Updated Planned Battle Rating Changes (April 2026)

Official News, Development Blogs and Updates
185

F6F-5N, F6F-5N (France)

  • Air Realistic Battles: 4.3 → 4.0

Reasoning: This is a similar case regarding the BR placements of the F4F-3 and F4F-4 Wildcats. Compared to the standard F6F-5, the F6F-5N Hellcat has the same engine and similar performance. The primary differences are two 20 mm cannons in place of two .50-cal machine guns and the addition of airborne radar. Consequently, its flight performance is worse due to the increased weight and drag, significantly reducing the power-to-weight ratio.

I do not see how the increased firepower and the addition of airborne radar justify a full 1.0 BR increase over the standard F6F-5. At 4.3, the F6F-5N is often outclassed by other fighters at the same BR, particularly in climb rate and energy retention.

13 Likes
186

Arcade ground battle
Pz 4 F2 3.3 → 3.7
Vk 50.02M 5.0 → 5.3

1 Like
187

The “Unknown reason” is they cant have used the C-4 engine since they where acquired from germany with the C-20 engine

If we are handing out engine upgrades, then the GR.1 Tornado should have the MK103 engine rather then the MK101 from its early life

188

P-47D-25

  • Air Realistic Battles: Keep at 4.3 as it is
  • Increase the manifold pressure limit of the Republic P-47D-25 Thunderbolt from 56" Hg to 64" Hg, resulting in improved engine performance (Bug Report)

Reasoning: Currently, both the P-47D-22 (Razorback) Thunderbolt and P-47D-25 (Bubbletop) Thunderbolt have nearly identical engine performance, both operating at 56" Hg and producing around 2,300 bhp at War Emergency Power.

@Rockonanon33 submitted a bug report proposing an increase in manifold pressure for the P-47D-25 to 64" Hg, as implemented historically. At 64" Hg, the engine would produce approximately 2,535 bhp instead of 2,300 bhp.

However, the report was accepted and then closed as “Not a Bug.” Here’s BRM’s comment in the bug report, stating reasoning for the “Not a Bug” classification:

The developers have reviewed it in full. Currently, there is no error here. No changes are required at this time. Increasing the boost pressure to 64 inches of mercury will change the aircraft’s performance, requiring an increase in the aircraft’s battle rating in the game. So this modification is not planned for now.

For this reason, I propose increasing the P-47D-25’s manifold pressure from 56" to 64" Hg. As it stands, both the P-47D-22 and P-47D-25 have nearly identical engine and flight performance. The main advantage of the D-25 is a slightly higher power-to-weight ratio due to differences in the turbocharger, while the D-22 retains a slightly better flight model due to its lighter airframe.

I disagree with the reasoning that adjusting the manifold pressure would necessitate a BR increase, especially considering the P-47D-25 is already at 4.3, while the P-47D-22 sits at 3.7 and can be considered superior in some aspects.

Therefore, the P-47D-25 should receive the historical 64" Hg manifold pressure at WEP to better differentiate its performance from the D-22.

Additionally, the P-47D-28 Thunderbolt already uses a 70" boost in-game. Modeling all three variants (D-22, D-25, and D-28) with their respective boost settings (56", 64", and 70") would create a clearer and more logical performance progression within the Thunderbolt series.

9 Likes
189

Vehicle: Sholef

BR: 7.3 → 7.0

Reason: The current 7.3 HE slingers are all better then the Sholef ie Type 99 has a bigger ready rack, much higher HP/T and better traverse. The 2s19M2 has a lower reload at 6s.

3 Likes
190

No, the 20mm is very good

191

P-47M-1-RE, P-47M-1-RE (Poland)

  • Air Realistic Battles: Keep at 5.7 as it is
  • Give P-47M-1-RE its 100/150 octane fuel, further improving the flight performance (Bug Report).

Reasoning: As it stands, the P-47M-1-RE Thunderbolt does not offer a meaningful difference in flight or engine performance compared to the P-47D-28 Thunderbolt at 5.0, since the P-47M-1-RE’s engine was nerfed. Although the P-47M-1-RE is lighter, it produces less horsepower and has a lower top speed at low altitude compared to the P-47D-28.

I believe the P-47M-1-RE could be improved in its current state of engine performance so that it better justifies its 5.7 BR placement.

It has been reported that the P-47M-1-RE historically operated with 100/150 octane fuel. In-game, however, the P-47D-28 already uses 100/150 octane, while the P-47M-1-RE is modeled with 100/130 octane and could potentially be upgraded to 100/150.

If equipped with 100/150 octane fuel, the P-47M-1-RE’s engine power and top speed would improve further, surpassing the P-47D-28 even when it also uses 100/150 octane. This would create a clearer performance distinction and help justify its 5.7 BR placement.

The related bug report was accepted but later closed as “Not a Bug,” citing that the performance change from 100/150 octane fuel could impact the aircraft’s battle rating.

17 Likes
192

Tbh the sholef is fine where it’s at, all the other howitzers should move up instead

2 Likes
193

poor Auf1

2 Likes
194

Ohh boy, no naval changes, what a shock… yep good thing I didn’t bother typing up my broken record of requests again…

OOF rip the poor IKV 103, what a piss poor change.

2 Likes
195

Vehicle: Tempest Mk. V (Germany-Premium)
Gamemode: Air Sim
BR Change: 6.3 ----> 6.0
Reason: The premium Tempest Mk V in the German tech tree is effectively a counterpart of the British Tempest Mk V, yet it has a higher Battle Rating despite having fewer combat capabilities.

The main differences between the two aircraft are limited to slightly lower maximum speed at higher altitude and a shorter takeoff run for the German version. However, the British Tempest Mk V has significantly more ground-attack capability, as it can carry:

  • 250 lb bombs
  • 500 lb bombs
  • 1000 lb bombs
  • Unguided rockets

These payload options provide the British version with much greater versatility and combat effectiveness in mixed battles.

Currently, the British Tempest Mk V is rated at BR 6.0, while the German premium Tempest Mk V is rated at BR 6.3.

There is no clear gameplay or performance justification for the German variant to have a higher BR than the British version, especially considering its reduced payload options and nearly identical flight performance.

2 Likes
196

Vehicle: AS90

BR: 7.0 → 7.3

The current 7.3 HE slingers are all similar then the as90. It having a 5s reload but slightly worse stats then the type 99 in traverse and HP/T but being more low profile.

4 Likes
197

I know see my other post about AS90.

198

B-17E/L

  • Air Realistic Battles: 5.0 → 4.7

Reasoning:

Compared to the B-17E (Early), the B-17E (Late) is identical in nearly every aspect except for its different ball turret design. As a result, the only notable change is a slight increase in weight, leading to somewhat worse flight performance.

With the B-17E (Early) at 4.7, there is NO reason to use the B-17E (Late) at 5.0, as there is no meaningful gameplay difference between the two variants.

12 Likes
199

I wanted to start by saying that I’m glad to see the low ranks being decompressed. There’s just a few things that I think should be reconsidered.

Pz.IV J & Pz.Bef.Wg.IV J

germ_pzkpfw_IV_ausf_J
germ_panzerbefelhswagen_IV_ausf_J
sw_pzkpfw_IV_ausf_J

  • Realistic Battle BR: 4.0 → 3.7

germ_pzkpfw_iv_ausf_j germ_panzerbefelhswagen_iv_ausf_j
Rationale:
The Ausf.J was living in the shadow of the Ausf.H, being outright worse at the same BR. By moving both it and the Ausf.H up to 4.0, it still ends up with the same issue.
I think it would be acceptable to keep at 3.7 in its current state as a Pz.IV G sidegrade that trades mobility and turret traverse for higher penetration.

12 Likes
200

B-24D-25-CO

  • Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.0
  • Give B-24D its missing additional bombs (Bug Report)

Reasoning: How this bomber is still at 5.7 while the B-17G Flying Fortress sits at 5.0, despite being objectively better than the B-24D Liberator, is unclear. Legacy BR, perhaps?

Objectively speaking, compared to the B-17G, the B-24D has worse engine performance, overall inferior flight characteristics, and a lower power-to-weight ratio. The B-17G features a nose turret that provides significantly better frontal protection, whereas the B-24D relies on nose guns with limited traverse, resulting in weaker forward defense. B-24D has a larger profile than the B-17G, making it an easy and massive target to shoot down with a volley of cannon fire.

The B-24D carries the same maximum payload of 8 x 1,000 lb or 4 x 2,000 lb bombs as the B-17G, meaning it does not offer a meaningful gameplay advantage. The B-24D is missing its 4,000 lb bombs as mentioned in the bug report.

The only notable advantages the B-24D has over the B-17G are a faster-opening bomb bay and the fact that all bombs are carried internally, reducing drag.

Overall, the B-24D is objectively inferior to the B-17G and can be considered either a worse side-grade to the B-17G or a slight improvement over the B-17E series. Therefore, a BR of 5.0 would be a more logical placement for the B-24D.

9 Likes
201

M24 and Amx-13-m24 going up to 4.0 as deserved but I wish recently added LVT(A)(1) (M24) still sitting at 2.7 also went up just a bit, its huge but still decently mobile platform with insane turret and gun for br.

1 Like
202

Nah that Finnish tax is carrying hard

204

It should go up as is.

I see, you just want to save your overpowered vehicle from being moved up.

205

F4U-1C

  • Air Realistic Battles: 4.7 → 4.3
  • Give F4U-1C its missing additional bombs (Bug Report)

Reasoning: As it stands, the F4U-1C is the worst-performing F4U-1 variant in terms of flight performance compared to the F4U-1A , F4U-1A (USMC), and F4U-1D Corsairs. Reminder, all F4U-1 series, including the F4U-1C, use the identical engine, so the F4U-1C has objectively inferior flight performance and is easily outclassed by other aircraft at 4.7 BR, particularly due to its very poor climb rate. Simply put, its flight characteristics are closer to those of a 3.0 aircraft.

The 4.7 BR placement appears to be a harsh response to its fairly powerful 4 x 20 mm armament with a high ammunition count, which is understandable from a game design perspective in Air RB. However, I believe moving it down to 4.3 would be a fairer adjustment rather than placing it at 3.0 alongside the F4U-1A and F4U-1D.

9 Likes