Planned Battle Rating changes (table updated 04.08.2023)

Official News, Development Blogs and Updates
664

Do you really want a tank with 80mm of penetration to face Tiger H1s, M4A2 (76)Ws, M4A3E2s and even Tiger Es, Panther As, Panther Gs, M4A3 (76)Ws?

KV-1E has good armor, but that’s it. It has miserable firepower first found at 3.3 which is extremely lacking in uptiers 4.7 and let alone 5.0 uptiers already.

KV-1E is a tank that is as difficult to kill, as it is to kill with it. Uptier it, and you will have a tank that can’t kill anything, yet its armor advantage is negated.

KV-1B’s situation is different though, since most of the guns that can pen it with ease are on its team.

2 Likes
665

you understand that the BR change is across the board right? all 7.7 vehicles are being moved to 8.0. All previous 8.0 vehicles are being changed to 8.3 and all 8.3’s to 8.7 and so on. Nothing is changing, you just wont be seal clubbing WW2 era vehicles anymore and you wont have to worry about being uptiered against 7.7 M60’s while you use a king tiger.

1 Like
666

This looks great, but please rearrange everything so that we don’t have to research a vehicle of a higher BR before we can research a vehicle of a lower BR.

An example: In the Italian tree you would have to research the 9.3 Centauro R before you could research the 9.0 VCC-80/60. Similar issues likely pop up in all trees, though I only checked the Italian and German ones.

1 Like
667

I think this will be a positive change. As someone who only really cares to play WWII (and some post-war) vehicles I’ve avoided anything above BR 6.0 in GRB for a while because uptiers were not enjoyable. Now most of the ATGM and HEAT-FS vehicles are further away in BR there is less chance to see them in late war heavy tanks.

I can see that this will worsen compression in the upper end of that BR range, but I assume there will be more BR change updates to decompress that range later.

668

i think its a massive negative because it compressed more than it decompressed

1 Like
669

I do not approve of these BR changes unless the developers also realize that they are just moving the compression problem from one BR bracket to another . You are fixing one part of the BR being compressed and causing problems further up the road for other vehicles .

While I understand that the intention is to alleviate issues at that specific tier, I would like to suggest a more comprehensive approach to address the problem effectively.

The compression of battle ratings is a concern that affects not just a single tier of vehicles but can potentially impact the entire ground forces tree. By merely moving the compression issue further up the tree, it postpones the problem rather than truly resolving it. To achieve a sustainable and balanced gameplay experience, I believe it is essential to increase the maximum battle rating of the entire ground forces tree to at least 12.3 or possibly 13.

Here are some key reasons why this approach is preferable:

  1. Long-term Solution: Increasing the maximum battle rating for the entire ground forces tree provides a long-term solution to the compression problem. It allows for more flexibility in matchmaking and ensures that as players progress through the game, the battles will still remain diverse and challenging. This will also open up room for new vehicle additions to be added to the game without the need for the developers to do further BR changes down the road again.
  2. Player Retention: The compression of battle ratings can lead to frustration among players, especially at higher tiers, where the variety of vehicles and gameplay experience is limited. By decompressing the battle ratings, players are more likely to stay engaged with the game and continue progressing through the tech tree.
  3. Balanced Matchmaking: A wider range of battle ratings allows for more balanced matchmaking. Players will have a better chance of encountering opponents and allies with similar vehicle capabilities, leading to more exciting and fair battles.
  4. Incentive for Vehicle Diversity: With a decompressed battle rating system, players are encouraged to explore a broader range of vehicles across different tiers. It enhances the appeal of various vehicles and reduces the likelihood of players gravitating towards a few overpowered options.
  5. Positive Player Feedback: Addressing the compression issue and increasing the maximum battle rating demonstrates a commitment to improving the overall gameplay experience. This can lead to positive feedback from the player community and foster a more dedicated and satisfied player base.

I sincerely believe that a comprehensive approach to decompress the battle ratings by increasing the maximum battle rating for the entire ground forces tree will significantly enhance the game’s overall balance and enjoyment. It ensures that players at all tiers have meaningful and engaging battles, promoting diversity in vehicle choices and overall experience within the game.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I hope that you will carefully consider this suggestion to create a more enjoyable and dynamic experience for War Thunder players.

P.S Please remove scout and strike drones from the game, they do not belong in the game and offer a cheap advantage that limits the over all game-play and tactics people can employ within the game.

6 Likes
670

I think that both of the amx 30b2 should stay at 8.3 for now.
The brenus already was at 8.7 for a long time. Back then the Brenus was unpopular because it was under performing and it also had no lineup.
What would be different really now ?
That thing still has no stabiliser and at 8.7 france barely has anything.
It would not be really useable as a backup at 9.3.
In the end, the Brenus would end up being useless again.

1 Like
671

but I assume there will be more BR change updates to decompress that range later.

673

Of course the 2S38 is staying while PUMA is moving up

2 Likes
674

The STB-1 should not be going to 8.0, 8.3, or anywhere near those BRs.
It lacks thermals. Its main round is only APDS since the Heatfs were removed for whatever reason which personally I’m still annoyed with since it didn’t make sense to do so.

The Type-74s are good but when you compare the performance of these vehicles to what they’re gonna encounter it just isn’t gonna be able to perform as well. Some players may perform well in it but that really shouldn’t determine a vehicle’s actual performance which seems to be the case for years nearly a decade or longer it’s been like that.

Anyway, that’s really my only nitpick on the planned br changes.

1 Like
675

then the lower brs should have been secondary it causes less problems decompressing from the top down

676

Just play one of the other two Leopard 1 in the game

677

Does it? To decompress from the top down you need to know how far up to push max BR. If you start from where compression starts being a problem (as they have) you can push things up, wait to see if it was positive, and then move up the range. When you reach the end the max BR will be whatever it lands on.

If instead they made the max BR 13.0 (for example, no idea what it should be) they are limited in what changes they can make as they move down and might need to redo BR changes many times.

Whatever they chose to do would cause upset and complaints. Long term it will be good for the game and I’m glad they are tackling it for the BR range I play.

1 Like
678

While maybe 4.7 is maybe a bit of a stretch, it should definitly not be 4.0, that is far far to low of a BR for its performance. While there suddenly will be more guns that can deal with it if its BR is increased.

As it stands currently at its own BR or even those that at just at the BR below it (3.7), then of tanks that are not Tank Destroyers, there is only really the Pz IV that can to some extend reliably deal with it, in regards to its cannon. If we include tank destroyers, then it is probably not more that a couple of handfull of the total amout of vehicles it can face that can do anything agains it.

That is if it is even possible to aim a weakpoints, because many times they have bushes that cover their turret & hull, so you have to guess of where to aim. At the same time, it also have decently good mobility of that heavily armored tank, and are probably moving, so you have to constantly move your aim for the weakpoint.

If i really have to highlight, of how few tanks that can deal with it, then i would say they need around 140mm pen either AP or APHE, to be able to deal with it reliably.

Currently at the following BR or below this is the amount of all tanks that deal with the KV-1E/B:

BR 3.0, Total tanks: 5
  • USA: 0
  • DEU: 2
  • RUS: 2
  • GBR: 1
  • JPN: 0
  • CHN: 0
  • ITA: 0
  • FRA: 0
  • SWE: 0
BR 3.3, Total tanks: 13
  • USA: 1
  • DEU: 5
  • RUS: 2
  • GBR: 2
  • JPN: 1
  • CHN: 1
  • ITA: 0
  • FRA: 1
  • SWE: 0
BR 3.7, Total tanks: 19
  • USA: 1
  • DEU: 8
  • RUS: 3
  • GBR: 2
  • JPN: 1
  • CHN: 1
  • ITA: 2
  • FRA: 2
  • SWE: 4
BR 4.0, Total tanks: 26
  • USA: 1
  • DEU:10
  • RUS: 3
  • GBR: 2
  • JPN: 1
  • CHN: 1
  • ITA: 2
  • FRA: 2
  • SWE: 4
BR 4.3, Total tanks: 32
  • USA: 1
  • DEU:13
  • RUS: 5
  • GBR: 3
  • JPN: 1
  • CHN: 1
  • ITA: 2
  • FRA: 2
  • SWE: 4
BR 4.7, Total tanks: 44
  • USA: 2
  • DEU:13
  • RUS: 8
  • GBR: 5
  • JPN: 3
  • CHN: 2
  • ITA: 5
  • FRA: 2
  • SWE: 4
BR 5.0, Total tanks: 54
  • USA: 4
  • DEU:14
  • RUS: 9
  • GBR: 5
  • JPN: 4
  • CHN: 3
  • ITA: 6
  • FRA: 3
  • SWE: 6
BR 5.3, Total tanks: 71
  • USA: 6
  • DEU:18
  • RUS: 13
  • GBR: 7
  • JPN: 4
  • CHN: 5
  • ITA: 6
  • FRA: 4
  • SWE: 8

And outside of Germany with their Pz IV (4 of the total for germany), then most of these tanks are not what people would go in as first or even second choice either because they are too low of a BR for people to put into their lineup or for a lot of the Tank Destroyers, they have no turret and are very lightly armored, so most people would not go into close quarters to deal with them to deal with the KV-1E/B. At the same time they would need to take time to aim for weak spots, where the KV-1E/B will just be able to shoot anywhere and be able to kill them.

Probably the best argument for it to go to 4.3, is that is alreay at 4.3 in AB & SB, and for AB people are able to see where and if they can penetrate it, but it is still a higher BR than RB, that just shows how effective the armor is.

And to counter the argument of it only having 88mm pen, and not being able to fight Tiger H1 or M4A3E2. As every Jumbo player loves to say, aim for the MG port, because the 88mm is enough to go through it. In regards to the tiger, it will not be able to deal with it frontally, the only way is if it can get onto the side of it, but if we take onto the flipside of it the Churchill I with 89mm pen, cannot pen the KV-1E/B anywhere, even if it somehow gets it flank. Or taking the 75mm gun that is on the Shermans, with either APHE or its APCR it needs to aim really precise shots on the driver port or very small spots on the turret to go through the front of the tank.

So to sum it up, there is so few tanks in the tech tree at the BR of the KV-1E/B that can actually deal with them, therfore they nearly have no enemies that they need to worry about. And those that can deal with them are either nearly not used and/or easily dealt whit by the KV-1E/B.

1 Like
679

The T-62M-1 legit has no business in BR 9.0
The APFSDS spalling is bad, the ATGM after rework is janky, HEATFS post pen is terrible
The mobility is literally every russian tanks ever and the composite armour not even guarantee to block any shots at around 9.0 - 9.7
Theres NO thermal on this tank either and in the next few weeks, its gonna fight a merkava mk 2D that HAS everything better than itself at 9.7

even with a slightly better reload rate, a full uptier in this tank will faces actual MBT at 10.0, its not worth it

680

If the goal is to decompress BRs then moving things up in BR will only compress the upper BRs more, and doesn’t solve the issue. In order to decompress we need more BRs, or reduce BR spread in the matchmaker, or both.

In RB change.
R2Y2 Kai v1 from 8.0 to 7.3
R2Y2 Kai v2 from 8.0 to 7.3
R2Y2 Kai v3 from 8.0 to 7.3
The capabilities of these aircraft are similar to the F3D at 7.0, but they don’t get an air spawn like the F3D does. They are WW2 tech, and with their excessively high BR they are rarely used.

Ki 200 from 8.7 to 7.7
Me 163 B from 8.0 to 7.7
Me163 B-0 from 8.7 to 8.0
These aircraft are WW2 tech at the same BR as Sabers and Mig 15’s and can fight Mig 21’s and F104’s, at least in case of the Ki 200 and Me163 B-0. They are unique rocket powered aircraft that have very limited fuel and can’t remain in the fight for very long, unlike what they fight against. These vehicles are rarely used due to their excessively high BR.

F3H-2 from 9.3 to 9.0
This aircraft is a subsonic jet without countermeasures. it is incapable of countering the more advanced missiles like the R60 and R60M it constantly faces, and it’s missile armament is inadequate for what it faces.

7 Likes
682

Yes, the 2S38 is set to “click and delete” everything…even jets flying at supersonic speeds. I agree it needs to be moved up. It seems like Gaijin keeps the OP premiums at initial poor BRs for quite some time.

Yes please… move it up.

2 Likes
683

If you get hit by a 2S38 it means they have godly aim or you were going straight within 4km of them.
It’s not OP, just fire an arrow at it.

684

PUMA need Spike

686

Chinese helicopter will receive a BR rise again. It’s necessary to do something such as:
Z9W: Add HJ-8L
Z9WA：Add AKD-9 and target track function
Z9WA with AKD-9: The Z-9WA should have AKD-9 capacity - Already Reported & Resolved - War Thunder - Official Forum
Z9WA IRST: Gaijin.net // Issues
I know both Z9s have powerful air to air capability, but their air to ground capability is much worse than other helicopters in the same br. HJ-8C has the shortest range and the second worst penetration in 9.7. HJ-8H has the worst range and penetration in 10.0. Even the AKD-9 in 10.0/10.3 would not be a good ATGM. No need to mention Z9’s poor pylon number.

5 Likes