Nice let’s increase the Br of the 2pl and not give it a Dm53…
3 Likes
as someone who understands the situation. you’re joking?
5 Likes
You expect to answer +3000 posts, one after another? If you expect to have bots here, answering you just to make you feel better, well, sorry, this is not the place you are looking fore. I really hope that I simply misunderstand you, because what you are saying is simply super strange and unreal.
3 Likes
Indeed. Them being ignored would imply lack of knowledge of these.
However, when I’ve asked @Smin1080p_WT about many of the suggested changes that were not applied, he was able to reply to me instantly with an answer from the developers (he’s the GOAT for always taking his time to reply quickly), which proves that, as much as I disagree with the logic (or lack of thereof) of the answers provided, these changes weren’t applied not because they were ignored, but because they were straight out rejected. Which I am not sure whether it makes it better or worse… but it certainly can’t be said that they were ignored.
For example, the answer regarding my M1A1 AIM concern;
If anything, you could argue that they ignore the underlying issues the suggestions are attempting to solve, but that’s not exactly flat out ignoring the suggestions themselves.
In any case, CMs did their job as best as they could, and remember- they are not to be blamed for the developers’ decisions. CMs are just the messengers.
26 Likes
Why do you keep force Ariete and Ariete PSO to be higher than they actually should be?
This reload buff was completely unnecessary as well as DM53 in previous BR changes, just place them at lower br. Let it be 11.3 with OTOMATIC at least.
PS for the love of God fix 5.5 tons of heavy air!
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MA8ugNxKkXQm
11 Likes
I want to know why developers ignore this. this is the suggestion ranked first among supporters.
6 Likes
with 300 ammo left to spare this change sure is fair to 3.7-4.7 range planes. I didn’t do anything special just climbed over the whole enemy team but dived to force some head ons and get energy and then enemy team is forced to go lower giving me free hand to do anything I want. There’s nothing they can do cause i have so much raw power. P-63, I 185, Ki-44, Ki-61, P-51C shouldn’t face this plane just like even lower planes shouldn’t face xp-50 it has just so much more power and bigger head start.
Not sure why F8F change feedback was ignored Its slightly lighter 6.3 plane frame at 4.7. Doesn’t matter it has 50cals if you can make enemy so much slower than you sure it will still struggle against stuff like yak-3u but who doesn’t.
18 Likes
Also Italian F-16ADF doesn’t need br decrease, it beeds its actual armament.
4 Likes
In what way?
MTTD has autoloader, gun is the same, the chassis is same…
3 Likes
ZTZ-99A is a top-10 MBT for 12.0.
Why are people wanting tanks slightly better than T-80BVM reduced in BR below it?
People already claim Russian bias exists, and you beg for Chinese bias…
@TyphoonCro
Smoke grenades, which are necessary especially for a light tank.
My detailed feedback on the VT-4A1, which received more than 90 hearts at the time of closure, was not even commented on by the developers. In the entire thread addressing feedback, no top tier tanks were ever addressed.
As it stands, Chinese top tier is very weak, and the vehicles ZTZ-99A, WZ1001, and especially VT-4A1 need a BR decrease. There were many comments with tens of likes on this issue, yet none of the feedback on the tanks mentioned were even acknowledged in the short post responding to other vehicles feedback.
Although it is true there were over 3000 comments, my post (and other posts about Chinese top tier tanks) was definitely among the top in the amount of support shown, and logically should not have been completely ignored.
10 Likes
I consider that “useful to have”, not a necessity
But that’s just my two cents as an AB tanker
1 Like
Regular F-14A is pointless for playing now because it has worse loadouts from Iranian one.
Big F
4 Likes
@Stona_WT where can i post suggestions about br changes for heli, i just found a pinned post in the generall discussion category, but it seemed kinda old
1 Like
Sadly you have to wait until next BR changes…
1 Like
The whole “onion” thing is rendered pointless when most maps are 800x800m cages where most engagements take place head-on <200m. In War Thunder, armor plays an extremely significant role which can’t be downplayed because of whatever onion thing in real life.
Maybe by a few cm- but even Challenger has better armor than Merkava.
750mm KE vs ~400mm KE on the turret.
550mm KE vs 300mm KE on the glacis.
Merkava’s “protection” against KE is barely cosmetic.
9 Likes
Also, funny you say this…
When people said that 2S38 should get higher BR because of IR tracking, you said that IR tracking doesn’t affect the BR. Yet now, according to you, smoke shells do
How come?
6 Likes
I didnt know 11.3 equals 11.7
3 Likes
This is the best joke I’ve ever heard today.
Your standard for ‘good’ refers to:
The worst firepower in top-level competitions（577+7.1）.
Even worse defense than Abrams
(lmao ,people have been complaining about Abrams poor protection. but think 99A is very good.)
Mobility that does not bring any advantages.
（Especially now that maps are becoming increasingly COD based.）
you are just evaluating based on imagination. never realized the existence of the problem.
and Gaijin is just like you.
didn’t even read that comment carefully.
2 Likes
I disagree with majority of the additional SIM BR changes. Nobody asked for further compression. And especially nobody asked for downtiering Phantoms or Mig 23.
I play the Mig 23 MLA and rekt lobbies easily with it. It was perfectly fine where it was. I play the F-4F from time to time and it was fine where it was AND then you stick better Phantoms (Japanese and American) at the same BR as the German one, while the German phantom lacks guided CAS ordnance and FOX1 missiles. WHY? Makes 0 sense.
The Mig 21BIS were fine at 11.3.
F8U-2 going to 10.0 is insanity.
And the F-111A going down to 10.3 is just a cherry on this rotten cake of BR changes. This singular instance is why we know a machine (or rather an algorithm) is behind these changes and not an actual human. Because everyone will tell you (everyone playing the game that is), the Ardvark A was completely fine at 10.7. Hell, it could go even to 11.0 unaffected. The use case is why you downtiered it. Because everyone was going to bomb airfield, die to AAA and respawn racking up negative K/D with most of its players. Well newsflash, it will still have negative K/D even if you stick it to BR 1.0 just because of how players use this particular plane. Doesn’t take more than 5 braincells to figure it out.
Meanwhile you ommited almost all of the changes the SIM community asked for.
You are not listening to community. You are doing whatever you want and justify it with saying the community asked for it. These practices are dishonest and shameful.
STOP COMPRESSION!
Regarding RB↓
Sure, the TAM may have deserved 9.0, but why 9.3 for the TAM IP? It’s literally the same tank, only immune to .50cal just like any other tank at this BR. It doesn’t justify being 0.3 higher than TT TAM. This is just petty. You are only hurting your wallet. Why should anyone buy a premium tank in reach BR of the pay to win USSR former 10.0 (now 10.3) blackhole lineup?
You also didn’t have to butcher the Flarakrad reverse speed and forward speed. Poor thing barely gets up a 5 degree slope as is.
And finally. Why is the M163 going to 7.3? It already fought against WW2 prop planes at 7.7. Why are you doing this? Do you think that prop planes going around AO at 350kmh should be subject to a radar guided minigun? I want to see specifically who asked for this? Why don’t you just add a regular SPAA to USA instead to fill the gaps?
PS: Before you hide this comment and devoice me for a week again for well deserved critique, know that I criticise not because I hate the game, but because I want it to succeed.
6 Likes