The dude I replied to said he continued to hope for something universally positive. That simply isn’t possible. Sure, there are problems, and there always will be. My point is literally there will always be problems for someone, so expecting a problem-free balance patch is stupid.
1 Like
yes this is what i’m talking about, i agree with that
I am gonna point out one exception, Hunter F58 deserve 10.0 minimum
A-4N as well.
It is just bs that F.58 have same BR with British F.6.
Milan together with mirage 3C should probably go up as well.
And more importantly F8U, I really don’t see why it is staying at 10.0
Why? Both got ZERO chances against T-2 9.7 or Mig-19 9.3
1 Like
“Strong” A-7D with “all-aspect” AIM-9J at 10.3 😂
“Even stronger” A-7E with “all-aspect” AIM-9G at 10.7.
“Strongest American strike aircraft” A-7K with AIM-9L 11.3
“Weak” F-8U 10.0 🤣
2 Likes
Good luck when they fire missile from your tail.
Also for the hunter F58, that thing reliably beats Mirage3C, if in a dogfight.
Luck? Both can evade 20G missiles or use unguided rockets as flares.
AIM-9G is not even a problem.
Kind of a hot take, but ground strike aircraft should not be effective in an air superiority fighter role. You wouldn’t complain about Sergeant York, highly specialized anti-air vehicle, not being able to take on contemporary MBTs, now would you?
1 Like
Mirage2000d should not be at 12.3 but 12.0
1 Like
Uuhhhhh??? what’s the point again?
Trying to seek a reason for some of those changes is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. All we can do is express our POV of those changes, how we feel about them and pray that devs will take them into account with next BR changes
But the most dangerous enemies they could’ve faced have now been moved up, so why not move them to 9.7? It’;; benefit everyone.
The hunter has the flight performance of a 9.0, and it is only good because of 2 missiles. It going up would make it useless.
The MiG-19 and F-104A/C deserve higher BRs, their speed and acceleration alone is way too big advantages at 9.3
It wasn’t OK then, and isn’t OK now.
Preventing situations like this is the very reason why so many demanded a battlerating decompression in the first place.
To me it seems like a waste of a decompression if all that comes of it is an even increase of every BR by the same 0.7, leaving problematic aircraft like the F-4C and F-4F Early in the same situation as before.
I wish it would be no higher than 10.3 BR at the very least, or even better: change the model to F-4B / F-4D and add countermeasures.
2 Likes
Tornado Changes are not good.
General feedback was that IDS-Tornados with guided bombs should be the same as the ones with dumb bombs, as their Air to air capabilities are the same:
Tornado IDS (1995)
Tornado GR.1
Tornado IDS ASSTA1
→ now at 11.7, were 11.3
should be the same BR in AirRB as:
Tornado IDS MFG
Tornado IDS WTD61
→ now at 11.3, were 11.0
But no. Instead of lowering the BRs of those 3 they now increased the ones with SAHR missiles.
Tornado F.3
Tornado ADV
→ now at 12.0, were 11.3 and were supposed to increase to 11.7.
The OPPOSITE of what was asked and given as feedback.
Ridiculous. The IDS Tornados are THE SAME in AirRB.
What use are the split BRs if they still ‘balance’ the planes in AirRB by guided munitions.
2 Likes
Under no circumstance should the F.3 and ADV be at a lower BR than the F-4J/S and Spey Phantoms. The IDS and GR.1 are gonna be fine at 11.7, considering they are actually meeting less modern jets now.
Why su-25sm3 at 12.3?!
Su-25t has a significantly better turn rate, 4 AAMs, DIRCM and better AIR-ground performance.
Su-25T can fight Gripen or F-16A and win, Su-25SM can’t do anything to less manueverable F-16C.
Why su-25sm3 have higher BR?
hey, you guys forgot the F104J 10.3 → 10.7, pls fix asap