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.
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?
I didnt know 11.3 equals 11.7
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.
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.
Sorry, you are too late for the party :(
We have published BR changes thread here: https://forum.warthunder.com/t/planned-battle-rating-changes-for-october-2024/ a week ago and collected feedback for few days.
You can discuss your idea in many already existing topics on forum (check search bar for them) but next official topic for BR changes will be published in future (cannot say when, because I do not know yet).
Agreed, the Fakour is the main problem, but Phoenix gets the collateral damage.
okay thanks your answer, than i just have to wait i guess
95% of suggestions were completely ignored. Even the popular ones didn’t get a reply.
Incredibly disappointing.
No map in War Thunder is sub 1x1km.
On top of that, I’ve bounced more on the standard M1A1 recently than all other modern-ish MBTs I’ve played recently. Any amount of semi-strong armor is useful sometimes.
As for average engagement distance: 500 meters.
@TyphoonCro
Smoke shells prevent you from getting tracked.
IR tracking does not track tanks.
False equivalence fallacy.
Nice attempt defending the 2S38 from a BR increase BTW.
@MirageTank1
T-80BVM and Type-99A do not have the worst firepower. They have the “3rd worst round”. 3BM60/DTC10-125 are not bad rounds.
ZTZ-99A has slightly more armor than T-80BVM, which means your post is claiming both T-80BVM and ZTZ-99A have worse armor than Abrams… lol
Screenshots are intentionally mismatched. That ZTZ-99A model isn’t in War Thunder anymore.
On top of that the yellow area extends to inert areas.
War Thunder’s map size average increases every new map. So your post is claiming COD has larger maps… whether you intended for it to or not.
ALL of War Thunder’s tiny maps are old.
What makes J-7D same BR as MiG-23 MLD in Air Sim? The aircraft has a barely useful radar without IFF, and RWR without IFF, no all aspect missiles.
Things that MiG-23 MLD has and J-7D has not:
All aspect short range missiles
All aspect medium range IR missiles
The best SARH missile in it’s BR
A radar capable of MTI, LD
A proper IRST
More top speed
More thrust to weight ratio/acceleration
Better turn rate
This is purely a joke and I am almost done with your game and you trolling your players
hhahhahahhahahaha. If you think so, the discussion is meaningless. You’re just ‘I think’. Intentionally ignoring facts.
You didn’t even notice that Gaijin was constantly deleting flank routes and sniper points.
Another proof of ignorance.
That much is obvious that smoke shells prevent you from getting tracked and that IR doesn’t track tanks
2S38s IR tracking is still very potent against aircraft and helicopters (coupled with HE-VT shells)
Does it increase lethality against tanks? No. Does it increase lethality against aerial vehicles? Yes, big time.
As for the last thing… Please re-read before you post. I recommend at least twice or even thrice. I never defended 2S38 from BR increase.
The feedback wasn’t ignored but it certainly doesn’t seem to have been listened to either. Id like to see a second round of feedback before implemation, maybe with feedback-feedback on any controversial denied/enforced changes.
Some of the naval changes simply make no sense. Compressing the battles around 4.0 by moving coatals up but light cruisers down wont help anyone (the cruisers may be poor but they are still big gun cruisers!).
Meanwhile Mohawk is still over BR’d after numerous cycles and feedback every time, surely the company must be asking why a potentially decent Premium isn’t selling. Maybe jts the lack of battle statistics, which would be no surprise when its not been worth playing for such a long time.
But on a positive note - at least some French coastals went down, although lets face it almost the entire lineup feels sad compared to the competitive. Maybe a CBT should have its own feedback cycle rather than random forum dumps?
I mentioned this earlier, but I want everyone to remember that the Community Managers (@Smin1080p_WT , @Stona_WT …) did their job as best as they could; they DID revise all the feedback and fowarded it to the developers.
Just because the developers flat out rejected the suggestions and ignored the underlying issues these were aimed to solve because of their over-reliance on “performance statistics” (AKA player stats) in favour of objective technical capabilities, it does not mean that the Community Managers are to be blamed or that they did not do their job.
In short- don’t shoot the messenger.
Then the BRs of helicopters and aircraft change, not tanks.
Your idea that anti-air capability matters means Abrams would be a higher BR than 2A7V because of its proxy round.
I will take you as an idiot for that I guess, why would you think it has more?
The UFP would be penned by DM53 without ERA, T80BVM same, T80BVM has faster reload, by 0.6 seconds, T80BVM gets side ERA, T80BVM has smaller weakspots, every aspect but mobility states against this claim of ‘T80BVM is worse than ZTZ99A’.
Me 262 with 50mm cannon at 6.3 is gonna be fun. Basically can be played like an Fw 190, but 1.3 higher, just requires more trigger discipline.
I won’t use it as an anti-air but you can knock yourself out
With 5sec reload and proxy round you can in theory use Abrams as an anti-air
All you have to know is how to lead the target with 120mm
Can we expect further decompression in the near future? By this, I mean like decompress 10.7-12.0. I like what was attempted to be done with these changes and it has made 8.7-9.3 a much better environment but for the upper tiers it feels so compact and there is nothing to split the truly better MBT’s from the sub par ones.
Also, can we expect any movement of some vehicles Tech Tree positions in the future? By this I mean stuff like the Challenger 3, ZBD04, and other vehicles that are all now jumbled up with vehicles at a higher BR before it in the TT.
Below is a list of vehicles that may need their position removed in their respective TT if it is considered:
Breda 501 - Move to Rank IV so it can be with the other 5.0 vehicle in the TT just to make it better on those running the small lineup?
Leopard 40/70 - Folder with R3? Same BR/Rank SPAA. No reason people need to grind the full amount for 2 vehicles, the discount for folder vehicles would be nice.
TAM - Switch positions with JaPz.K A2 in folder as it is now the higher BR vehicle and they are no longer the same.
Imp.Chaparral - Folder with M247? Both same BR SPAA, no point having people grind full points for an SPAA twice that will be for the same lineup.
ZBD04A - Switch with ZLT11, ZBD is now higher BR than ZLT.
Challenger 3 - Switch to before the BN and 2E (possibly to Rank VII but I can understand it remaining in Rank VIII). Unless there are plans for a huge buff for it to put it up to 12.0 with the others there is not much of a reason for it to be the end of the line vehicle when it is not the highest BR in that line. Yes it may be the most modern but it just hinders people who want to get the 11.7 vehicles first before getting the BN and 2E to form their 12.0.
