineup, and one of their first post WWII tanks. The M48A2 C was added at the same BR as the M48A1, because it was basically the same tank (ignoring the smoke grenade launchers and slightly worse hull armor), but it was immediately dropped down in BR because of player statistics on it tanking. It’s win rate dropped because of everyone rushing to play the new tank and then immediately having to deal with an APCR stock grind, but it stayed low because the M48s require skill to play well. That’s a stark contrast from almost all the German tanks that came before it which had good firepower that was easy to use, almost always got their best round stock, and towards the end of the WWII stuff had fairly reliable armor. M48 has unreliable armor and a gun that requires you knowing precisely where to aim, whether it be because you’re using the APHE, or because you’ve got the higher pen of HEATFS with it’s worse post pen. M48 is good, but the A2 C was lowered because it was played by German mains coming off of a tree full of very easy to play vehicles that didn’t know how to use it.
You also say that copy/paste vehicles are always the same BR across tech trees, but that’s not true. Yes, they usually are, but as with before there are weird exceptions to this that boil down to vehicles being balanced based on players statistics. The Panzer IV G in the German tech tree is 3.7, but the practically identical Panzer IV G in the Italian tech tree is 4.0. The German StuG III G is 4.0, and so is the Italian one. That sounds fine, but it’s not a straight copy/paste vehicle. The Italian StuG III G lacks the track armor that helps make that tank so resistant to guns like the American 75 and Russian 76. It has noticeably weaker armor, so it should be a lower BR, but partly because it’s seen as a copy/paste, and partly because of player statistics, it ends up being the same BR as the German one despite being objectively worse.
Outside of copy/paste, there’s plenty of vehicles that are at a stupid BR because of player stats. The Char 25t is 8.0 entirely because it can flank things with autoloading APHE. The Object 906 is at the same BR, has the same reload, has higher penning APHE (admittedly with less pen, but 77 is still perfectly fine when 8.0 tanks are as cramped as they are), is a bit faster, gets HEATFS that allows it to engage tanks head on with ease (something the Char 25t can’t do), AND is fully stabilized. The 906 is objectively better than the Char 25t, but because of player statistics, they’re at the same BR.
I fundamentally disagree that player stats should be the primary basis for balancing vehicles in this game. I don’t think it should be ignored completely, but it shouldn’t be taken as gospel. If we’re balancing vehicles primarily based on player stats, than most of the German tanks in the game should go down in BR because Germany has poor win rates. If we’re balancing based on player stats, then Gaijin should follow through on their threat to increase the battle rating of the T20, a tank with a 76 and no armor, to 6.7. Is the T20 equivalent or even superior to the M26? I REALLY don’t think so, but according to Gaijin’s comments on the last round of BR changes, player stats disagree.
Based on actual in game performance, the T25 has comparable armor protection and firepower to the T1E1 (90), but has noticeably worse mobility. So why is the T25 so much higher? The M36 has the same firepower and better mobility, but it can be overpressured quite easily. Apparently not being able to be overpressured at the cost of being sluggish as hell is worth a full 1.0 BR increase. That same logic is not applied to T20 vs M18, with T20 having better armor than M18 (still not good, but you won’t get overpressured or machine gunned), gets a stabilizer, and it’s still pretty quick.
Quite literally the only reason the T25 is 6.3 is because of the player stats of a few good players holding it up after gaijin moved it up to 6.3, then nerfed it into the ground, and left it to rot. Out of the four vehicles you provided stats for, the only one that has fewer players is the ST-A2, which is also foldered, but is in a minor nation’s tree. Compare the T25’s 96,000 games played to the STP’s 522,000. If your counterargument to “only good players are playing it” is that good players only ever play what’s meta and good, then why is no one playing the supposedly T25? It’s not meta, and it’s not good. It COULD be meta if Gaijin would fix the transmission, but they won’t do that. It WAS meta back when it still had the correct transmission model and stabilizer, but it lost both of those.
If we’re both in agreement that M26 shouldn’t be 6.7 (which I assume means you’d agree that with current levels of BR compression, it should be 6.3), then why should the T25 which has worse armor and worse mobility be at the same BR?
1 Like
I mean… yea it probably would end up near there if people on this forum got what they asked for.
AIM-120c5 on a F-14d would put it stupid high. people already whine about it being where it is with what it currently have
F-14D never carried AIM-120 let alone c5s. I want a puff on whatever the people who think that are smoking.
1 Like
suggestion: Unfolder the M247/imp. chapraral and put the chaparral before the m247. Or reverse their order in the folder. It’s weird having a 9.0 vehicle behind a (soon to be) 10.0 vehicle.
1 Like
I know. but people seem to think it did, and because C-5 was around from 2000 theres a few years of overlap of tomcat to c5
This place is generally not one for actually wanting accuracy when their toys arent the OP oppressors they wish really is it?
Of course they put the t90m below everything else genuine brainrot
1 Like
The closest it ever got was a modified F-14A testing an AIM 120. But it was a test and never on the F-14D. As much as I like the “what if” scenario in this case it’s BS.
1 Like
M44 and M55 exist to counter this thing, most nations have it or something similar
1 Like
careful. clueless freeaboos will crucify you for saying that
1 Like
And these 2 Satan spawn can also join the KV-1B/E at 4.3 or even higher tbh
5 Likes
I mean, everyone has bias whether we are aware of it or not. Everyone likes to think their nations tech is the best, even if that isn’t true.
I’ve certainly been guilty of it.
1 Like
T-90 is garbage so what do you expect lol
There is nothing in the world that can make horrible firepower, internal layout, reload, shell gun depression and mobility somehow good
1 Like
I’m not really biased to a nation, but I’m rather biased to the whole WW2 era.
F/A-18E/F should stay at 14.3
1 Like
No lol
F-18E should go up, Su-27SM should go up and Mirage 2K with MICAs should go up
2 Likes
Maybe because the T-90M is simply a meh-mid tank in game?
1 Like
wouldnt this affect most spaa ir missiles too?
would explain why strela is so much more flare resistant than the rest. its a small fov by default while others have shrinking fov.
MICAs are not what they once were. Now that most fox threes can turn well enough, the playstyle the MICA allowed for is no longer unique. I’m even at the point where I believe the Rafale should stay 14.7, it’s radar is worse than the EF-2000, J-15, J-16, Su-30SM2 and even GE. The MICAs have abysmal range, its basically useless unless you can sneak up one someone.
Coming from the owner of an F-2000A (AESA), Su-30SM2, F-15C GE and of course Rafale C F3
I have found playing as many nations as possible very humbling.