Nonsense. At first there were just some incomprehensible rating changes, and now they’re officially CRAZY!
Glad to see none of mine ideas went into it :(
Examples:
RB:
Ozelot 9.7 → 9.3
Leopard A1A1: 9.0 → 8.7
BO 105 PAH-1: 9.3 → 9.0
Puma 10.3 → 10.0
SB:
F-4F Early: 10.7 → 10.3 / or F-4F 10.7 → 11.0 (with Aim-9L)
11 Likes
No changes to either pantsir, no changes to Su30MKK/MK2, SLE and GR4 still remain at 12.3.
What a joke of a balance team.
15 Likes
F-14A IRIAF
9 Likes
Vehicle: Tornado GR1, ASSTA1, IDS (1995)
Gamemode: Air Simualtor
BR Change: 11.7 —> 11.3
Reason: Much like ARB, they are little justifcation to be at a higher BR just because they have guided weapons and in fact, in ASB there are already stronger aircraft at 11.3 such as the Mig-23MLD and F-111C. There is little reason for the these Tornado IDS to remain at 11.7 just because they have GBUs, even in a gamemode where they have limited use
6 Likes
Ozelot
Ground Realistic
9.7 → 9.3
Reason: Every other nation with Manpad SPAA has one at 9.3.
The Ozelot is also outclassed by the Helicopters on that BR, since the Stinger often does not lock beyond 2-3km.
The Ozelot has no gun.
9.3 also has the same or similar Manpad missiles already, such as the Machbet with the same Stingers or the Santal with Mistrals.
It would also give the 9.3 lineup a SPAA.
67 likes on the Original post
13 Likes
So Zeros and Reppus still going up even tho they shouldnt. JH-7 deleting any CAS option for Chinese 11.7 ground lineup other than Q-5L flying vs Pantsir,thanks Gaijin. BI finally going atleast 0.3 up,could do with 7.7 fine tbh.
7 Likes
Vehicle: Harrier Gr7
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: 12.3 —> 12.0
Reason: It’s incredibly difficult to justify the Harrier Gr7 a subsonic aircraft, at the battle rating of 12.3. Especially with all the Harrier related issues and the nerfed nature of its defensive suite, but it was just about doing okay. The decision to move the F-15A/J down to 12.7 has however had massive impact on this and this current BR is no longer tenable. If the F-15A/J is truly 12.7 worthy, then everything below needs to be moved down accordingly.
13 Likes
Both premium SU-30’s (MKK & MK2 AMV) should go up from 13.3 → 13.7
Both have major power disparity to any jet that sits even at 13.7 just because of the amount of ordinance they can take. Either reduce their ordinance to at tops 6 missiles and keep them in 13.3 or move them up to 13.7.
But I guess its reprehensible to even slightly nerf the cash cows…
23 Likes
Vehicle: Tornado GR4 & Tornado IDS SLE
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: 12.3 —> 12.0
Reason: These aircraft are already pushing it in terms of being “okay” at 12.3, as essentially 11.3 aircraft with more CMs and IRCCM missiles, whether they should be 12.3 or 12.0 or even lower is a debate to be very much had. Im personally of the opinion that they are largely comprable to the Mirage F1s already at 12.0 and so would do little harm if they were moved down to 12.0.
But with the decision to move the F-15A/J down to 12.7, then there is absolutely no justification for the Tornado GR4/SLE to remain at 12.3 as it is very much not only 0.3 worse than an F-15A running 4x AIm-9M and 4x Aim-7M (and thats without even mentioning the F-15J with AAM-3). The aircraft are very much comparable to the Mirage F1s currently at 12.0 and so they should be placed alongside them.
In this latest set of changes, we now see the Mirage 2KC-S5 join the Tornado SLE/GR4 at 12.3 in ARB and the Mig-29s in ASB. These are definetly stronger aircraft
5 Likes
Wow, that only took several years of complaining
25 Likes
Vehicle: HMS Tiger
Gamemode: Naval Arcade & Realistic
BR Change: 6.0 -----> 5.3
Reason:
On the surface, HMS Tiger looks like a strong ship, with 2x very high rate of fire 6" main guns and 3x Incredibly fast firing 3" secondary guns. But the reality is that HMS Tiger is far weaker than most light cruisers at 5.7 and especially 6.0.
HMS Tiger’s mains guns have 3s reload (80 rounds per minute), which sounds good on paper. However, this is actually pretty poor for the BR. This is marginally better than HMS Liverpool with 9x 6" guns with a 7.5 second reload (72 rounds per minute) but far lower than ships such as USS Atlanta’s 14x 5" guns with 2.8 second reload (300 rounds per minute) or Nurnberg with 9x 6" guns with 5 second reloads (108 rounds per minute)
Compared to 6.0 cruisers since her BR increase, directly compared to something like HMS Belfast with 12x 6" guns with a 7.5 second reload (96 rounds per minute) just makes matter even worse
On top of the fairly poor shells per minute of the main guns, they have massive shell spread, and will rarely all impact the target, Easily 25%-50% of shells fired miss the target due to shell spread. Even at shorter ranges. These guns are only good at taking down aircraft with HE-VT due to their spread, as they act like bird shot. In comparison. 95% of the rounds fired from HMS Liverpool will hit the target due to having a very tight grouping.
Based upon datamines. HMS Tiger’s main 6" guns have double the shell spread of all other British 6" guns in game and there is no justified reason for this increase. If anything, Tiger should be more accurate
Since Tusk Force, the ability to fire the secondary guns at the same time as the Primary guns has been removed. Due to the inherent weapon spread of secondary guns vs naval targets when AI controlled, this has removed them entirely as being an anti-ship weapon vs anything other than coastal boats. I cant see any reason to be firing them manually at a target instead of the 6” guns unless they have been disabled. So this change has eliminated more 50% of the Tigers firepower, especially vs destroyers, which I imagine is the reason for her BR increase to 6.0
As a final note, HMS Tiger also has very poor survivability and cannot withstand fire for very long. She loses crew incredibly fast and due to having so few guns, can be suppressed and disabled very easily. Let alone if ammo racked leaving one or more guns being disabled for an extended period of time.
HMS Tiger, was never a strong 5.7, the increase to 6.0 was already highly unnecessary with the ship in the state it was…… With the further nerfs it has recently received…. It is now impossible to justify being 5.7 and 5.3 would be a more appropriate BR for this air-defence light cruiser
5 Likes
Vehicle: Hawk 200
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 10.7 —> 10.3
Reason: The Hawk 200 could be best compared to something like the A-10A in the US for CAS in GRB which currently resides at 10.3. Whilst the Hawk is faster, the A-10A compensates by having a far larger weapons load and defensive suite. In maximum A2G configurations, the A-10A can field 6x AGM-65B, in addition to other rockets or bombs, and still carry 2x Aim-9Ls and 480 CMs. The Hawk 200 on the other hand, currently at 10.7 could only carry 4x AGM-65B, a single unguided bomb, no AAMs and only 60 CMs, substantially weaker, especially if also compared to the A-10A Late which exchanges the AGM-65Bs for AGM-65Ds and 4x Aim-9Ls currently at 10.7.
7 Likes
N001 radar is so good and usable /s
1 Like
Vehicle: Hawk 200 RDA
Gamemode: Ground Realistic
BR Change: 11.0 —> 10.7
Reason: First and foremost, the Hawk 200 RDA is currently placed at 11.0, which means to actually use the aircraft, you need to uptier the 10.7 line-up to 11.0 as we currently don’t have a single 11.0 ground vehicle. This in-itself should be enough to consider lowering it to 10.7, but when also compared to the A-10A Late at 10.7, which can field 6x AGM-65D, additional unguided A2G weapons, 4x Aim-9Ls, has a gun and 480 CMs, there is simply no competition. The A-10A Late is substantially stronger than the Hawk 200 RDAs 2x Aim-9Ls and 4x AGM-65Bs with only 60 CMs, it doesn’t even get a gun. Whilst the PD radar and Skyflash DFs are an advantage in A2A, the Phantom FGR2 which is supersonic and can carry twice as many Skyflash DFs is also only 10.7, that placement is likewise weirdly high.
Even Sweden is fielding the AJS37 with 4x RB75Ts at 10.7, which essentially trades being supersonic for a more restricted CM situation and rear-aspect IRs.
Additional change: Change the AGM-65Bs to AGM-65Ds to bring it directly on-par with the A-10A Late’s loadout.
5 Likes
Vehicle: Hunter F6 (France)
Gamemode: Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.0 —> 9.3
Reason: Currently at 9.0 is the Hunter F1 in the British TT which has both a weaker engine and an inferior wing design. It is inferior to the Hunter F6 in every respect. In addition to this the Hunter F6 has 2x Aim-9Bs where the F1 has none. The F6 also has drop tanks, and can use these to dump most of its weight when entering a fight. In the Swedish TT is a Hunter F4 with 2x Aim-9B called the J34, which is currently located at 9.3 within ASB. The Hunter F6 needs a BR increase to 9.3 at the bare minimum to match the BR of the J34. The J34 then likely needs a BR reduction to 9.0
1 Like
Vehicle: J34
Gamemode: Air Simulator
BR Change: 9.3 ----> 9.0
Reason: The J34 is a Hunter F4 with 2x Aim-9Bs but this just means it has a larger internal fuel storage than the Hunter F1 and gains no meaningful flight performance improvement over the Hunter f1, whilst the 9Bs are incredibly valuable to have, they don’t warrant a BR increase at this time and if needs be, the Hunter F1 can simply go down to 8.7 where it likely needs to be anyway.
4 Likes
All the Apache’s now getting AGM-114K but still no AGM-114K for the Comanche even though it’s completely unhistorical for it to have AGM-114B.
Copied from the first thread:
Vehicle: RAH-66 Comanche
Gamemode: All
Change: Replace AGM-114B with AGM-114K
Reason: During the time the Comanche was in testing it would have used AGM-114K instead of AGM-114B as at that time AGM-114B was no longer in service and thus would not have been used by the Comanche. The Comanche first flew in January 1994 while the AGM-114B’s use ended in 1992. Not only this but the Comanche was planned to use either AGM-114K or AGM-114L if it was to enter full production and service so giving it AGM-114B is completely unhistorical.
There’s also the issue that at 11.3 BR AGM-114B on an airframe which lacks countermeasures it is inadequate, especially when other helicopter airframes of the same BR does have AGM-114K or better missiles than the AGM-114B.
12 Likes
Vehicle: AMX A-1A
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Sim
BR Change: 11.0 ----> 10.7
Reason: The AMX A-1A is identical in nearly every single respect to the tech-tree version the AMX, except it has the MAA-1 Piranha Air-to-air missiles. These are notably different to the Aim-9Ls that the standard AMX carries but comparable in overall performance and I don*t believe justify any reason for the AMX A-1A to be any higher at this time.
All Ground Attack aircraft are underperforming notably with Air Realistic at the moment, especially sub-sonic airframes that routinely encounter super-sonic ground attack aircraft. Such a higher BR guarantees that they will encounter aircraft such as the F-4S which routinely clear any and all bases long before the AMX can arrive.
The only gamemode that the AMX A-1A performs “well” in is Air Simulator, but even within this gamemode it is notably underpowered and would be better suited at 10.7 alongside similar airframes such as the AMX and Buccaneer S2B. Whilst the MAA-1’s are little stronger with Air Sim due to their short burn time, making them harder to see, the lack of radar limits the AMX A-1A’s ability to ID targets at longer ranges.
The AMX and AMX A-1A are not strong dogfighters, with aircraft like the Sea Harrier FRS1e at 10.7 much more capable under most conditions and its hard to justify even 10.7 for the airframes if not for the on-going compression
With the introduction of the Hawk 200, located at 10.7 with 4x Aim-9Ls, the overall justification for 11.0 has only become much weaker
9 Likes
Vehicle: Buccaneer S.1
Gamemode: Air Realistic & Air Simulator
BR Change: Air Realistic: No change. Air Sim 9.0 -----> 8.7.
Rank Change: Rank VI ----> Rank V
Reason: This change would enable the Buccaneer S1 to get its Air Spawn back. Unlike even later Bucs, it has a notably weaker flight performance and absolutely no A2A performance (No AAMs and no CMs). It is extremely vulnerable to any attack and rarely if ever can make it to a base to drop its bomb on target. Lowering its Rank to V would enable air spawn and fix a LOT of issues for the Buc S1
The Buc S1 is also substationally slower than the Yak-28B and far less armed. These 2 aircraft should not be the same BR
BR change in SIM is due to the lack of any sort of A2A. 9.0 places it above a lot of other aircraft when its closest equivalents are at 8.3
11 Likes