f-104s ASA
I was about to add that lol.
But yeah that’s what I mean.
Did they spin this to decide which 8.0s to burn?
M41D
Obj. 906
TO-55
AUBL 74 HVG
Should all remain the brs they are now tbh.
Aubl needs a buff to go up in br at all. It’s so bad to play
2 Likes
yeah that plane needs love too, big time. the thing with the mig 21 is that it is not super fast nor can it dogfight well in 13.3 games, or compete with missles, the R27 + R73 combo is nice but without a capable radar its lacking the ability to do BVR or even close end dog fighting, exept with the R73 which get one flared 90% of the time. AIM9Ms are better and would fit well on an f104 along with aim7-F/M. no idea if that is historical however, but with the aim7 buffs i thing even the older aim7s would do well on that air-frame
I don’t think it ever had the F/M or the AIM-9M but according to this it did have the L/1 which would be a nice improvement.
The bison is a jet I really wanted to pick up during the sales but I ultimately went against it for the reasons you listed.
Yeah, the 6 second reload for that little damage is not 8.3 worthy, AT ALL.
the L1 would be huge for the ASA, as well as a stricter match maker, and the bison is ok when not up teird, i have a 1.5kd in it so far at 165 kills or so, its painful seeing SU30s and fox 3 at 12.3, same with you and the F15A i assume, its coughing baby VS atomic bomb somtimes
1 Like
Sd. kfz. 234/2
Sd. kfz. 234/2 TD
and
Sd. kfz. 234/2 Biene
- Rank : Rank II → Rank III
- Ground Realistic Battle: BR: 3.7 → BR: 4.0 or 4.3
Reasoning:
The Sd.Kfz. 234/2 is a German light tank that is utilized across a wide BR range from 3.7 to 6.0. In GRB, situations in which the presence or absence of an Sd.Kfz. 234/2 on the team decides the outcome of the match are extremely common.
On flat ground, it can move forward and reverse at 90 km/h, and even on rough terrain it can still exceed 55 km/h. The hull is large and the armor is thin, but these drawbacks are more than compensated by its outstanding mobility.
By launching surprise attacks from unexpected directions and then vanishing with smoke, it can turn a losing match around.
This potential remains effective even at BR 6.0. It possesses performance equivalent to Rank 3 vehicles at BR 4.0–4.7. At its current BR of 3.7, it is effectively OP.
2 Likes
Great suggestions (if you read through all that text xD)!
1 Like
I would say, with its current attributes (like the buffed gun handling), it’s similar in performance to the M24, maybe slightly better in some cases, maybe slightly worse. It should probably go to 4.0. I’m not really sure if 4.3 is justifable though.
1 Like
Vehicle: AA (Anti-Aircraft) units.
Battle Rating: The maximum BR for anti-aircraft units should be aligned with the maximum BR for aircraft in ground battles.
Reasoning: AA units are not sufficiently affected by BR decompression. When placed at the top of a 1.0 BR spread, their technical superiority completely overwhelms the capabilities of the aircraft they face.
Vehicle: XM803
Battle Rating: 9.0 → 9.3
Reasoning: General BR decompression, in line with other vehicles of similar technical specifications.
Vehicle: All ATGM-equipped units.
Change: Reload time.
Standardize manual reloading based on the number of launchers being reloaded. Currently, this parameter is in a state of complete and utter disarray.
Vehicle: Boxer MGS and CT-CV 105HP
Change: Reload time 7.5 → 5
In the latest patch, their reload times were increased (slowed down) without any explanation—even though these vehicles do not possess any other particularly impressive characteristics compared to their counterparts.
2 Likes
ok let me explain: if the gepard was slow it would be terrible. 35mm SPAA are only as good as they are because they’re fast (or they’re the chieftain marksman, which is slower than all of them but not different enough to be tiered differently). This is something I’m translating from other games because it’s an easy comparison to make. The Olifant’s mobility, on a pure comparison with other vehicles mobility in the BR, is subpar at best. However, because it has a laser rangefinder and a VERY potent gun, the mobility relative to the firepower of the BR is quite comparable. You might question why this is a big deal, but when a gun is potent enough that it doesn’t need the most perfect position to be effective, your pure mobility doesn’t matter as much because it’s an easier position to get to. I’m not explaining this point very well, but if you gave Heavy from Team Fortress 2 the mobility of a Scout, yeah that’s broken.
But to answer your question, no, the T58 does not have leopard level mobility relative to its gun. I’d put it closer to a Tiger, except with way dumber volumetric.
All top-tier tanks are moving to 13.3, dragging the 12.3 ones along with them due to the matchmaking (MM) system. Can anyone guess which tanks—absurd, fantastical, and unbalanced—are going to remain at 12.0? The BMPTs.
Nice work gaijin, like allways (this its getting reaaalyy old).
1 Like
What makes you think the obj. 906 should stay at 8.0? This thing seems very strong and I hate playing against it, especially in an up-tier.
Its pros:
-4.3 second auto-loader
-HEAT w/ 300mm pen
-Good APCBC round
-Revers gear box
-good mobility
-ESS
-Amphibious (doesn’t mean much but it still counts)
Against:
-A technically small crew of three (losing a crew member doesn’t matter tho, thanks to the autoloader)
-Bad armor
-Standard soviet gun depression
This thing should absolutely go up to 8.3
3 Likes
In Open plains it will almost certainly overtake the M24, and even on terrain with a lot of slopes it’s nearly equal.
Even if the front driver is knocked out, the rear driver is still there, letting it quickly get out of critical situations.
On the other hand the M24 has a .50 cal and a stabilizer 👍
1 Like
Lvtgdb m/40 (Luftvärnterrängdragbil m/40)
- RB: 2.7 → 3.0
- SB: 2.7 → 3.0
Correct the vehicle’s historical inaccuracies regarding its designation, visual model and maximum speed.
- Rename: Lvtdgb m/40 → Lvtgdb m/40
- Correct: Sights to match the real vehicle
- Correct: Rear plate behind the cargo bed to its proper angled shape
- Increase: Maximum speed from 44.3 km/h to 60 km/h
The Lvtgdb m/40 was based on the Tgdbil m/40, and its designation should reflect its correct Swedish military nomenclature. The currently modelled sights do not match available photographs of the vehicle, while the rear plate behind the cargo bed should be angled rather than vertical.
The vehicle’s maximum speed is also incorrectly represented. The official vehicle catalogue lists a maximum sustained speed (max marschhastighet ) of 60 km/h for the Tgdbil m/40, on which the Lvtgdb m/40 was based, compared to the 44.3 km/h currently available in-game.
The original truck was already really heavy, They removed almost 70% of the vehicle and mounted the gun instead. So the “Lvtdgb m/40” Would have a similar Top speed
Correcting the designation and visual model would improve historical accuracy, while increasing the maximum speed would improve the vehicle’s mobility and ability to reposition.
Tgdbil m/40 “Volvo TVB” What the “Lvtdgb m/40” is based on:
Sammanfattning
Bug reports:
Lvtdgb m/40 has incorrect sights. (Model)
Modeling error on Lvtdgb m/40
Lvtdgb m/40 max speed is too low
See post for more details:
3 Likes
I’m just saying that putting an AA gun on the back of a 1930s/40s truck would probably decrease the top speed.
the BMPTs are now 11.7 they moving up 0.3, the same with most of the vehicles that are moving up 0.3-0.4. The Pantsir is a joke at 12.3…
4 Likes
S1 absolutely needs to move up to 12.7!
4 Likes
The original truck was already really heavy, They removed almost 70% of the vehicle and mounted the gun instead.
2 Likes
fair enough
however
I’m biased against guntrucks and do not think it deserves to have historically accurate mobility
also the misdesignation is almost certainly a typo because it took me a good 30 seconds of reading your post to see where the difference was (should still be fixed tho)
2 Likes