my b
Strv m/41 S-I
Ground RB: 2.7 > 2.0
Ground AB: 2.7 > 2.0
Ground SB: 2.7 > 2.0
(Remove APDS Round)
As this is the previous version to the improved Strv m/41 S-II with worse side armour, it should differate from the Strv m/41 S-II. So it should have its APDS removed and be moved to 2.0 instead of 2.7.
Would give this tank more variety aswell as increase its effectiveness for the new BR while not having the APDS round making it overkill in all aspects.
4 Likes
Strv m/41 S-II
Ground RB: 2.7 > 2.7
Ground AB: 2.3 > 2.7
Ground SB: 2.3 > 2.7
(Replace stock AP with APHE or APDS)
(Increase its top speed to the accurate 43 km/h instead of the 41km/h) (Bug report)
This is a excellent support and scouting tank. it features a Good APDS round for its BR, along with better mobility than the Strv m/41 S-I, decent armor, and excellent gun depression.
The current main drawback is the stock AP round, which has very poor penetration (~50mm) and significantly limits performance when stock. Once fully upgraded, however, it becomes highly effective vehicles, capable of performing well even above their BR into 3.3~
Increasing its top speed and removing the stock AP with the APHE or even the APDS would make this tank more enjoyable and give sweden a great Scouting light tank.
2 Likes
I agree with this post, but you’ll likely have to make a comment for each and every aircraft you mentioned here otherwise Gaijin will likely just skip it over.
2 Likes
J22-B
ALL 3.7 > 3.3
The overall performance of the J22-B is average at best for its current BR, with limited high-altitude capability and strong dependence on staying below ~4,000 m to remain competitive. Above this, it suffers heavily due to the lack of engine performance, making it ineffective against many opponents it commonly faces.
While it has good manoeuvrability, it is not exceptional enough to consistently outperform dedicated turnfighters, and it is still outclassed by aircraft with better climb rate, speed, and energy retention. This leaves it at a disadvantage in many engagements, especially against common boom-and-zoom fighters.
Its armament of four 13.2 mm machine guns, while effective against lightly armoured targets, lacks the burst mass and reliability of cannon-armed fighters at this BR, requiring longer time on target and putting the aircraft at additional risk.
Additionally, the aircraft has no suspended ordnance, making it largely ineffective in Ground RB, further reducing its overall value compared to other fighters at 3.7.
At 3.3, the J22-B would better match aircraft with similar performance limitations, allowing it to remain competitive without being overshadowed in both Air RB and Ground RB.
2 Likes
StuH 42 G
-
Realistic Battle BR: 3.0 → 3.3
-
Reload Speed for HEAT Shells: 10.0 s → 9.1 s (Forum Post 1) (Forum Post 2)
-
Add Pzgr. Rot (APHECBC) (Bug Report) (Forum Post)
-
Add F.H.Gr. F (HE) (Bug Report) (Forum Post)
Rationale
The StuH 42 G is a competent seal clubbing vehicle in its current state, which does warrant moving up to 3.3 in AB. While not quite as good in RB, it’s still a strong vehicle that many lower ranks will struggle to pen, so it would make sense to raise its BR to 3.3 in this mode as well.
This means it will be facing more vehicles with heavier armor. Currently, it’s only asset for dealing with these vehicles is HEAT rounds, which have unreliable damage.
The introduction of improved APHE and HE ammunition, which it historically had access to, would allow it to handle these vehicles more reliably, and would ensure the StuH keeps its fun factor.
The StuH also used single-piece HEAT ammunition instead of using separate charges like its other rounds. This would theoretically allow for a faster fire rate when loading HEAT rounds. Different reload speeds for certain rounds is already modeled in-game, mainly for some gun-launched ATGMs, but I think this would be another fitting circumstance to apply this game mechanic to keep the StuH 42 G competitive against heavier vehicles. It also adds a greater degree of gameplay depth to a previously very easy to play vehicle.
Proposed Ammunition Specifications
10.5 cm Pzgr. Rot (APHECBC)
Slightly lower muzzle velocity than the current APHE round, but has sufficient peirce a KV-1 side-on at close range. The explosive mass is slightly greater, and it also has the benefits of being a “-CBC” round.
10.5 cm F.H.Gr. F (HE)
Greater explosive mass and velocity compared to current HE round.
8 Likes
Re.2005 (VDM)
Air Realistic Battles: 6.3 → 6.0
Reason: There is no reason to put this aircraft at 6.3. Its maneuverability is good, but that doesn’t help much when every other aircraft is faster and has the same or a much better climb rate. The Spitfire LF Mk IX is superior in every way (and rightly belongs at a 6.0). The VDM also compresses over ~600 km/h, which makes it very difficut to beat faster props or jets.
8 Likes
Otomatic still not moved down
Freccia still moved up ruining the 10.7 italian lineup
Re.2005 still moved up
Why i’m even surprised? Gaijin ask for feedback only to ignore some for years
You just love to hate italy
1 Like
That’s more of an early CW round afaik. I think that could be interesting for a late production Chaffee with the improved sight and no smoke mortar.
Regardless of if it gets M338A1, it should still get T45.
1 Like
Instead of nerfing the Ikv 103 into 3.3 and removing a good round, help the Ikv 72 out!
Ikv 72
Ground RB: 1.7 > 2.3
Ground AB: 1.7 > 2.3
( Also switch places with the Sav m/43 (1944) )
This vehicle is fast, agile, and deadly. The gun is excellent for its BR. Even up to 2.7. And thanks to its High HE filler APHE rounds, it can one-shot most targets with a clean penetration. It also features an impressive –20° of gun depression, allowing great use of terrain.
With its low profile, it excels at close-range brawling and flanking, taking advantage of its quick reload and powerful shells. The armor is thin, but its mobility and firepower more than compensate, making it a fantastic and highly effective vehicle.
5 Likes
I mean, technically the Kfir C.10 and F-2A ADTW have ESA radars
Please Don’t Overtier The JH-7’s to 12.0!
The JH-7’s already struggle against the lower tier sam vehicles like tor/tunguska etc.
They don’t deserve 12.0 at all.
All early sams of that range can intercept its munition easily.
A raise in their br will result in them becoming “useless due to their non competitive flight model and limited self defence capabilities.”
1 Like
I Suggest! SAV 20.12.48 (ALL): 4.0 > 4.7
“hpgr M/50” (APCBC) > “Hpgr M/50” (SAP-HE) (Bug report)
“sgr M/50Z” (HE) > “Sgr M/50Z” (HE-VT) (Bug report)
Add it and you have a great 4.7 semi SPAA/TD lol, 25+ degrees of gun elevation can make short work of low flying planes.
Also the tank is more deadly in Realistic Battles due to the element of suprise and it having such a short reload desimates about all tanks it faces by knocking out tracks and barrels if it doesent overpressure from the start.
4 Likes
BMPT / BMPT-72
11.3 ->12.3
Theyre still going to clean house at 11.7, and that without a shadow of a doubt. Even 12.3 is too low but we all know its never going to top tier. 10.7 used to be the best BR in game, but its been playable ever since this void armor ERA lined monster was added when nobody asked for it.
3 Likes
What I said is still correct, no plane has both a better radar and missile kit than the premium flankers at 13.3
No plane has the better missile kit at 13.3
There’s obviously better radars, but the Su-30MKK and MK2’s radars are just fine, probably on the higher end for 13.3
4 Likes
Cromwell V/ Cromwell V (RP-3): No change, OR receive M61 Shot.
There is functionally no reason the 75 Cromwell should be at the same BR as the 57mm one, with worse reload, pen and mobility. Either they should remain where they are, or receive M61 shot to be more comparable to the Sherman.
It’s a Tiger E. All three Tiger Es are 6.0. 6.0 is fine for that tank.
Will Panzer IVH and G be finally Rank III again? After BR bump to 4.0 this should be done…
Far to high BR for these trashcans. Their armor is too weak to be played properly.