IS-2 is very well armored for 6.0, maybe too well. But lets wait how it turns out. Its downside, long reload, is still a thing.
You mean something they already do?
The Su-25s went down in grb
not air rb
Where Air to Ground munitions matter more
You cannot tell me that laser guided munitions with that terrible sight, are on par with 8 F&F munitions on the A-10A Early and 6 on the A-10A Late.
Dear Apache player who is attacking Chinese helicopters, if you use a little more of your brain, you will understand that Chinese helicopters are very weak, because they cannot do what other nations’ helicopters can, and because only China has such poor ATGMs. The reason they all carry missiles to engage air targets is precisely because they cannot efficiently kill ground targets to change the tide of battle. Of course you won’t understand that, because cause and effect are beyond your comprehension.
Spoiler
BTW, if you check the stats, you’ll be “surprised” to find that the number of air kills by the Z‑10 and Z‑10A is actually not high at all. With that brain of yours, you must surely conclude that this is because the TY‑90 performs worse on the Z‑10 – just like other helicopter AAMs, right?
1 Like
armor matters at lowtier a lot cause you have to aim for super small portion while the churchill has a lot more options when making a quick shot making it really hard to beat
and just cause churchill in a few spots can be penned doesnt mean its bad
? the TIGER 2 can be frontally penned by many 6.7s in the turret does that mean its bad and should be undertiered to 6.3 ?
at 5.0 it cant face tanks in downtiers 3.7 like KV1 L11 which has maybe like 7mm more pen than reserve BT7
lol. E5 is strong. It lacks pen, but it makes up for it with a lovely reload. Surprised it didn’t go to 7.0, tbh. Still wondering why that POS T95 is 7.0, while the E5 is 6.7, but whatever.
M44 is quite strong, so it was funny seeing it going down. M55 is fun, too. I figure this one is from them being used by inexperienced players, rather than them not fitting the game. Ah well, least FV4005 went down.
It certainly doesn’t solve some of the biggest issues with the vehicle and why it’s suffering.
I can easily autocannon (for example) an IS3, IS4, IS6 to death with a 37mm frontally. Should we send them down in BR? No tank is invulnerable or immune.
1 Like
In my memory, one of Gaijin’s employee said it will be applied with other advance IR-AAM in future (mabye we can see F15EX at the same time?)
They enjoy printing out the complaints on paper and then throwing them into the shredder before throwing the shreds into a bonfire.
Me when T26e5 gets skipped for getting nerfed for the 3rd time:
1 Like
The August BR adjustments have now been implemented. As we can see, in the first version of the changes, the Z-19 and Z-19E attack helicopters were raised from BR 11.3 to 11.7, and received double the air-to-ground and air-to-air missile payloads. However, in the second version just a few days later, not only were the weaponry increases revoked, but the BR was left at 11.7. I just want to ask: on what basis? Why was the BR increase retained even after the weaponry changes were rolled back? The American AH-64 Apaches are sitting at 11.3 with more and better Hellfire missiles—is the AKD-9 really that powerful a missile?
The official response to this change was: “Regarding the withdrawal of the preliminary plan to increase the maximum AKD-9 and TY-90 loadouts to 16 missiles for the Z-19 series, as these vehicles are primarily used in an air-defense role, increasing the number of anti-air missiles could further improve their efficiency data.”
But the Z-10 at 11.7 can also carry 16 TY-90s, and on top of that, it has the much more capable AKD-10 missiles. Now the Z-19, with both inferior quantity and quality of ordnance compared to the Z-10, is crammed into the same BR. Does its better maneuverability alone justify this BR increase? Was the Z-19’s performance at its original 11.3 BR so outstanding that it needed a BR hike? Is this BR change really fair?
One developer told us: “Regarding the more controversial parts of this BR adjustment plan, community moderators have provided feedback. For the Z-19, Z-19E (as well as other air support options in China’s top-tier ground lineup, such as the F-5E, etc.), the development team will closely monitor data changes after the BR adjustment and make further adjustments if necessary.”
Is this just a talking point to placate players’ current anger—a perfunctory response? I sincerely hope that the suggestions we raise can be promptly and genuinely conveyed to the development team, and that the team will respond substantively to player concerns in a timely manner. This would make the game healthier. I believe no reasonable player enjoys the current situation.
It’s wack the TU-95M didn’t go to 8.0 for sim like it should’ve… it’s not nearly as good as the B-52H, but hey what would I know?
I only own both, and play a lot of sim.
It’s the random USA pampering that really turns me off from playing, hence why I’ve been playing Project Zomboid a game that’s actually fun.
Like what about France adjustments? Italy? Etc??
What ever happened to good balance? It’s just flavor of the month now. (Which typically happens to be the USA)
You have to be baiting at this point.
1 Like
IDK
Increasing the BR of these planes wouldn’t be an issue, therefore, if the planes above it were also on higher BRs…
And same goes for many Ground vehicles. Vehicles which are deemed to be too strong for a BR, but too weak for the very next step.
That’s because compression remains to be an enormous issue yet to be truly addressed. The difference in capabilities between vehicles in full up/downtiers is still too big.
1974 plane with early 70s missiles that use another early 70s missile motor at 13.7 (faces 4.5 gens) is crazy
1 Like
If you can teach the wallet warriors how to deal with Fakours (and get people to stop distracting themselves at that BR range), it will go down in BR!
One of the worst changes yet
Our feedback was mostly ignored
I don’t think there’s anyone happy with them (aside from a few tiger II players perhaps)
They recently added this option for the Scimitar, so there’s no clear reason why a similar approach couldn’t be considered for the Challengers.
Wasn’t there once a time that iraf can play againt top tier?
The SU-30MKK was my first plane with ARH missiles (my nickname says it all)—even as a rookie, I could handle it because its BR is way too low…
Now that I’ve discovered ~8–9 top-tier fighters and gained some experience in ARB, I’ve come to realize that the premium SU-30 is one of the best planes at BR 13.7. Seriously, I have absolutely no idea what it’s doing at BR 13.3 alongside fighters like the MiG-29SMT, F-16A ADF, etc. Seriously, the premium SU-30 is even better, IN MY OPINION, than a few BR 13.7 aircraft, such as the F-15C MSIP II and the MiG-29KR…
Interestingly, the premium SU-30 is clearly faster than the MiG-29SMT AND EVEN the MiG-29KR, which completely contradicts the information on the War Thunder Wiki. Gaijin, how is it that an aircraft with a climb rate of 205 m/s is noticeably faster than one with a climb rate of over 300 m/s? What’s more, the SU-27/30/33 has excellent flight handling that allows for sharp maneuvers without significant speed loss, while the MiG-29 is a disaster when it comes to energy retention—a 90° maneuver to notch results in a noticeable loss of speed compared to the SU…
The SU-30MKK/MK2 are BR 13.7 fighters, placed one tier lower in the combat classification for obvious reasons…
PS: Gaijin, please finally raise the BR to 15.7 and give fighters in the 12.3–13.3 BR range a little breathing room…
An F-16A at BR 12.3 fighting against a BR 13.3 is absurd; even fighting a BR 13.0 is quite a challenge when you only have AIM-9Ls…
P.S. II: Why does the F-16A have a BR of 12.7 in ASB when the Netz, with its better Python 3 missiles, already has a BR of 12.3 in simulation battles? That doesn’t make sense.