yes!!! my tornado
Vehicle: Class 3 (P)
BR: 9.0 → 9.3
Reason: The class 3p has dm33 and a very good damage model able to survive auto cannons from the front and most sabos from the side due to its sheer size. It is arguably a sidegrade to the R400, with some better elements and some worse.
3 Likes
Alpha Jet Family
- Alpha Jet A
- Alpha Jet A (JaboG 41)
- Alpha Jet A (Japan)
- Alpha Jet E
Changes:
- Air Realistic Battles: 9.0 → 8.7
- Alpha Jet’s high AOA fixes (FM nerf) (Bug Report)
- Alpha Jet’s top speed reduced (FM nerf) (Bug Report)
- Alpha Jet’s sustained G and thrust boundaries fixes (FM nerf) (Bug Report)
Reasoning: There are accepted reports that have not yet been implemented in War Thunder that would correct the Alpha Jet’s flight model, reducing its overperformance. It does not make sense to move the Alpha Jet up to 9.0 while also planning to apply flight model changes that would negatively impact its performance.
It would be more logical to correct the flight model first and then monitor its performance and statistics at 8.7. Revert these proposed BR changes for the Alpha Jets without the air-to-air missile capability.
13 Likes
So once again RAH-66 didn’t recieved AGM-114K missiles, welp it is what it is I guess.
1 Like
F-80C-10
Changes:
- Air Realistic Battles: 8.0 → 7.7
- Remove the ability to have unlimited WEP (Bug Report)
- Give the F-80C-10 its missing JATO units (Bug Report)
Reasoning: I fail to see the justification for moving the F-80C Shooting Star to 8.0, the same BR as the F-86A Sabre. The F-80C-10 is not comparable to the F-86A-5 or the MiG-15 in terms of flight performance. This proposed BR change should be reverted, keeping the F-80C-10 at 7.7.
In exchange, it should not have unlimited WEP due to its water injection system.
In reality, the F-80C-10 had a limited supply of water-alcohol fluid for its WEP system. I have provided excerpts from the F-80C manual to support this.
Excerpts of Flight Manual
Link to the source: Flight Operating Instructions for F-80B, F-80C, and TV-1 | AirCorps Library
18 Likes
N1K1-Ja
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.3
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The N1K1-Ja, even at its current 5.3 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and strong cannons as its main strengths, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
22 Likes
Very disappointed as well, the M4K is at 13.0 with fox1+fox2 , while the SU-30MKK with 6 fox-3s + HMD is at 13.3.
It doesn’t make any sense.
1 Like
A6M5 Otsu
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.3
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A6M5 Otsu, even at its current 5.3 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability as its main strength, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
22 Likes
Alr I edited it
1 Like
A7M2
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.3
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A7M2, even at its current 5.3 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and strong armament as its main strengths, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
20 Likes
A6M5 Ko
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.7 → 5.3
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A6M5 Ko, even at its current 5.3 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability as its main strength, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
25 Likes
A7M1 (NK9H)
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.3 → 5.0
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A7M1 (NK9H), even at its current 5.0 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and strong armament as its main strengths, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
19 Likes
Vehicle: All Aircraft
Change: Stock weaponry unlocked when recached
Reason: Improve combat effectiveness in all modes.
Example F-4EJ Phantom II with 4 Aim-9E’s and 4 Aim-7D’s would make the aircraft more reliable to unlock other modifications.
The Pz III Ausf.N shouldnt move to BR.3.3 without the extra turret armor, 50mm just isnt 3.3 material.
4 Likes
A6M6c
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.3 → 5.0
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A6M6c, even at its current 5.0 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and fairly good armament as its main strengths, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
21 Likes
A6M5 Hei
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.3 → 5.0
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. The A6M5 Hei, even at its current 5.0 placement, is outclassed by its fighter counterparts. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and fairly good armament as its main strengths, it still does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
20 Likes
Can you stop coppying and pasting the same recomendation from the last thread, they have already seen them and it wont change anything just spamming them again for this BR update.
1 Like
The overall 2.3 decomoression in uptiers to 3.3 looks nice.
1 Like
G.55 serie 1
- Air Realistic Battles: 5.3 → 5.0
Reasoning: This is another unnecessary proposed BR change that appears to be based on player statistics rather than the aircraft’s actual capabilities. While the aircraft has decent maneuverability and fairly good armament as its main strengths, it suffers from a lackluster climb rate and top speed, and therefore does not warrant any further BR increase. Revert this proposed BR change.
24 Likes
With the M24 going to Rank III, the Sd.Kfz.234/2 should also go to RanK III.
8 Likes