Jump to content

Planned Battle Rating changes


Best answer

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistic mode:

  • Air:

G.91 R/1 8.7 -> 8.3 

Reason: Plane is very similar to G.91(P) and still worse than Mig-15 on 8.3

G.91YS 9.7 -> 9.3

Reason: Plane without countermeasures, good missiles, small load and any AGMs shouldn't be fighting on 9.7

Vampire (all) 8.0 -> 7.3

Reason: Weak guns, slow and bad acceleration

Re.2005 5.7 -> 5.3

Reason: Plane was decent on 5.3 but now it's bad and often plays on 6.0 and 6.3 BR

Tu-2S-44 5.7 -> 5.3

Reason: Same plane as Tu-2S on 5.3

  • Ground:

Semovente 75/46 M43 4.7 -> 4.3

Reason: a bit better armor than Stug 3G, same cannon characteristics as Stug 3G's cannon.

Sidam 25 8.3 -> 7.7

Reason: Worst SPAA on it's BR. No radar, Leading only up to 1,5km.

meanwhile Gepard is 8.0...

VCC80/60 9.0 -> 8.7

Reason: Zero post-pen damage, big silhouette, slow replenishment speed, worse than Centauro Romor and Centauro I 105.

Dardo 9.3 -> 9.0

Reason: Worse than BMP-2M in all aspects.

 

  • Upvote 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pleasantly surprised by these BR changes. Almost all of them seem healthy in one way or another. 

 

I do want to suggest the following tho:

 

F-4F Late

(RB) 10.7 → 10.3

OR

Add AIM-9Ls and keep (RB) 10.7

 

With F-4E, F-4EJ, F-4EJ ADTW and FG.1 and FGR.2  being moved down from 11.0 to 10.7, german Phantom is currently underpowered for its BR. Anything F-4F does, aforementioned Phantoms can do better.

 

If Sparrows are standart for 10.7 with brits having acces to Skyflashes, plane armed only with 4x AIM-9Js does not fit the meta at all.

 

Either move it down a bit, or add AIM-9Ls to make it more unique in terms of gameplay. 

 

F-4F Early

(RB) 10.3 → 10.0

 

Similiar problem as the F-4F Late - at 10.3 without flares and armed only with 4x AIM-9Js against planes with AIM-9Ls and RM-60Ks just does not seem fair. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good br changes overall for all modes. Well done Gaijin! I only have some additional Aircraft and Tank br change requests.


Realistic Battles:  

 

A-7s (all) 

Lower brs by 0.3/0.4 each

The A-7s are long past their hayday in game and don’t have the missiles or flight performance of other strike fighters to do very well in Air Battles, and their ground ordinance is comparable to may of the better performing strike aircraft that are lower or the same br. Considering these issues, I think that the A-7D can be 10.0, A-7E can be 10.3, and the A-7K can be 10.7 without breaking the game’s meta and will give the Corsair IIs a new lease on life.

 

Tornado IDS Marinefliegar

Stay 10.7

I do not believe that the Marinefliegar has the flight performance, missile load, or ordinance capabilities to justify it becoming 11.0, unless the rudimentary ground attack capability that is mentioned in many different sources is added to the AS.34s. Otherwise, I think it is a pretty well balanced 10.7 because while it can use its missiles and flight performance to surprise enemies, it is often on the back foot in an engagement and has to either run or drain its opponents of energy, similarly to the Yak-38M which will be going to 9.3 for its lack of flares.

 

Sea Harrier FRS.1
10.7 —> 11.0

The Sea Harrier FRS.1 is much more deserving of br 11.0 than the Marinefliegar by comparison because it has more Aim-9Ls, better flight performance for defending itself/offensively maneuvering, a similar amount of countermeasures, and a good bomb load. The combination of the better flight performance for most situations and additional 2 missiles makes it a very dangerous and frankly overpowered aircraft in the fighter role when compared to the other 10.7s like the Kfir Canard and Marinefliegar.
 

A-6E TRAM 

10.0 —> 10.3

The A-6E TRAM has comparable flight performance to the Su-25, but also has the option to take 3 missiles and a gun pod or 4 missiles, and has extremely good guided bomb loadouts. I think it’s too good to be 10.0 because of its combination of performance and missiles and should be the same br as the A-10 Late that has worse flight performance, but one more missile, an internal gun, and Maverick Ds instead of a multitude of guided bombs.

 

BMP-2M

9.3 —> 9.7, 10.0, or 10.3

The BMP-2M has excellent mobility, and with the 1200mm Tandem and HE-VT Kornets and the ability to fire missiles on the move, I and most of the community, believe it is too good for 9.3. I think it would be fine for the tank to go up in br in increments to see which br best suits it with data to back up its performance. I know that not the best players use it and it’s stats are probably conflicting, but I think most people want it to be at least the same br as the 2S38.

 

Thank you all for making the game better, o7.

  • Upvote 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nathanclawfish said:

Aye the bosvark is geniunely a bad vehicle, same with the ystvark, both are large, have massive dead zones, and i cant recall the last time i have actually seen one other than people base rushing in them. I just find it funny the crusader aa is slowly going down in br when i prefer it in literally all situations at the same br XD

The bosvarks are meh, but I found it suprisingly good in squadron battles of 4.7.

Anyways, yeah, that thing should stay at 4.7.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very Great changes but their is more changes needed !

 

BMP-2M

9.3 to 10.0 Br

Gen 2 thermals / APDS-FS / 30mm grenade launcher good against jets and helis / 9M133FM-3 VT missiles with 10km range With Radar lock and track system.

 

Ta 152 C-3

Should stay 6.3 Br.

 

Z-19/19E

Great change.

 

Sidam 25

8.3 -> 7.7

No Radar and limited lead for 1.5 km.

 

(T-10A Need a change)

7.7 to 7.3 Br

IS-6 at 7.0 have same gun with no Stab and better armor and 17km reverse speed.

T10-A worst armor 8km reverse Speed with stab work at 20km speed only and slow reload and suffer from up tiers. 

 

2S6

should stay 11.0 Br.

 

itpsV 90

8.3 to 8.7 Br.

very Great mobility and great armor in the hull used as light tank more than spaa.

 

XM8

9.3 to 10.0 or 10.3 Br

but only if it gets M900 round.

 

2S38

Best change !

 

M53/59

6.0 to 6.7 Br

spaa with 91mm of pen can kill tanks very easily.

 

 

VK45.01 (P)

5.3 to 5.0 Br

Tiger H1 with more weak spots.

 

Me 410 B-6/R3 

5.0 to 4.7 Br

big target not good for dog fighting and slow.

 

tiger HAD

11.0 to 10.7 Br

it just a tiger HAP with AGM-114k and No Radar and no APKWS II missiles and only 12G air to air missiles.

other top tier helis have Radar and 30G missiles and better rockets at same br.

 

Elefant/Ferdinand

6.7 to 6.3 Br

very slow and armor not good anymore with heat and atgm and buff for the apds and high repair cost.

 

Flakpanzer 341

Removed spaa

6.3 back to 6.7 br but give it's missing HVAP ammo.

 

T-72AV (TURMS-T)

9.7 to 10.3 br

only weakness slow in reverse.

 

 

would be better if max up tier was only 0.7

before 1.0-2.3

After 1.0 to 1.7

that will help a lot of vehicles suffer less from up tiers and face better planes/tanks that out class them !

 

best wishes :fixsnail:

 

Edited by __olivia
added more
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, x_Shini_ said:

puma 9,7 is bad if this does not include spikes, tornado ids marine flieger 11.0 is not fair it doesnt have the capabilities for it, but the trio turms ,2s38 su-25 only to 10.0 to low, those need to go up another 0.3 at least and with general raise of the br i dont know if it is good enough

Considering that at that br of aircraft and tanks, most of them will stay at the same br, the br changes of the Russian Premium Trio will actually be proper a nerf to them, and I don’t really think any of them should go higher than that when compared with contemporaries, other than maybe the 2S38. I’d like it more if the HSTV-L and Otomatic could be reduced in br to 10.3 or get some nice buffs to their ammo types and amount, but I don’t think the 2S38 should be higher than 10.3. The Su-25s are good contemporaries to the A-10 Early with different specializations in their flight performance and ordinance that make them kind of like equals with different mastery of trades, and the Turms will fit in well at 10.0 if the T-72B isn’t going to go up.

  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2s6: 11.0 ->11.3 & OTOMATIC: 11.0->11.0

 

it makes no sense to reduce the br of 2s6 while increasing the br of Otomatic, when Otomaic is worse than 2s6 in all aspects (anti-air & anti-tank). Basically all CAS aircrafts are increased in br (and heli this planned update), a 0.3 decrease in br for 2s6 this version basically means a 0.6 decrease in br before the br was extended (without vehicle performance degradation). And I can’t really understand how’s Otomatic going to 11.3 when the developers are planning to reduce the br of 2s6. I don’t really see the logic to make these two decisions same time.

 

Arite C1/PSO: 11.0->11.0

I don’t really feel the combat efficiency improvement with the DM53 as new rounds. It’s not worth the br.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see really zero reasons to set 2S6 at 10.7. On this br it will be thomesing like second pantsir, because it has 1) good guns, when other SPAA with SACLOS missles don't 2) better missles than roland, wich is only 0.3 lower and it will outrange every helicopter with 8 no-stop firing missles.
Also bmp-2m defenitly must go higher, cuz its basically the best ifv if not in the game, then at 9.3. Just compare it whith sweden strf-9040 at same br. 9040 is worse in almost every aspect.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Ariete: stay at the old BR. This is madness. Now they cannot even catch a break and will face only top tier tanks which are objectively better at everything.
Leopard 2A4 (and it's variants): get DM33 since it will face much more dangerous opponents now.
OTOMATIC: should go to 10.3, especially since 2S6 gets a BR decrease.

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All comments and vehicle discussion for Air Simulator mode

 

Generally good, EC9 is much needed and will make many planes at 10.7 and above viable to use again. A-10 and Su-25 being moved up was also desperately needed and should very easily improve the game experience around 9.7 and 10.0, but the A-10 and Su-25 should still remain strong at 10.3, even against fighters.

Increasing the BR to 12.7 can easily be done to reduce the power creep in terms of radar and missile capability. Increasing the BR in air simulator mode would only affect this mode, not even tank simulator mode (if BRs are increased to vehicles after BR 6.7) so this would not cause any issues to any other modes. Many planes lie between BRs where they are either very weak or very strong one way or the other. By increasing the BR range, more planes will be competitive and so more players will use the under-used planes rather than skipping a plane to only wait until unlocking the next competitive plane.

 

Harrier GR.3 / AV-8 / Yak-38

I do not see why this should be moved down from 9.7 to 9.3. Especially with planes such as the A-10, Su-25 and even Jaguar being moved up, creating a comfortable place for these planes to perform well at BR 9.7. At 9.3 no other planes have comparable missiles and very few have flares. The flight performance of these planes at 9.3 is far too strong compared to just other 9.3s.

 

Q-5 early

I believe with many of the 9.7s being moved up (A-10, Su-25 etc...) this plane should easily stay at 9.7 and be effective as the acceleration, climb and speed of this plane means that no 9.3 fighter has a remote chance to engage this plane. Especially since the effective range of missiles is lower due to increased drag while turning now and the Aim-9B and equivalents do not have much range to begin with.

Remining at BR 9.7 after the change will make this plane perform better as this does not have to face all aspect missiles and the flight performance allows the Q-5 early to either out run, out turn or do both simultaneously to almost all 9.7 planes besides the Russian equivalents.

 

Spitfire Mk24

6.3 is a fine BR for this plane, currently at 6.3 it performs adequately. As the speed below 3,000m which almost all fights occur at is not great. Even the manoeuvrability of the Mk24 is not the greatest as planes like the Ki-84 have better turning performance while having a similar top speed. The Yak-3U is faster than the Mk 24 while having very similar turning performance but maintains its energy much better which means the Yak-3U should win against a Mk 24 in a manoeuvring dogfight.

As the spitfire is like a Ki-84 and weaker than the Yak-3U at altitudes that almost all people fly. As well as being a relatively uncommon plane to see, likely due to mediocre performance. It should stay at BR 6.3

 

P-51D-30

This should easily be moved up to a BR of 6.0 or 6.3, while its speed is mostly unrivalled at BR 5.3 it’s manoeuvrability at high speed which this plane is always at is also very good. A Bf 109K-4 at BR 5.7 is outperformed by the P-51D-30 in all ways (at typical altitudes) besides climb rate and possibly sustained turn time however the P-51D-30 with flaps will easily get onto the tail of a 109K before the P-51D-30 runs out of energy and needs to rely on sustained turns.

Even at BR 6.3 the P-51D-30 will be among the fastest planes however, all the planes that will be faster, and still many that are still slower, are very easily out turned by the P-51D-30 so this will make the plane somewhat more balanced, but it will still be strong at BR 6.3. The P-51-D-30 should be increased to at least BR 6.0 where it will easily remain the strongest plane at this BR, ideally it should be 6.3.

 

Ta-152 C-3

I have not seen anyone say this plane is good in Sim. As the strengths of this plane is its performance at very high altitudes which is never approached in all games. This plane is generally awful in terms of flight performance in which the manoeuvrability is by far the worst out of any single engine fighter and probably twin-engine fighters. The speed of this plane is awful at typical altitudes where many single engine fighters can easily catch it. While its armament is strong, this should not be a reason to increase its BR. The Ta-152 C-3 should be thought of as a twin-engine interceptor and balanced as such. Where its flight performance is lower than a single engine fighter but has a strong armament to compensate.

The P-51D-30 can very easily catch and has no issue to manoeuvre to get on the tail of the Ta 152 C-3. As there are many single engine fighters that are faster than the Ta-152 C-3 and all the single fighters can out manoeuvre the Ta-152 C-3, the BR should remain at BR 5.7.

Edited by A13DarBray1TS@psn
  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what about the premium Harrier Gr 1 in Simulator mode? Harier gr 3 is lowered one br below, and I remind you that it has heat traps, an radiation warning system, long-range missiles, and gr 1 does not have all this. But the Harier gr 1 remains at the same br - 10.0. it is not possible to play on it against aircraft of the same br. He has one advantage, this is a bomb load and that's it. It turns out that he is 2 steps higher in br just because I can destroy the base in 1 run, and not in 2?
Also, the French f8 is lowered down the br in simulator mode, while the American one remains the same. What kind of double standards?

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

improving the BR of CR1, CR2 is ridiculous, no one cares about their actual combat efficiency stats, the kill efficiency of L27A1 and L26A1 is a joke, given their massive weakness, there is no need to improve the BR
So my advice is to either strengthen them or leave them as they are

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When will you finally re-evaluate the BR of the A2D-1 Skyshark in AB? I guess you don't get much data from it, because at 9.0 even with a lot of slots there are so many jets one could rather play, why bother with a turboprop? If at least it would get 7.0 so it could be used in top tier naval that would be great.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BMP-2M needs to be moved to 9.7 at least, preferably 10.0 ... 

 

and you need to stop ignoring arcade helicopter BR ... quite a few helicopters need to be moved down to 9.3 because they can't do much in the 9.7+ heli battles (HKP9, BO-105, ...)

or even better, create third bracket for heliPvE battles ... 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad list. I can make a few suggestions. 

Su-22, Su-17M2: 11.0-10.3. While they are supersonic attackers, they only get regular R-60s 
Su-17M4: 11.0 - 10.7: might be too high for its airframe even though it gets R-60Ms
I also agree with all of the above suggestions from other players. 

  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator

(All RB)

2S6

Feedback ==> Should stay at 11.0

Description ==> Considering the increase of maximum ground BRs, it wouldn't be a good idea to move this vehicle back to once again compress vehicles. Currently, Roland systems (Roland 1, XM975, FlaRakPz 1) are at 10.3, making 2S6 Tunguska a 10.7 SAM system isn't only lowering the point in existence of the mentioned SAM systems, but puts all CAS (especially helicopters) at a serious disadvantage.

 

Su-25 and 2S38

Feedback ==> This is a lovely and positive change to see, thanks!

Description ==> Not much to talk about Su-25, but 2S38 can still be considered to go higher in later updates.

 

BMP-2M

Feedback ==> Should go to 9.7

Description ==> One of the most advanced vehicles at its BR, outranging any SAM with its HE-VT missile while staying effective against ground targets. High gun elevation combined with fast-firing 30mm gun AND target tracking capability is not something to ignore. The vehicle is also pretty fast, can fire on the move, has 2nd-gen thermals, commander sight with very high zoom and access to APDS-FS rounds.

 

Sea Vixen F.A.W. Mk.2

Feedback ==> Should go to 9.0

Description ==> This is a jack of all trades vehicle that shines in any role. Powerful engines combined with tough airframe and easy controllability are paired with advanced weapon systems. Good radar with BVR lock, coverage and IFF, RWR, 4 x Redtop missiles, ability to carry bullpops and other ground-pounding armament is not an 8.7 material.

 

Milan

Feedback ==> Should go to 9.3 (Considering the continued decompression, this is a very personal opinion of myself)

Description ==> While vehicles like F-104s, MiG-19 series, F-100 series and Lightnings are at 9.3, this one lacks a proper fit at 9.7. Lack of any advanced weapon systems and avionics (Missiles, radar, RWR, countermeasures, etc.) makes this quite similar to mentioned vehicles. It lacks maneuverability at any speed due to heavy airframe, bleeds a lot of energy in turns and lacks any defensive mechanism.

 

Ayit (A-4N)

Feedback ==> Should go to 9.7

Description ==> AGMs (3 x AGM-65A), 4 x maneuverable and long-range missiles + CCIP/CCRP for bombs, Countermeasures and RWR. I think the mentioned specs are pretty much self-explaining. And these are also combined with a very good acceleration and engine. Ever since the introduction of the vehicle, it has been a deadly multi-role jet. It's pretty devastating to air targets with 2 x AIM-9D + 2 x Shafrir II loadout (And a 20mm gun pod) and at the same time, outranges any SPAA in it's BR.

 

Ki-45 (hei-tei) (China)

Feedback ==> Should go to 2.7

Description ==> Air-spawn, great engine and easy control of vehicle, deadly guns and a turret. What else is needed to increase the BR to 2.7? )) The Japanese Ki-45 is at 2.7 without Schrage Musik cannons.

 

Hope this feedback helps :salute:

As a note, I play and have all the mentioned vehicles except 2S6 (Tunguska).

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F-4E: 11.0 -> 10.7, OR give it Pave Spike, GBU-10/12 and AGM-65D.

It's very "effective" in ARB and GRB due to "great" radar, missiles, and guided bombs/A-G rockets, that can track targets only at 6 or less km and cant be used in night battles

AH-64D(every nation): 11.3 -> 10.7, OR give it AGM-114L and 11.3 -> 11.7 like Tiger UHT.

Even before 96K6 Apache couldnt play against AA due to weakness of laser AGM-114, so its br should be lowerd to 10.7, or it should get AGM-114L

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SU-17M4 should be on 10.0 BR as it used to be.
It is a heavy block to fly and has, no flares/chaffs.

 

2S6 should be on BR 10.3/10.0 because it is useless on 10.7. Most aircraft are already fast and maneuverable.
The missiles in the Tunguska are so bad that it's even hard to hit a drone from afar as they lose energy quickly, not to mention maneuverability.

 

Mi-35M on 10.7 BR is a joke, if it already has to be on this BR then add armament with more range than 6km

  • Confused 10
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is going to sound outrageous how ever...

 

Harrier GR.7 11.7 ----> 11.3 RB & AB

Reason: after the addition of the gen 4 fighters, its early advantage has been completely removed and it no longer can be its role as a strike aircraft being countered by both the f-16 and MiG-29 and it will take a missile directly to the cockpit 9/10 when trying to bomb.

Another reason is that the payload isn't high enough for it to be worth risking the missile warfare to bomb.

 

Tornado GR.1 11.3 ---> 11.0 all modes

Reason: not much really to explain, the guided bombs are meh and the tornado IDS is better at a WAY lower B.R

 

Jaguar GR.1A  10.3 ----> 10.0 (even I'm on the ropes about this one)

Reason: it is completely powerless at its current BR. Yes the bombs are quite good and it is a supersonic aircraft. But what's the point of that when you cannot bomb without taking a hit? Ever since it was changed from 10.0 to 10.3 I have never wanted to play it.

 

Sea vixen FAW 8.7 ---> 8.7 (stay the same) 

Reason: it has zero countermeasures and it gets often uptiers to 9.3, if it would go to 9.0, it would be a slaughter as all of its advantages vanish after 9.3.

 

Hunter F.6 9.7----> 9.0 

Reason: completely powerless at its BR. It's SRAAMs are useless past 1KM range and it has zero countermeasures. Even the down tier for it wasn't enough to stop this 16k repair cost from getting slaughtered.

 

Sea hurricane MK.1C 3.0 ---> 3.3 

Reason: cannons are OP with this plane. It has fast speeds, good turn rate and a good acceleration. It can survive upto 4.0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by GKB05@live
Updated list of BR changes I'd like added to war thunder!
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how we got a 2nd BR update before an economy one.

 

Naval AB and RB:

HMAS Arrow, 2.7 -> 2.3 - HMAS Arrow is pretty much a worse SC-497, having worse armament in exchange for a small speed increase (but is still slower than MTBs so it won't be catching any early game points), and has no business even being at Rank 4 (personally I think it's worse than the preceding Fairmile D). The Bofors' coverage isn't particularly good and unlike SC-497 doesn't have 3 Oerlikons to cover the rear, only a single .50cal which does rather negligible damage.

 

Letuchiy, 4.0 -> 3.7 - Letuchiy is not very good at 4.0. It has essentially no AA, and its main guns have a meh RoF (The same as the 130mm and worse than the German, US, and UK equivalents) and only have access to HE, which limits its overall usefulness compared to other destroyers which can have (S)AP and HE-VT/TF to deal with more targets.

I would also suggest Letuchiy -> before Ognevoy, as Ognevoy is simply a better vessel, it has armoured turrets, faster speed, effective AA, and better firepower. It also makes the progression make more sense, as Bezuprechny is an improved Ognevoy. But that's an economy update thing anyhow.

 

Besposhchadny, Ryany, 3.7 -> 4.0 - Uh, the Pr.7 destroyers are basically the same as the Pr.7Us. They have the same firepower, speed, size, AA, and crew (because they're pretty much the same class), with the only difference being the 7Us having a less vulnerable engine layout. I could kinda understand them being at 3.7 back when their AA was the terrible 45mm cannons, but since they've been buffed with 37mm autocannons they should move up.

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2s38
Feedback ==> Should go to 10.3
The BR of the 2S38 is to low to begin with, so just adjusting it is not enough and or the tank should be classified as a SPG or SPAA and its light tank abilities should be removed.

 

BMP-2M

Feedback ==> Should go to 10.0
Light the 2S38 this vehicle is at a lower BR than it should be and for some reason it even gets spared the "adjustment", that other vehicles get. Both missiles and cannons punch way about it's BR and leaving the BMP-2M at it's current BR would make it even more broken than it already is.

  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...