Which is crazy because in desert storm even when friendly fire happened the brads were VERY survivable.
If not all IFVs should completely avoid battle rating 9.7 with a very few exceptions like SPz Puma and BMP-2M for obvious reasons. At battle rating 9.7 most vehicles with an autocannon as main weapon and an anti-tank missile as support. Examples like the:
- Type 25 RCV (P), similar to the M1296 both in weapons, size, flaws and capabilities, only the M1296 recieved a battle rating decrease.
- Type 24 ICV (P), again, similar to the M1296 both in weapons, size, flaws and capabilities, only the M1296 recieved battle rating decrease.
- VBCI-2 (MCT30), again, same reasons as previous, no battle rating change despite the support and obvious reason of poor performance of AFVs that doesn’t support or doesn’t have proper anti-tank weapons like missiles and cannons:
These were the three vehicles I tried to push forward in the latest planned battle rating changes without sucess. M3A3 Bradley could have its battle rating decreased, though I don’t see why, however if it’s changed, I would support if more vehicles went the same threatment and I don’t like how only the M1296 was the only vehicle positively affected by the battle rating changes and I think it’s not a positive thing to put eyes to one vehicle, the M3A3 Bradley while countless others is in the same if not worse situation because is less popular.
TOW-2B is inconsistent because it’s a HEAT warhead in-game, with very low penetration numbers, might be not accurate to the real life counterpart, but I don’t think it’s enough of a reason to move lower in battle rating a IFV decently armoured, with a decent autocannon and effective alternative missiles—the TOW-2A which is more consistent with damage specially against spaced, composite and explosive reactive armor because of the tandem-charge warhead. Personally I don’t think the M3A3 Bradley should be lowered even more.
1 Like
The opposite. All the other 30 and 35mm autocannon vehicles at 9.0-9.7 should be downa br. Nearly none of them are competitive and, without the capability to engage air with prox, they are just bad. That would put the bagel in its correct ranking with vehicles around its br.
1 Like
As you said yourself, gaijin won’t do anything to TOW-2B damage nor they will move it to 9.3 also they gather suggestions for BR changes in respective topics where they announce upcoming BR changes. Bushmaster is an anysmal gun, TOWs are abysmal ATGMs, Bradley M3A3 itself has a bad mobility. So yeah, just don’t paly it, it was very constructive indeed.
No no it wasn’t like at all…
Telling people to play something else isn’t a solution
1 Like
Begleitpanzer has an incredibly good cannon with a mid ATGM for finishing off crippled targets, bradley has a very mid cannon with a better but still mid ATGM.
Begleit is also more mobile, has a better profile, and has HEVT.
Jaguar 2 is at 8.7 with the same missiles as the M3A3 while also being faster, Having faster reverse (70 km/h vs the M3’s 15 km/h) and gets more missiles to top it off (14+ ammo box vs M3’s 12)
Also in their current state, I-TOW’s are unironically better than TOW 2B’s.
The bagel is also significantly more versatile with the ammo options it gets, And is also way more mobile.
2 Likes
“Solution” do you or any player has ability to change the game? No? What comes to the developers side we established everything in my previous message, part of which author established himself. Now tell me, what EXACTLY are you planning to do ON bradley while not being able to do ANYTHING about core issues?
Did anyone ask for your replies? No. Similarly everyone has the right to complain about the game, forum exists so that the devs can hear the player’s voices.
It costs nothing to be nice to people.
1 Like
Yes
You are replying like I tried to silence or invalidate anybody, which I didn’t.
Where I was “not nice” lmao
You’re indeed trying to silence him.
This is clearly discouraging him from trying to bring up solutions.
1 Like
Because there is no solutions beyond asking devs, for that, I even gave a practical advise of providing BR suggestion during the next BR changes blog, where Gaijin collect suggestions. Other than that it is genuinely pointless to make topics/suggestions because it won’t reach Gaijin’s devteam and will only result in him being frustrated in a long run.
Unless major HEAT damage overhaul is coming, nothing will be done to TOW2B individually damage vise.
Both are true, but the Begleit is wildly more effective than vehicles like the CV9040B at 9.7 and, to an extent, still outperforms the CV9040 BILL. I would even go far enough to say it is arguably better than the Puma. Even though it theoretically lacks protection, its configuration can often prevent easy kills on it in certain circumstances. The hull can be fairly bouncy at times, while the turret’s shape can prove difficult to do meaningful critical damage to. There have been many times when they sit hull down, and I’m forced to fire several APFSDS, or even HE shells at the turret, with spall simply not hitting where it needs to.
Mostly luck, and Gaijin did a few tweaks. The problem is that even if they are "one-shotting, " most IFVs with them are limited to only 4. If you can’t get to a cap, that’s at most 4 kills if each missile performs well, which they usually don’t, while other missiles are typically found in larger quantities and aren’t restricted to 600+ meters. Another thing to note is Spike ATGMs can’t be used if there’s any destroyed tank between you and your target, as the heat signature will almost entirely hijack it.
1 Like
Meanwhile in real life: