Planned Battle Rating changes

[Stona_WT 72,761]

Dear players! We appreciate your feedback and suggestions. In the recent BR update we continued to introduce our approach to gradually increase the Battle Ratings of the top- and pre-top vehicles. This approach allows us to identify solid leaders and outsiders by combat efficiency and make corresponding adjustments to the planned BR updates. This time we are updating the BR 9.7+ vehicles (including a few 9.3 vehicles) in order to reconsider BR 9.3-9.7 vehicles and below. Thanks to your feedback, we’ve also noticed a few rank III vehicles (such as Comet and T-34-85), which also had their BR updated. 

 

As for the Harrier GR.1 (1) efficiency, it could have a higher rating, but due to the massive feedback we decided to reduce its BR to 9.7 both in RB and SB. We will closely monitor its efficiency after this update. We have also noticed your suggestions concerning the G.91Y (1,2). At the moment we are working on the new weapon menu, including new air-to-surface munitions for this aircraft. This requires specific model updates, and new weapons to be introduced to the game in one of the upcoming updates. Also, the previously announced BR updates for Fw 190 D-12 and Ta 152 C-3 (1, 2, 3, 4) in RB mode will also not be introduced yet: although these aircraft remain BR rise candidates, we decided to wait and monitor their efficiency a little more.

 

Some aircraft receive their BR updates in accordance with their modifications: The American F-8E (USA) gets BR 10.0 in SB, same as the French F-8E(FN); Chinese F-5A gets its BR 10.7 in RB, same as the F-5E. After the F4U-1A (USA), the British Corsair F Mk II and Japanese F4U-1A will have their BR lowered to 3.3 in SB. Although we agree with your suggestions to lower the BR of the AH-6M, but only in the AB. Further changes of ground vehicles and helicopters will take us further research.

 

We were pleased to hear your positive feedback on the top-tier Enduring Confrontation mode. Other BR changes in the SB mode will also support the variability for all rotations regardless of the week. Unfortunately, some of your suggestions did not take into account the possible encounters for the minimum BR value. However, after analysing the feedback and statistics, we decided to increase Ariete's BR to 9.0. At the same time, we do not plan to lower the BR of the C.202 EC in the upcoming rating updates, which might not correspond to SB matches at 2.3-3.7. 

 

[9] Enduring Confrontation changes will be implemented later.

[RaymondCChan 211]

Leopard 2PL needs DM53 to stay competitive, instead of DM43 which was never used by anyone.

[SaabGripen 642]

For RB

 

Well... BMP-2M, T-72AV, and Su-11 survived again... Have you ever suspected that you might be misinterpreting statistics? These vehicles have been consistently pointed out by numerous players for a long time.

 

The Strf 9040B and Strf 9040C suffered harsh BR impressions even though they only had a cannon -capacity of 24 rounds-, without any missile. On the other hand, it is difficult to understand why there is no adjustment for the BMP-2M  , which not only has a 30mm cannon, but can fire while moving four missiles with 1200mm penetration or anti-aircraft capability. Even in top rank matches, the BMP-2M is preferred over the BMP-3, BMD-4, and 2S25M. The BMP-2M is easily found in 11.3 games, so this vehicle should have the appropriate BR for it. And also, how about 2S38? 

 

All countries must use their ammunition. Remove all C76A1s from the US arsenal, and replace all DM53s to CL3143 from the Italian arsenal.

 

Classifies A21A-3, A21RB, A28B, and A29B as Strike Aircraft -according to their names- and give them aerial spawn.

 

 

 

BR should increase:

• BMP-2M: It's kind of a disaster for balance. It has become more powerful while receiving a buff that receives APFSDS rounds. Check out what the USSR top-ranked lineup is filled with.
• 2S38: A blatantly P2W or Soviet bias. 225mm pen/20rds for 10.0 soon(2S38) and 170mm pen/24rds for 10.0(Strf 9040C)? Meanwhile OTOMATIC is 11.3 soon... Disgusting.
• T-72AV: The T-72AV(9.7) can point-and-click kill the Leopard 2A4(10.3 soon), but the Leopard 2A4 can't against the T-72AV like that. In addition, this have nice optics unlike Leopard 2 family.
• M4A2 (105mm) : 2.7 to 3.3. In the current BR, it functions like a heavy tank.
• Pz. IV G: 3.3 to 3.7. There was no reason for this vehicle's BR to decrease in the first place.
• KV-1B: 4.0 to 4.3. Currently overpowered in this BR.
• KV-1 (L-11): 3.7 to 4.0. Currently overpowered in this BR.
• KV-1S: 4.0 to 4.3. Currently overpowered in this BR.
• KV-1 (ZiS-5): 4.3 to 4.7. Currently overpowered in this BR.
• KV-85: 4.7 to 5.0. Compare with German KV-1E.
• Jagdpanther: 6.0 to 6.3. It doesn't need to be lowered here. Hard enough, also penetrating enemies well enough.
• ZBD86: 7.3 to 7.7. HJ-73E(800mm pen) is too powerful than BMP-1's(500mm).
• Gepard, Type 87: As M247 and VEAK 90 increase, these should also increase to 8.3. They are good radar SPAAG with APDS.
• Leopard I: 7.3 to 7.7. Similar to the AMX 30, but with a lower BR.
• Marder 1A3: 7.7 to 8.0 and give Milan 2. Getting a thermal image on 7.7 feels a little too early, and with MILAN 2 we can give it a distinct character from Marder 1A1 on 7.3.
• Puma: 9.3 to 9.7 with APDS only stock belt. Better than the Strf 9040C. This is a excellent autocannon grinder. Also have great survivability.
• XM8: It is a later developed vehicle, but uses older ammunition than the CCVL. Get M883 or M900 and raise BR.
• Lvrbv 701: 10.0 to 9.3. MANPADS without search radar and NVD, poor turret traverse speed and elevation limit. Moreover, exposed gunner.
• XP-50 : 4.0 to 4.7. Too good performance compared to the current BR, plus air-spawn.
• XP-55: 4.3 to 4.7. In addition, why this BR 4.3 plane deployed in Rank II? Should move to Rank III.
• Wyvern: 4.0 to 5.0. It's a very fast plane that can't catch by anyone, plus air-spawn and nice firepower. Compare with Fw 190 F-8.
• Su-9: 7.0 to 7.3. Compared flight performance with the F-80A, Me 262A-1a, Ho 229, MiG-9, Sk 60B, Vampire, etc. Do you really think this is equivalent Spitfire F Mk.24?
• Su-11: 7.0 to 7.7. Compared flight performance with the F-80A, Me 262A-1a, Ho 229, MiG-9, Sk 60B, Vampire, etc. Do you really think this is equivalent Spitfire F Mk.24?
• A-10A (Early): 10.0 to 10.3. The lack of armament compared to the researchable A-10 doesn't justify the slaughter of the 9.0 as being as easy as eating cake. The A-10's AIM-9L is a better missile than the Su-25's R-60M, so the BR should also be higher.
• A-5C: 10.0 to 10.3. This aircraft easily hunts other aircraft with Magic.
• A-6 TRAM : 10.0 to 10.7. Not only the ground attack ability, but also the vs air performance is excellent, and it has an abundant number of countermeasures. Also not as slow as the A-10s.
• F-14A (Early): 11.7 to 12.0. It excels at taking initiative on the battlefield, forcing opponents to fly low.

 

BR should decrease:

• Strf 9040B: 9.3 to 8.7. It only has a 40mm autocannon without missiles, but it doesn't have effective penetration into the front armor of the opposing tank. The 40mm m/90 ammunition won't even penetrate the IT-1, the first vehicle seen on the test drive. Why do you think this is so much better than the Puma?
• Strf 9040C: same as 9040B. It has slightly better ammo, but it's not worth it to be at 10.0. Why do you think this is so much better than the Puma?
• Lvkv 9040C: same as Strf 9040B/C, and magazine capacity(24 rds) is insufficient for anti-aircraft purposes.
• Spj fm/43-44: It's too big, the launch angle is limited, and it's not very sturdy. It doesn't have to be 0.7 higher than German 15 cm slG 33 B Sfl.
• T-28: 1.7 to 1.3. This isn't a Heavy tank, and easily penetrated.
• T-28E: 2.3 to 1.7. It's overly harsh.
• T-28 (Finland): 1.7 to 1.3. This isn't a Heavy tank, and easily penetrated. Also, move to Rank II compared as USSR.
• M4A3 (76) W: 5.7 to 5.3. Neither penetration nor protection is outstanding.
• T25: It's lost its stabilizer, but why doesn't it get lower BR?
• M18 GMC: 5.7 to 5.3. In addition, restore historical classification (Tank Destroyer).
• M4A3E2(76)W: 6.3 to 6.0. This is not equivalent vehicle as the Tiger II (P).
• Stromer HVM: 10.3 to 10.0. I don't understand why this should have a higher BR than Roland.
• Chi-nu II: 4.3 to 4.0. I don't understand why this should have a higher BR than Pz.IV (H).
• Strv 103C: 8.3 to 8.0. Unlike the Strv 103A, it is very easily penetrated by its own BR, and it has no advantages except the reload speed. Lower its BR, or give it a slpprj m/90s round.
• SIDAM 25: 8.3 to 8.0. There is nothing better than Gepard.
• SIDAM 25 (Mistral) : 9.7 to 9.3. 12G missiles are not worth as much as BR 1.7.
• T 80 U (Sweden): 10.7 to 10.3 or give 3BM46. Without 3BM46, but why same BR as Russian T-80U?
• J22B: 3.7 to 3.3. It's a bit overrated. Flight performance is too poor to do anything in the current BR.
• J21A-1, J21A-2, A21A-3: 4.3 to 4.0. It's a bit overrated. Flight performance is too poor to do anything in the current BR.
• Vampire FB.5: 8.0 to 7.7. There is a huge gap in performance against 9.0 fighters.
• Vampire FB.52: 8.0 to 7.7. Same reason as Vampire FB.5.
• Vampire FB.52A : 8.0 to 7.7. Same reason as Vampire FB.5.
• A28B: 8.0 to 7.7. Same reason as Vampire FB.5.
• A29B: 8.0 to 7.7. This plane is same as J29A but rockets. Moreover, this isn't classified as strike fighter, so this is not air-spawn plane. Why should the BR be different?
• J29F: 9.0 to 8.7. The AIM-9B is not a game changer.
• J35D: 10.7 to 10.0. No RWR, No chaff/flare dispenser, No BVR missile, Terrible energy retention ability, But fight against F-14 and Mirage 2000? Nonsense. Even the Mirage III -with a BVR missile, RWR, and Chaff/Flare dispenser- has a BR of 10.3.
• AJ37: 10.3 to 10.0. Very limited armament. How much do you think it can do in one sortie?
• Tornado (All): 11.3 to 11.0. It is not exceptionally good in any role.
• Ariete PSO: 11.3 to 10.7-11.0. It is a glass cannon vehicle that should feel life-threatening to the 105mm DM33 even from the front. Just because this vehicle is at the bottom of the tree doesn't mean it should get the highest class BR.
• Ariete: 11.3 to 10.7-11.0. It is a glass cannon vehicle that should feel life-threatening to the 105mm DM33 even from the front. Just because this vehicle is at the bottom of the tree doesn't mean it should get the highest class BR.
• Ariete AMV: 11.7 to 11.0. It's just an Ariete with better acceleration. There is no value for 11.7.

 

Something change in another way:

• BT-42 : Move to Finnish line and send the T-28 to rank 2. It is not necessary to have 3 vehicles of BR 1.7 in same line.
• BMP-1: The BMP-1P modification is too powerful at the current BR. Separate the BMP-1 and BMP-1P into different vehicles and group them into folders.
• Puma: The BR increase in this is a good direction, but fill the stock belt with only APDS. Current stock belt is too harsh until research the APFSDS belt.

Edited April 5, 2023 by SaabGripen

[RomanianEULA 8]

-Here is my contribution for some forgotten early jets in air AB :

 

French F100D and chinese F100A 9.7 -> 9.3 : like the american one which is the same plane with better missiles.

French and italian F84F 9.0 -> 8.7 : like the american, israeli and german one which are identical.

French and israeli Mystere IVA 9.0 -> 8 .7 : it has no IR missiles, no afterburner and worst aerodynamics compare to the Super Mystere B2 which is also 9.0. The 30mm canons are good but a 8.0 sabre has better flight performance and its energy retention is terrible. The comparison is even worse with a 8.3 Javelin or Scimitar ! 

Mystere IIC 8.7 -> 8.3 : same issues than its big brother but with even worst flight performances.

AV-8A 9.3 -> 9.7 : almost untouchable if flighted well with its countermeasures, huge climb rate and (too much) good missiles for its BR.

 

Also in air AB the japanese Ki-84 hei at 7.7 is way too high for a prop plane with poor top speed.

All the Ki-49s should go from 3.3 and 3.7 to 3.0 and 3.3 as they are very inefficient in almost every way.

 

-For ground AB :  E.B.R. (1951) 4.3 -> 4.0 the gun is ridiculous at this BR.

                             E.B.R. (1954) rank III -> rank IV sounds about right now that its BR is that high.

 

-And finally for naval (all game modes) : Type T-51b 2.3 -> 2.0 the survivability and the armement of this boat is too low at its curent BR.

Edited April 5, 2023 by RomanianEULA

[Bumpy25 26]

I would love to see RB (planes like su-25) are same as SB (10.3), that way its can fight as A-10 and F-4s and MiG-21s.

[MajorFooFoo 226]

Churchill NA75: 4.3 -> 3.7 

 

The only reason it's at 4.3 is the gun, so naturally it should be compared to the 75mm Shermans which share the same gun. And it's essentially just a worse M4A4:

 

- You've got the same main gun but without the stabilizer or any APCR round, thus you completely lose the Sherman's ability to accurately fire whilst moving which makes them so lethal at close-to-mid range, and you have no APCR round to make up for the APHE's terrible penetration when fighting heavily armoured opponents. You also don't have the Sherman's .50cal that's so useful for engaging aircraft, light tanks/SPAA or blowing enemy tracks off. 

 

- You have significantly worse mobility in all aspects. Shermans can make up for their weak penetration by closing the distance with enemies or flanking - you can't do either because almost everything is far faster than you. You also struggle to reach objectives, retreat when damaged or reposition to avoid planes, all of which a Sherman can do. 

 

- You have worse armour than most Shermans. Anyone can check in the hangar how 75mm M3 struggles against Shermans but goes clean through the NA75; The NA75 can be pretty effortlessly penetrated through it's front turret armour (What is meant to be the strongest part of the tank) by most tanks in the 3.X BR range, let alone 4.X or 5.X, whilst it's own gun can struggle against 3.X mediums and heavies.  The only area it's objectively better armoured than a Sherman is the side armour, but that has multiple massive un-coverable weakspots than even the weaker tanks in the 3.X BR range can easily penetrate whilst you're angling. 

 

It's a 4.3 Heavy Tank that has worse armour than, and a gun on-par with, several 3.3/3.7 Medium Tanks. It's not horrible, but anything you do in it a Sherman can and will do better, whilst sitting at a lower BR and having a cheaper spawn cost. 

 

For another fun comparison look at the French ARL 44 (ACL-1). 3.7 Heavy with better armour, mobility and penetration than the NA75. In a fight it can penetrate the NA75 frontally just about anywhere, whilst the NA75 can only attempt to knock out it's breach or hit the minuscule cupola. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by MajorFooFoo

[xX_Yaman_Xx 4]

AFT09      8.7  ->  9.0/9.3
Should be moved up in BR: because it has great maneuverability enough to get to great spots on maps and abuse the ATGMs. You can also abuse your positioning in the vehicle behind ridgelines or structures using the great gun depression (-10*) and you have a unmanned turret. The ATGMs are too powerful IMO sitting at 8.7 currently; 1,200mm pen any range and you can adjust your lead and switch targets instantly makes it unbalanced at 8.7 currently.

Char-25T      7.3  ->  7.3
It cannot compete with more modern MBTs that at 8.7, it already has trouble reliably penning vehicles in a 8.3 game.

2s38      9.7  ->  10.7
Its literally an HSTV-L that is more reliable and can perform more actions. In comparison to the HSTV-L the shells are pretty similar except the pen is -50mm in the 2s38, both have similar play styles IMO. The only difference is you can easily shoot down aircraft in the 2s38. The 2s38 IMO would be completely balanced at that BR.


 

[bananomet 633]

Ta152C3 going to 6.7 is a mistake right. Right!?? If not then I want the stuff you are smoking.

2S6 going down in BR is another out of season april fools joke?

Other than that, I welcome this BR decompression. Both Su25 need to go even higher though.

Might want to consider raising Strela BR as well. Why is it lower than Ozelot despite being better? Thats not fair.

BMP2M no changes? Shame.

[Gerhard_bar_ 85]

Tornado IDS(Germany)^{event plane}

Stay 10.7

 

Bloody hell Gajin, do NOT move this thing up to 11.0. it was performing just fine at 10.7 with a reasonable spread of planes to fight. it has 0 use in Ground RB since it's ground ordinance are garbage by comparison and limited to dumb bombs. 11.0 puts it right back in top tier territory AGAIN where the aircraft is completely helpless to targets 100% faster, fight against insane BVR missiles, planes it has no chance of outrunning, with a broken radar for months now.

There is nothing you can show to make us believe that the Marineflieger and British Tornado F3 have any business being 0.3 Br apart. The F3 is faster, has 1000% better Radar, 6 more missiles and 300 more counter measures.

Heavily reconsider this please.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Gerhard_bar_
clarity of message.

[Zerocookiecake 59]

• Sd.Kfz.222 should stay 1.7 in RB, or be given the scouting ability at Rank 2.
• If the Sd.Kfz.234/1 and Sd.Kfz.140/1 move to 2.0 BR then they should be moved to Rank 2 and given the scouting ability.
• CV 90105 (XC-8) should remain at 9.7
• Char 25t should remain at 7.3
• 2S6 should remain at 11.0
• 2S38 and BMP-2M should be moved to 10.7 atleast

Happy with most of the changes though, I and many others, have been wanting the game to be decompressed for years. Gameplay will become much better. But I do think that certain vehicles need to be drastically brought up in BR: such as the BMP-2M and 2S38 - Statistically the vehicles might not be "perfoming" but in the hands of a skilled player they are over powered for there given BR's.

 

_{All this is for ground RB btw}

 

[Jak0303 16]

A7M1 has to go up in BR in simulator. It has been the defacto overpowerd premium for a good while and it is not included in the BR changes. 

 

Also please fix the flight models of japanese ww2 fighters in general, they are UFOs. 

 

Japanese fighters don't loose nearly enough speed in turns and they outexcelerate everything at low speed.

 

 

See this video for context:

 

 

[Imaflyingturkey 114]

Ariete 11.0 (Possibly 10.7)

Shell upgrade in no way makes it worth the uptiers its been getting in recent BR changes

 

 

Ariete PSO 11.0 (possibly 10.7)

Same reason as above

 

Ariete AMV 11.3 - 11.0

A better engine shouldnt mean that this overtiered glorified light tank needs to be at the same br as stuff such as BVM STRV122 and Abrams SEP

 

Otomatic 11.0 - 10.7 or lower  (Remove the limitations on APFSDS)

So moving the Otomatic up again and wanting to lower the BR of the tunguska yeah no what youve got here is an overtiered gun SPAA that in no almost no ways is better than the tunguska

 

Centauro 120 11.0

No real reason to move it up as youve got better things that could be added for that br and also the lineup is at a lower br

 

Good things

Its nice to see that ground is finally going to become a little less compressed

Edited April 5, 2023 by Imaflyingturkey

[ZdrytchX 1,261]

Just  curious but why was the 1.0-2.3 crushed down?

 

Also there were better ways this could have been done, such as expanding upon the number of rotation days. I can already tell just by looking at the table that you guys probably spent 5 minutes thinking about it and called it a day. But seriously, having a bracket that is only 0.7 wide at the high end seems like a very bad idea

I think this will make it harder to find games near the end of each patch season even if they're better balanced, so I guess it's better than inaction

 

(Speaking of lineups, there could be restrictions applied to them - for example, no allies vs axis lineup above BR 6.7, since anyone with half a brain would've figured out after a few games that literally 98% of axis vs allied games are exploit sessions. This is probably not the best solution, but aside from the current and previous patch with the mig-29, usually america will dominate the opposing teams through shear population - One way to balance against that is to possibly introduce a blueflag/redflag setup where its for example, U.S. vs the rest of non-eastern bloc aircraft.)

 

BR adjustment suggestions and comments:

• Mirage IIIC is still a higher BR than the israeli one, despite being inferior by not having an RWR
• Jag at 9.7 is a bit rediculous no? Despite being an attack jet, I regularly do much better in this jet than the F-1/T-2, which both lack countermeasures, despite the F-1 having PDV added (it can't make the most out of it due to lack of IFF). Meanwhile, the jaguar has hundreds of countermeasures! And magics! And a memelord of a missile! Ok turns out the table erroneously lists the Jaguar A twice.
• Q-6A Early: I have a feeling this will roflstomp at 9.3. From what I've been told it's just a marginally heavier mig-19S which probably means it'll vastly outperform most fighters at 9.3.
• B-29: I think it would sit just right at 7.3.
• bf109 G-2: I'm not saying it shouldn't go up, but the G-2 is marginally worse than the F-4 by being heavier and having a substantially worse cockpit model. I think it's statistically doing better simply because only good people use it. If it goes up, so should the bf109 F-4, at least imo.
• Kfir Canard: If this goes down, why not the Kfir C.2 and C.7? They're basically the same aircraft at the end of the day, except the C.2 has thinner and longer canards, and the C.7 can fit more an additional pair of missiles on the inner pylon. There's also no way you're telling me the kfir canard is inferior to the mirage IIIE, lol.
• Ki-83: This is a very rarely seen aircraft so it could use a reduction imo. Sure it isn't a total brick and climbs well, but it isn't exactly fast like the hornet mk III, which feels almost like a jet in comparison. Not to mention, there's a superior aircraft at 5.3 called the P-38K (although the guns probably suck atm due to the weird HE fragmentation updates this year).
• Do-335 is another aircraft which is kinda rare that could use a reduction, but in this case its moreso that the do-335 is unsuitable for sim due to its cockpit design and its heavy reliance on spaded performance. But hey, we got the french VB-10s to work at 3.7/4.0, so I don't see why can the Do-335 be put down a little either.
• Su-11: Needs to go up to match RB at 7.3. Speaking of twin engine premiums, the P-38K, XP-50 and the TIS MA also need to go up.
• P-61 and its premium variant need to go up back to 4.7 imo. They might not dogfight that well, but with some decent mouse aim abuse and some knife edging, the plane's basically unstoppable.
• G.55S, Ki-44 II Otsu, A7M1: Perhaps some of the best single engine prop premiums in the game for their BR that are too low.
• Spitfire mk 24: Sure it's great and all, but you don't hear anyone complain about it. If there's any spitfire that needs to go up, it's the spitfire lf mk 9, which has a 35+ m/s climb rate at 5.0.
• MiG-23 ML: Why is its BR not increasing alongside the MLA? The only reason why I would see it not increasing is because its getting its supposedly ahistorical R-24 removed (apparently the "A" in MLA refers to R-24 support), but I haven't heard any news of that yet...
• F-4D SkyRay: It's an incredible aircraft at 9.3. It probably needs to be moved up to 9.7 due to its absurd performance, but its repair cost is perhaps what kills the fun the most in it. But then again with all the BR compression that WT has had in the past year, it probably is alright where it sits... who knows
• Harrier GR.3: Sure its inferior to the american harriers, but this doesn't need a reduction...
• Japanese medium-ranged bombers Ki-49 and Ki-67: I'm not one to cater for gunship players, but they're so bad nobody even touches them. I would even go as far as to say they're inferior to the SB2M which currently sits at BR 1.7-2.7. They Japanese bombers could use a reduction in BR if you ask me.
• F-4E, FGR, FG.1: Considering they have better missiles and/or payload and/or performance than the other (soon to be) BR 10.7 phantoms, I'm not sure if that reduction is necessary.
• Some low tier planes needs some attention too. Like the Ki-27 shouldn't be a 1.3 plane - Sure it has crappy guns but it perhaps has one of the best manouvrability-performance balances in the game with perhaps the best turn time of only 8.5 seconds. Compared to the Gladiator biplane or the bf109 B-1, which is also 1.3, they are vastly inferior in every single way except perhaps the gun. In fact you can put almost any aircraft below BR 2.7 against the ki-27 in a 1v1 and the majority will lose through shear stick pulling and outspeeding (I dare you, challenge me!)
  Just remember, you need to cater for the new players of war thunder too, not just the veterans. I struggle to invite people to war thunder due to the poor balancing early game in addition to the immense grind that meets them as a new player with next to no knowledge on the game... WT feeds too much off the current playerbase without accomadating for the new players which is why there's been such a shift in player distribution to the later ranks, leaving the lower ranks bone dry...

 

Tank lineups: We desperately need to split the upper lineups. Take a look at what russian tanks have for example as a reference for their cold war lineups: T-54, then a T-54 1951 - not even the early T-55, then all of the sudden they transition to the T-62M, some premiums get quality thermals, and then all of the sudden it's modern tanks. For aircraft, they get late war super props, then early jets, then korean war jets, and then all of the sudden they get mig-29s.

Overall most of the BR changes are positive ones so at least I'm glad most of the changes provided are sensible.

Edited April 5, 2023 by ZdrytchX

[muhammad_hero 55]

Following vehicles placement in the trees should change:

1. Hunter FGA.9

Rank 5 → 6

This thing irl had a CCIP for its ordnance so pls add that meachnic. It is the highest BR at rank 5 which is not logical for it. Increase its Rank to 6. It would be a good customer satisfaction move.

2. Hunter F.1 and Swedish J34

Rank 6 → 5 & J34 Finnish line → Swedish line 

Both Hunters should be Rank 5 vehicles not 6, being rank 6 they are higher in research and SL cost. Their modules are higher research/SL aswell. This way their costs can be reduced and they be logical organising of the tech tree. Furthermore, the J34 Hunter should be placed behind the J32B since it is a Swedish flag, it is illogical to put in in the Finnish line.

 

3. F86F-2

Rank 6 → 5

Its BR is that of rank 5 plane, and this would lower the research and SL requirement for it and its modules.

 

Following should be streamlined based on role/user nation.

France:

Jaguar A

Mirage 5F should be redesignated as Strike Aircraft

Mirage F1CT should be redesignated as Strike Aircraft

Mirage 2000

Etendard IVM

F-84F & F-84G-26-RE should be folded

above mentioned should be moved in the Strike Aircraft line aka After the F84G-26RE. This is to streamline the progression and make logic. Furthermore the Mirage 5F and F1CT were CAS aircarft role oriented hence they were Strike Fighters so ingame they should be Strike Aircraft.

 

F-100D should be moved after the F-86K

F4U-7 moved after Seafire LF Mk.lll

These two mentioned above are the US line in the French tree.

 

USSR:

Su-7B & BKL should be folded
Su-17M2 & M4 should be folded

MiG-27M & K should be redesignated as Strike Aircraft

above mentioned should be moved in the Strike Aircraft line and placed after the Su-17s. The MG-27s are legitemately designated as Strike Fighters irl for CAS. These should be redesignated ingame. This is to open the space for the future Sukhoi Su series of aircrafts. And streamline the tech tree and make logical progression.

 

Germany:

MiG-23BN moved behind the Su-22UM3K

it is a Strike Aircraft so its only logical to put the there.

 

Tornado IDS ASSTA1

Do 355 A-0

Me 410 B-6/R3

Me 410 A1 & B-1 should be folded with A-1/U4 & B-2/U4

above mentioned should be move over to the Strike Aircraft line aka in the Su-22UM3K line. as these are all strike aircrafts.

Do 217 N-1 & N-2  should be moved after Do-217 J-1 & J-2

 

USA:

F-84B-26 & G-21-RE should be moved to the Strike Aircraft line and folded with F-84F

Why these two are in the fighter lines I have no idea. Make it logical. And a natural progression.

Edited April 5, 2023 by muhammad_hero
accidently pressed save by keyboard

[Malekitth 149]

Please reduce the BR of F-104S TAF back to 10.7, it really suffers at 11.0 with no PD radar, useless 2 AIM-7Es and 4 AIM-9Ps.

[POLYDEUCES 293]

The changes for Mirage 5F as well as Nescher are a sight for sore eyes even if long since overdue.

Mirage IIIE at least Mirage IIIC should should come to enjoy the Br of 10.0 as well though.

 

[Un0rig1nAL 0]

F4e ->10.7 ?

No PD?

[CodyBlues 323]

Move all current 12.0s to 12.3

 

move the F-14a as well

 

There simply can not be any balance as long as we have such a small BR range. Current 11.0s are too powerful to be moved down and too weak to fight 12.0s. A simple bump will fix so many issues.

Edited April 5, 2023 by CodyBlues

[PARDUS IX@live 263]

Can the Q5-L be finally moved to rank VI with the other Q-5 models since it lacks air to air capabilities and is a struggle to attempt to unlock modules in any aspect. its current position in rank VII of the CN air tree should be reserved for a possible future JH-7 early or JH-7A.

[汉城战车道 장태완 18]

Overall any form of decompression is great as it allows the vehicle on the lower end of each BR to have a chance to perform: hopefully the T-72B 1989 will get some attention now. But however, here are some changes I believe would be helpful to the game.

 

HSTV-L

Stay at 11.0 or going to 11.3 with HE-VT

The HSTV-L is a great tank(and yes being a spookston fan did make me a bit biased), but 11.3 is too much to ask for the tank. Its firepower is not an issue - it is a great flanker. The problem is its spalling, when facing T-72B3/T-80BVM and various conventional western tanks such as the leopard 2 or strv 122s, it often takes more than four to five rounds. It is still very capable of disabling such tanks, but its poor autonomy will really show at 11.3, when that is the only enemy it will see. It can still easily defeat ZTZ99s and challengers though, so 10.7 is not that needed.

People argue the 2S38 is better than it, it is not. However, they are a good comparison, so giving it a HE-VT or keeping the two vehicles at a 1.0 gap could be a fair balance.

 

Challenger Mk.2 and Challenger DS

Stay at 9.7

The challengers are quite underperforming in 9.7 due to akward firepower and relatively "wacky" protection - works more or less relying maps favoring hull-down gameplay and depression angles. They are not bad - but heavily map dependent like other British MBTs. Since they already have a gap with other current-9.7 MBTs, keeping them at 9.7 in this decompression should help out. The challenger Mk.3 and vickers mk.7 on the other hand would do okay at 10.3, especially allowing the stormer HVM to have another try at GRB.

 

Challenger 2/DL2F/TES

Stay at 11.0

The chally 2s also suffered from poor firepower. There are more issues however, most notably that they no longer has a great protection as well. The turret roof is a big weakspot and can lead to critical hits, the mantlet is also decently bigs, albeit the breech can often help the absorb the spalling and allowing for quick repairs. Unless better rounds are introduced, they better stay at 11.0, where it already struggled. However, given that the ADATS got moved up to 11.7 and not really too much to keep it at 11.3, I doubt even not changing its BR will do much.

 

T-64B

Stay at 9.3

The T-64B is a great tank but very much underlooked at when comparing to the TURMS, cannot help by the fact that USSR 9.3 is relatively underwhelming compared to 9.7. But the lack of thermals really made it unfavorable at 9.7, and losing a gen 2 thermal for slightly better protection seems a bit of a strech. I believe the two tanks(T-72A/AV and T-64B) should always have a gap in BR.

 

Ariete/Ariete PSO

11.0→10.7 or stay at 11.0 with ROF improved to 6.5s base and 5s aced

The DM53 should not be a justified reason to uptier such tank. It did provide better penetration, but at the cost of worse spalling. It did get back to the old days of firepower but it now faces a lot stronger foes. Its complete lack of protection and not a significant edge over its 11.0 counterparts in terms of mobility is already a red light about how the tank will perform. Therefore, going down to 10.7 is a lot more considerate for its place: it will still get penetrated by most of the rounds in 9.7 and above. An alternative that may work is buffing its fire rate. With the ariete and challenger considered the two worst top tier tank, buffing its firepower would at least improve its ability to rapidly defeat enemies in a flank, the only playstyle practically due to its poor protection. As of the AMV, I am sure many will also suggest keeping the BR.

 

OTOMATIC

11.0→10.7, 11.0→11.3 with a significant buff in ready rack replenishment rate, or 11.0→11.3 with the APFSDS limit lifted

The OTOMATIC is not ready for 11.0, nor is it competent in 10.7. The range is one of the major issue, and the other being its slow rate of refilling the ready racks. Recent bugs has shown that however, with a relatively fast ready rack replenishment rate, the OTOMATIC would do fine in 11.0 or even higher BR. The introduction of the 2S38 definitely made the OTOMATIC a lot laughed upon, and returning the infinite APFSDS would definitely kick up its popularity as an alternative.

 

Z-19E/Z-19

Stay at 10.7, with the introduction of 60 spawnpoints for 8 TY-90s, while only taking 4 being free

Chinese helicopters as a whole has very high BRs due to their great A2A missiles, but eventually they will be raised to a spot where its CAS abilities will be nullfied. To balance this out, an option could be that taking a large amount of TY-90s would cost spawnpoints, while only a portion of the full pool for self defense should be free.

 

Late war Spitfires(LF Mk IX/Mk.XIVe/Mk.XVIII)

Access to M20 API-T in various belts for .50cal MGs, including a full M20 tracer belt

Hispano Mk.II and Vs are often a bit disappointing in damage, they do perform well in certain conditions. However, giving spitfires with .50cals the M20 API-T allows them to deal decent damage even when the gun is jammed, and improves the generic firepower. The spitfires are in a fair place, not overpowered nor terrible, and they are not really in need of significant BR changes(except arguably the mk.24, but it is not relevant to this topic), a buff like this however, should make them more prevelant.

 

Sea Fury FB.11

Access to the 150 octane fuel, 5.3→5.7

The Sea Fury is not bad at all. However, it was always overshined by either other energy fighters or alternative British fighters, especially considering the fact that it may face Ta 152s. An improvement could be done by giving it the 150 octane fuel to improve its engine performance(which is not very unhistorical, considering this is almost a post-war fighter), allowing it to highlight the speciality in energy fighting. To balance this out, it could be moved to 5.7.

 

Phantom FG.1/FGR.2

Access to AIM-9L

Previously discussed by different posters(such as this post), the British phantomes no longer has an advantage interms of radars, since the F-4J has superior performance in forms of AIM-7F and HMD. Giving it AIM-9L would be a considerate option, and since it has worse radar than the Kurnass 2000 and F-4EJ Kai, 11.3 would be not overpowering this machine. SuperTEMPs are not historically accurate however, so that could not be an option.

 

Harrier GR.7

11.7→11.3

Pantsir does affect my explanation, but I am discussing more about the AIM-9L: it is no longer a prestige but a common weapon for top tier. Subsonic also meant that it will take a very long time to get into positions in terms of CAS. Comparing to the mirage 2000D, it is worrying that the GR.7 is still 11.7.

 

Stafighters

F-104G(China)/F-104J

10.7→10.0

They do have incredible speeds and a vulcan, but the fact that they lack conventional countermeasures at 10.7 makes them hot targets. Moving them down to 10.0 would allow the pilots of these starfighters to prove their skills against all-aspect missiles without being smashed with sparrows. Lowering them further would however, cause major problems due to their superior flight performance and vulcans.

F-104G(Germany/Italy)

10.7→10.3

At 10.7 the F-104G may face a lot of PD-assisted radar missiles, and due to its inability to notch a radar lock, its usual gameplay style for high-altitude "charge" is hardly an option anymore. It does have countermasures compared to the Japanese and Chinese starfighters and hence it should be at 10.3.

F-104S/F-104S TAF

11.0→10.7

The flare does help a lot in avoiding full-aspect missiles, however, one major problem with them is by moving them up to 11.0, they now face almost exclusively PD-assisted missile and cannot notch a radar lock.

F-104S.ASA

11.3→11.0

Same as above, it does not have the ability to defeat PD-assisted AAMs due to their inability to notch off a lock. AIM-9Ls are no longer an exclusive feature and its access to only 4 AAMs meant that it is less competent at the top echolons.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Qing_Bu_Zi_191
Added Phantom FG.1 and Harrier GR.7, corrected grammar mistakes

[Username418 2]

2 hours ago, Monika_in_action said:

Char 25T

 

Stay 7.3 / 7.3 → 7.0

This thing is not capable of fighting cold war era MBT like T-55AM. It has no sabot or HEAT rounds, making it extremely awful to engage heavily armored targets even in close range. Its mobility would be modest at 7.7, literally taking the best part away from it. Besides, it has no stabilizer or rangefinder, moving it up to 7.7 would be quite absurd considering that Object 906 and Ikv91 stay where they were. Speaking of Object 906, it has a stabilizer and an autoloader of 4.3 seconds, literally better than Char 25T in every possible way expect protection.

I agree... Putting the Char 25T at 7.7 would just make it a brick

[AlvisWisla 225]

For arcade battles BR helicopters.
9.3:
All AH-1S/F.
All HKP9. All BO 105.
I'd like to say Z-9WA as well.
Ka-29.

This would make them usable for heli PVE until a third bracket is added for mid-range ATGM helicopters.

[goatCerealkiller 1]

BMP-2M

9.3 → 10.0

Atleast. It has IRST lock, apfsds (that doesn't even have IRL) proxy missiles that can counter any heli, fire on the move capability, 4 missiles can be shot before reloading. Literally the best IFV in the game.

[BVREnjoyer 2]

Overall these changes look pretty great, the only thing that I question is the move of the FW190 D-12.

#1 It is a foldered vehicle meaning there are less players who play it, because it isnt neccesacy for grinding the tech tree, but rather usually played by far more expierenced players like myself. Greatly impacting its effiency score.
#2 With the change, we will have several similar or literally same performace wise vehicles at the a lower BR (FW 190 D-13, FW 190 D-9, Soviet Premium FW190 D-9 all at 5.0) making the D-12 irrelevant and only then played by more expierenced players.

In my opinion, there are two options for a resolution.

#1 You move the FW190 D-12 to 5.3, but the FW 190 D-13 also must go to 5.3 then. It is literally the same plane performance wise with the only difference being the nose mounted armament. (Also Im going to guess the FW 190 D-13s stats didn't necessitate a change because it is a premium plane with less expierenced players able to fly it right away)
#2 You leave the FW190 D-12 at 5.0. In reality this is where these planes deserve to be in the current meta of Air RB IMO
 

Also while on the topic of the FW 190 D-12, it is still missing the extra 30 rounds of MG151 in each of its wing-root MG151's that was given to the FW 190 D-13 years ago at this point. 

Edited April 5, 2023 by FockeYou

[Sandsmann 99]

Ground:

BMP-1(Russia/Germany/China) 7.3->7.7
Powerful fast reloading HEATFS launcher with fast mouse aimed ATGM's and superb mobility
make it far too strong for its br, the Chinese one having a tandem warhead is also
a bit insane. Or split the 1p upgrade from the Russian/German ones as a seperate vehicle and
set to 7.7 and keep the keyboard guided ones at current br.

Char 25T 7.3(STAY)
Its not better than the BMP's or as good as the Object 906, It should not go up any higher.

Su-85A 4.0->3.7
Just upgunned Su-76 with just as useless armor and bad mobility/gun traverse and tightly packed crew making 1 shotting it easy.
Much weaker than the dickermax.

Kv-2 1939 RankII->RankIII
The German premium one is a rank III and is almost identical.

T25 6.3->6.0
Only went to 6.3 because of the STAB that it doenst have anymore, Its a final spawn/backup for its BR at best.

M4A3E2 (76w) 6.3->6.0
Does not have the armor or the firepower to fight 7.0's or 6.7's, When fighting 6.7's you are better off using the normal M4A3 over it for the slightly better speed, Plenty of 5.7's can pen it with ease.

M24(All) 3.7->4.0 RankII->RankIII
Basically a baby Sherman that trades inconsistant armor for way better mobility and scouting.

M4A3 (76w) 5.7->5.3
Identical performance to the M4A2, Inadequate vs 6.7 and even 6.3 heavies and mediums, Panthers are far more powerful in most situations.

T-34-85 5.7->5.3
Also outclassed by Panthers, More similar to the M4's in terms of armor/firepower/mobility.

Leopard 1 7.3->7.7
It has great mobility(better than many other 7.7's), a high zoom gunsight, and a powerful APDS&HEATFS round and has a rangefinder, it was fine when it was at 7.7 and ever since the APDS buff it has even more reason to go back, The AMX-30 with no APDS at all and normal HEAT instead of HEATFS is 7.7 so there is no reason the Leo cant be.

Air:
P-51 H-NA 6.3->6.7
One of the best super props at its tier, Outperforms just about every prop 6.3 and below.
Very good energy retention and fast enough to keep up with early jets if they make the slightest turn in a fight.

Spitfire MK24 7.0->6.7
About as good as the P-51H, Near useless when fighting 8.0 jets.

Pe-8 4.3->4.7
Capable of analiating a entire team in ground rb with a single bomb as has good defensive guns, One of the few heavy bombers that are actually good in ground rb.

Su-25 & Su-25K 9.7->10.3
Slow flareless planes at 8.7/9.0 should not be fighting all aspect missiles.
Near indestructable damage model.
 

A-6E 10.0-10.3
I repeat, No flareless 9.0's should be facing all aspect missiles.

F-104A & F104C 9.3->9.7 or 10.0+massive repair cost reduction.
Nothing 8.3-9.0 has any chance catch a 104, When it was 10.0 it mostly suffered from the introduction of all aspect missile spammers, At 10.0 it would still be one of the fastest planes for its BR.
 

[sgtlongbow 1,936]

all suggestion are for arcade.

 

Ground

 

M56-vehicle has little to no protection,no mg and its ammo preforms equal to the Russian pt-76b which sits at a 5.0br arcade. suggest dropping br from 6.0 to 5.0,this also would fill gap in usa light tanks.

 

t72m2-moderna-would suggest leaving its br where it currently is or with a slight in crease. tank has poor reverse gearing,lacks protection of similar bred tanks,ammo has less pen then similar tanks.

 

aviation

 

f5  a/c - plane see planes that it outperforms in up and down tiers. suggest raising rating by .3 br for arcade.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 5, 2023 by sgtlongbow
? dont know why not being published, so edited to get published.