While we’re here, we’d like to give some additional context behind Battle Ratings and how they’re decided. Battle Ratings are decided based on how much a vehicle earns, but this is not purely economical. We use this metric because it’s all encompassing and considers every action a player makes with their vehicle, so this considers frags, assists, caps, and effectively every useful action a vehicle can perform all bundled into one universal metric.
This is the “Efficiency” of each vehicle and gives us a very well rounded perspective on all of its abilities and how it’s actually being used.
If a vehicle has high efficiency, it’s outperforming its contemporaries in multiple ways the majority of times it spawns on the map, and as a result may have to be increased in Battle Rating. Whereas a vehicle with low efficiency is not performing well across the board against what it fights, and may be moved down. However this is not purely a data driven process, we often consider additional factors such as the volume of players using a certain vehicle, its lineup, new features that may be altering performance in different ways etc — and this often leads us to delay a change we otherwise would have made to gather more information. Even though we do primarily go by this efficiency metric, we aren’t bound by it, and spend a lot of time each Battle Rating cycle to look over feedback for different perspectives and elements we may not have initially considered.
Ultimately, it’s very hard to balance a vehicle in a vacuum. On paper an aircraft might have incredible speed, or a tank might have great penetration for its Battle Rating, but this is cold data, in the sense that just because a vehicle on the surface has a very impressive asset, it doesn’t mean that asset guarantees high performance. It’s more about how a vehicle is actually functioning in the game, rather than weighing up its assets in isolation. So efficiency is good data to be informed by as it considers everything and everyone.
We’d like to note that when balancing aircraft before the introduction of separate Battle Ratings by mode, in the vast majority of cases the Battle Rating was set according to the performance for Air Battles, and not Ground Battles. We understand that many of you wanted a Battle Rating reduction for strike aircraft in Air Battles, so we have some additional answers for you on this below.
Primarily is a direct contradiction of “sometimes”
Which again, goes into what I was saying.
Gaijin does cross-analysis of vehicles each time.
Sometimes there are errors [F-14A being over-BR’d now, and F-104S ASA being over-BR’d in general], that’s partly due to compression partly due to not thinking hard enough.
I can play the F-14A with 2 degrees less sustained turn at 12.0.
There’s zero reason to ever play the F-14A again when ALL 12.7s in the game are superior to it, and some 12.3s are superior to it.
Why do you just compare with 262? is it better than SU9 or Meteor?By the way 262 is a little bit faster than F80 and it’s high speed performance is better as well
Even if the top speed and high speed performance are slightly better, the 262 won’t ever reach it’s top speed unless it spends half the match climbing.
Yeah but it literally isn’t, the F-80 literally just tops out at a faster speed, period. The high speed performance thing is wishy washy at best because both don’t really suffer much at high speed but the 262 won’t turn nearly as well still, it will just retain energy decently which is the literal only claim it has to any dogfight, and the F-80 isn’t BAD at retaining energy either for this to be a large deficit
Nah, Gaijin always changes BR on player stats.
Gaijin collects player statistics to create their ‘efficiency’ chart.
and changes BR with that ‘efficiency’.
Simply,
Gaijin uses a pig (player stats) for making bacon (Efficiency) for bacon salad (Balancing BR)
You can’t say that “Gaijin is vegan-friendly! because they didn’t use pig in bacon salad! See the menu’s name, dummy!” Because They used in fact.
No. They aren’t.
They usually do ‘no cross-analysis’ between vehicles each time.
Here are some examples.
CL-13 Mk.4 is a Canadian F-86E with F-86A’s engine but no slats. IMO it should’ve tied with F-86A thanks to the weaker engine than F-86F-25, but Gaijin tied it up with F-86F-25. (on 8.3 currently.)
Maybe gaijin got dumbed by well-skilled Italian mains I guess :/
Phantom F.3 is a British-bought F-4J. Crippled and Gelded badly Thanks to cherry-picking and double-standarding things by gaijin.
unlike British-domestic FG.1/FGR.2, F.3 retains the same J79 engine from Americans. which provides a weaker thrust.
unlike the original F-4J/S, F.3 have a weaker RWR. because they got sold to the UK before refitting RWR.
unlike the original F-4J, VTAS HMS got removed for some reason before planes got shipped into UK.
unlike the original F-4J, F.3 doesn’t have AIM-7F but has Skyflash(7E-2 with a larger fuse proxy) which is usually weaker than 7F overall (unless you fire them in point-blank range thanks to slightly better motor thrust which provides better initial acceleration.) but failed to get historical AIM-9L for compensation.
Phantom F.3, AKA F-4J(UK) is one of the worst phantoms in BR cost-effectiveness thanks to gaijin which picked the worst point of historic F.3 when designing her.
While Gaijin just gave an unhistorical countermeasure pod into their Beloved F-5C ‘because Canadian CF-5 can! why not?’
in the same theory in which F-5C took their unhistorical CM buff, Phantom F.3 should’ve received their unhistorical AIM-7F and VTAS HMS. (If they don’t want to due to unhistorical issue, then F-5C’s CM need to be removed too)
Gaijin always double-standard things and never cross-checks, and backrashing minor nations.
F-86 got buffed because they engaged in turn fight against vampires or meteors.
MiG-15 got buffed because their ammo count is too few and hard to use for newbies. so the average Kill ratio isn’t as high as their potential.
In the name of ‘F-104 is too strong, subsonic planes can’t resist against them’
while every other domestic subsonic jet in minors didn’t get the same buff and got thrown away into [Trash bin for planes which need to be neglected].
Anyway.
Gaijin never cross-checks while balancing things.
Buffing Sabre and MiG-15 directly for creating an F-104 safe zone for them was a dumb idea. sounds like compressing BR to me. they created another [F-104 problem] for 7.0-7.7BR with F-86A-5 and MiG-15bis ISH. (Attacker have nearly no chance against F-86A.)
Decompressing the BR of the Early-jet era(which makes F-104A/C go higher than 9.3. will also see subsonic less) is a better idea.
If Gaijin decided to buff sabre and MiG-15 directly because of F-104A/C. then the same theory should’ve affected every early jet which faced F-104. (Venom, Mystere, and Swift can be examples)
