oh yea is6 need 7.7br and t29 7.0… Just look at pen is6 + if u pen is6 in front he die instantly
1 Like
Since almost nobody is talking about naval, excuse me for posting the same thing again. I just need the mods to pay attention to this.
Invincible and Colossus going down are good changes in my opinion, but Dreadnought going down is NOT. No fully armored battleship, however poor, deserves 6.0 right now. Even some 5.3 ships already have little chance against a battleship, let alone any 5.0 ships. Please don’t go forward with this particular change.
3 Likes
we need decompression in naval its so compressed is the reason i don’t play anything 6.0+
1 Like
Yeah. But decompression is completely Gaijin’s decision. Experience has shown that pushing them for decompression just doesn’t work. We’ve been pushing for decompression in all modes since the beginning of the game. They decompress when they want to, not when the community wants it, sadly.
German 7.3 pretty much dominate everything, especially the leopard 1. Moving it to 8.0 is equivalent to 7.7 before all the decompression… and even when it was 7.7 it was already very good before the massive nerfs to other nation’s MBTs such as the STB and Centurions, and Leopard being moved to 7.3 to rub salt in their wounds.
If you think the leopard shouldn’t move up to 8.0, I suggest you play other nation’s MBTs such as the Centurions, AMX 30s , M48, STBs, etc and see how much worse they are than the Leopard.
1 Like
AMX 13 is quite lackluster… it’s not much better than the M41s and being at 6.7 instead of 6.0. It’s fine where it is. ELC could go up though, if it gets its weight fixed.
what should its weight be on elc and there have been times ive thought the amx13 shouldn’t be higher than 6.3 the 5sec reload carries it really really hard
Suggestion:
1.Type 16(FPS) :9.0-9.3 with type 93 APFSDS added
since M1128 WP can get m900 why this can’t receive type 93 apfsds as well?I think it’s necessary both for balance and for history,for balance,wheels under 9.0 won’t like to see full protected type 16.For history,there’s no any Type 16 called FPS and the in-game camo troops never used m735.
2.EBR(1963):remain 7.3
almost every recent BR change the EBR family never succeed in running away from being raised,current BR has already pressed their peoformance to limit,I really can’t see any necessarity for EBR to be raised again.
2 Likes
Amx 13 (FL 11) 4.0 → 3.7 it is no better than the amx13 (m24) at 3.7 and lacks a stabilizer
Ebr 75 (FL 11) 1951 5.3 → 5.0 or lower, gun is very lack luster for the br and the chassis doesn’t make up for it
4 Likes
Jagdpanzer IV should go to at least 4.7 it’s far to strong against 3.3’s which the majority of which cannot actually penetrate the TD frontally, 3.7’s also struggle with that whilst the Jagdpanzer can sit anywhere and one shot back, atleast if it gets downtiered to 3.7 there is more capable vehicles at engaging it although the Jagdpanzer iv is still heavily favoured to win.
Jumbo 75mm should go down in br, at least make it so it can’t fight the Tiger 2. Same thing goes for the Jumbo 76 go down to 6.0 there is not much of a reason to play it at 6.3 when your medium tanks have 90mm’s in comparison (unless your a masochist)
The Japanese STA’s and Type 61 should be atleast 7.0 minimum they’re very strong at their current br and can easily hold their own against anything in uptiers your only main problem then is you won’t really have anything in 6.0-6.7 range but that’s the price you pay for a nation that doesn’t have the tanks really for that era unless you add more blueprint vehicles like the Ho Ri or a sub tree that may or may not have vehicles for that br range.
2 Likes
i think the 75 is fine but the 76 should definitely go down to 6.0
I can see many good changes in this spread sheet. Here are my opinions of what I dissagree with.
AUBL/74 HVG - 7.7 → 7.7
Does not need to go up in BR, if anything ive argued for it to go down in the past or in this case to stay at 7.7. At least decrease it´s reload if it has to go up to get away from WW2 vehicles?
Pros
High pen
APFSDS
2 plane stabilizer up to around 55 km/h
Cons
Low to no postpen damage and very little spall. (practically have to hit directly to do anything)
60mm APDS → more like a 30-20mm AP damage.
Long reload for a weak post pen
No armor, but enough armor the spall (almost allways a onceshot)
Slow for a wheleed vehicle
its just outclassed by the 15 or so IFV that it is gonna be grouped with.
Warrior 8.0 → 8.0
It is probably the worst IFV in game at the moment and really struggles with its cannon, most kills come from the MILAN ATGMs. Imo it does not warrent to go up with the rest.
Type 93 9.0 → 9.0
This vehicles only has one thing going for it and that is that it is a fast scout car. But the fact that it has 10G missiles (planes get at 8.3) that are relatively slow and a all aspect lock range of just over 2km is ridiculous,k and now it´s gonna face 10.3 jets?
pros
Very fast
scouting
Thermals
Cons
Very fast
Breaksdown when hitting props and walls at high speed
no radar
laser rangefinder
No guns
no armor (does not spall but if you are hit your 3 crew in a line usually all die)
completly harmless to tanks/helicopters and relatively harmless to planes.
(Only SAM option for JAPN)
ZBD86 7.3 → 8.3
It is a better BMP-1 (USSR/GER) and deserves a higher BR since it has access to tandem-warhead ATGM:s. Tandem-warheads ignore ERA and makes a hugh diffrence against the ERA vehicles of the game.
Object 120 7.3 → 8.0
It got added at 8.0 and was perfectly fine there, it only did bad becuase new ppl bought it and did´t know how to use it. the fact that it still will be able to fight Tiger 2 after the change is dumb. It has a really good APFSDS shell and a great HEAT-FS shell. It´s a glass canon and is hard to play and that is ok even for a premium.
SIDAM 8.3 → 8.0
It is misisng radar and even NVG/thermal with a 1,6s burst of APDS belt (60/4 = 15 with 550 r/min) and a very weak engine it never deserved to go to 8.3 where it did´t have a lineup.
SIDAM Mistral The fact that adding 6 Mistrall to the sidam gave it a + 1.4 BR is ridiculous but we gotta wait and see with this BR change if it still needs to go down or if it´s in a good place then.
Overall it´s gonna be intresting to see how bellow 7.0 will do after this change. To me it looks like KT2 will do better without the massive amount of ATGMs from BMP1 everywhere so that is gonna be a nice change. Ive allways thought BMP1 was to low in BR.
7 Likes
how about just moving all the 10.3/10.7/11.0 and 8.7 one tier up, so i can buy the russian 10.0 premium t72av/2s38/su25k without hesitation since they will face less upper tier and more lower tier opponents.
1 Like
So they will nerf is-6 and buff t-29, another good move gaijin (sarcasm)
3 Likes
that has to be the dumbest shit i have ever heard lol
3 Likes
is6 has needed to go up for a while
2 Likes
So here is a comprasion B to D shell:
You are sniping with IS or fighting in close range? These few mm at high ranges at 60 deg. really means so much? BR-471D is just better because it is more usefull at IS gameplay, gg with using B version (Which is only available for IS-6 putting aside the stock BR-471). Btw we are talking btw about BR-471, not 412 because 412 is 100 mm shell.
And reload does not mean so much here, IS-3 or IS-6 still has to cover after a shoot to avoid getting its barrel destroyed because still its reload is long.
If you check armor analisys of IS-3 or IS-6 you will see some spots at IS-3 which for example Tiger II H should pen but it does not - only ends of frontal lower plate because there model of IS-3 is broken. Looking at IS-6s mantlet there is much bigger area of possible pen. Anyway both of IS’s hulls likes so much cumulative shells which are blowing them up because everywhere is an ammo and both of hulls makes equivalent of 200-220 mm of armor with theis slopes. IS-6 really has nothing better than IS-3 instead of mobility (which really do not change more in their gameplay). You talk about turret traverse… IS-3 turns turret 8,4 deg. per second and IS-6 - 11,6. But for example Tiger II H still turns it in 11,3 deg. per second. So in your opinion that’s why IS-6 is… “better”? I repeat my request to Gaijin to leave IS-6 at BR 7,0
And no, it is not explanation. 100 mm BR-412 and 122 mm BR-471 performs almost the same ballistic characteristics. And look at other nations reload rate. Tiger II H is still about 7-8 seconds
1 Like
Because?
1 Like
remove 1.0 Tier up or Down make it 0.4 up or down in all matches
this is not balancing the game , this is putting a bunch of rubbish tanks at a higher tier
mtb mtb mtb mtb leopard 1 leopard 1 leopard 1 leopard 1 leopard 1
i see what the future holds
missile carriers and 8 heavy tanks of the same vehicle
1 Like
because in 6.0s 6.3s and many 6.7s you can not pen is3 or is6 from the front and most heat is being moved up to 7.7+ aswell it is terrible balance to have a vehicle stuck in a position just because it simply cant pen a tank even when that tank is at the same br as you