Tornado IDS - Air Battle Rating

[Morvran]

As it currently stands in game, we have 6x Tornado IDS aircraft which have virtually identical performance within the air modes.

Those are

Britain:

Tornado Gr1 at 11.7

Italy:

Tornado IDS (A200) at 11.3
Tornado IDS (1995) (A200A) at 11.7

Germany:

Tornado MFG at 11.3
Tornado WTD61 at 11.3
Tornado ASSTA1 at 11.7

The only difference of note between the 3 at 11.3 and the 3 at 11.7 is the inclusion of a targeting pod and GBUs. These weapons have no notable effect on effeciency or performance within air modes. Especially ARB where these weapons are totally worthless to take.

This gives the 3 at 11.3 a notable and significant advantage over those at 11.7 and is it radically changes the aircraft you can and will encounter on the regular.

It has been confirmed that the only factor considered is player stats and that player stats are the reason why 3 are at 11.3 and 3 are at 11.7. No other factors are considered for this decision.

In the past, Gaijin gave a statement on this as well, but it only makes the decision even worse

@Stona_WT

Regarding Strike Variants of the Tornado and Bomb Carriers in General

At the moment, most aircraft that primarily bomb bases in Air Battles are as effective, if not more, than fighters of the same Battle Rating, although they often have much weaker weapons and air combat capabilities than fighters.

We’re aware that many of you think that the Battle Rating of bomb carriers in Air Realistic Battles is too high, comparing them with fighters solely in terms of air combat capabilities.

However, on the economy side of things, the Battle Rating of bomb carriers — which are discussed in many topics — are optimal or even underestimated. This means that their weak capabilities for air combat doesn’t prevent them from receiving on average a good or even great reward. As noted above, the average reward is one of the main factors in determining the Battle Rating of a vehicle. Therefore in order for us to be able to reduce the Battle Rating of these aircraft while maintaining healthy economic progression, the rewards for damaging and destroying bases would need to be reduced so that the average reward (the effectiveness) of bombers and fighters is equalized.

We fully realise that a change like this will not receive any support from players who are asking for a reduction in Battle Ratings at the current average reward values.

Therefore in the summer, we’re planning to give more clarification and bring this issue up for discussion — whether or not we should reduce the rewards for bases in order to reduce the Battle Rating of aircraft that mainly bomb bases, or leave everything as it is now. Please follow the news for more details on this.

Based on what we’ve written above, as of now we are going to leave the strike variants of the Tornado at their current Battle Ratings in Air Realistic Battles. The Battle Rating of the Tornado IDS ASSTA1 (Germany), Tornado GR.1 (Britain), and Tornado IDS (1995) (Italy) will not be lowered, and the Battle Rating of the Tornado IDS MFG (Germany) and Tornado IDS WTD61 (Germany) will not be increased to that of the other Tornadoes mentioned above.

In conclusion the Tornado GR1, Tornado ASSTA1 and Tornado IDS (1995) all need to move down to 11.3 to join the others

Should they move down to 11.3?

• Yes
• No

---

Therefore in the summer, we’re planning to give more clarification and bring this issue up for discussion

@Smin1080p_WT or @Stona_WT, when can we see this promised thread as it is no longer summer, and yet it has yet to appear so that we can challenge this balancing decision that makes absolutely no sense

[ZE4L0T]

I cannot speak for every Tornado, but I think the premium one in the German tree would sit nicely at 11.0. Maybe it can be higher in sim, but in ARB it just gets eaten alive.

[Morvran]

All 6 are identical in terms of performance and loadout bar the GR1 which has notably weaker engines for “balancing reasons”.

They all get eaten alive at 11.3 or 11.7

[Fluffy_Bucketles]

Frankly, they should be 11.0 if we’re comparing them to competition. They aren’t all that flash in the air to air unless you’ve bugger all fuel. Have to sacrifice bombs for fuel if you want to have lower fuel for defensive flying. Bugger all AAMs. AAMs that have questionable efficacy.

Really demonstrates how balancing by player stats is a really poor decision and whoever thought that it was the best approach really ought to reassess.

[joshje100]

It makes no sense that the GR1, ASSTA1 and IDS (1995) are at 11.7 when they are the exact same as the IDS, MFG and WTD61. Hopefully we see them all go to 11.3 instead of being split like this in air battles

[Morvran]

We can hope, but its been confirmed that its entirely purely player stats that decide BR placement, even for identical aircraft. So the premium WTD61 naturally has worse stats than the TT versions. Hopefully the A200 will help even that out a bit