wrong
the Su-39 is a Su-25TM and not a Su-25T, they are not the same
They should nerf the APHE of those SPAAs instead of moving them up in BR
There aren’t any other (good) SPAAs that could do their job at their respective BRs
Vehicle: VT5
Modification: BTA2
Reason: DTW2-105 isnt good enough for its BR. Under 500mm penetrating round at 11.7 BR is almost unusable, players have to specifically aim at the weak spots.
5 Likes
but they arent going to do that thanks to the community voting against it.
they could just remove the he filler from the apit rounds tho.
(Translator. I’m sorry, my English is very bad.)
Type 90 (all versions) GRB 11.7 ->11.3
The vehicle is essentially a slightly modified leopard2a4 - the loss of guidance speed in both planes and survivability due to fewer areas protected by composite armor (hello autocannons) and a crew of 3 people is compensated by a new projectile (which can also be issued by Leo 2a4) and accelerated reloading up to 4 seconds. In all other respects, the vehicles are almost identical, so I consider the difference in 1.0 combat rating unjustified.
Thanks for reading.
7 Likes
type 90 “all” grb 11.7->12.0
they are just better tkx(p) at lower br.
better armor against autocannon, bigger ready rack and faster.
they are better than any other mbt at 11.7.
API-T always has some HE filler, otherwise it cannot be incendiary
They obviously could nerf the potency of that HE filler, but they can’t get rid of it
The results of the APHE poll doesn’t prevent them from nerfing the penetration value of the shells or to reduce the HEI to API/APHE/SAP ratio. Get rid of the 50/50 and 75/25 belts and limit the SPAAs to always use the 3 HEI/1 AP belt configuration.
Correction: The API used in most modern 25/30/35mm anti air guns is actually a type of SAP ammunition, which contains explosives to increase their effectiveness against planes
Regular API doesn’t necessarily contain explosive fillers, but I am not sure if regular API shells for these anti air guns even exist
1 Like
TKX(P) has 3rd generation thermal; Type 90 only 1st gen.
3 Likes
The year is 2030. The A6M5 zero is now 8.0 and going up to 8.3 as MiG-15bis and F-86F-35 players cannot stop turnfighting with it. The F-14 tomcat eagerly awaits dueling the A6M5 in 2036 to re-create the movie The Final Countdown. The Japanese would rather kamikaze the AI ships on the map than try to fight players, yet still shoot down four jets who tried to turnfight them on the way to the AI targets.
On a real note, can we please stop and think critically about your changes? The A6M zero is slow and can be countered. Stop babying the playerbase by increasing the BR of anything that’s remotely difficult for people with little experience to fight - namely, turnfighters like the zero, vampire etc - and let players figure out how to fight them naturally. Different aircraft naturally have different skill floors and ceilings. I thought Gaijin’s balancing team would get the message after the community backlash when a small group of players were able to push the CL-13A Mk4 to 9.0 simply by squadding up and doing well in it, since it was so rarely played (for being a worse counterpart to the sabre at a higher BR and in a minor tree even before the proposal for 9.0)
7 Likes
Is the Ho-Ri removal going to work the same as the removal of the R2Y2 jets? Where you will own the vehicle just by putting at least one research point into the vehicle or do you have to actually purchase the vehicle to own it?
yes, all the vehicle removals have worked the same way.
1 point in research is enough
thank you
How you figure the filler does not make a difference?
FYI - the Jumbo 75mm gun at 5.7 would have similar effectiveness of the Churchill ammo at 5.0
And… still no BR change for the Falcon spaa. LOLOLOL.
or maybe this TKX (p) should be lowered down the br in the same way as the type 90? Have you thought about that? None of these tanks deserves 12.0
Other 11.7 tanks:
M1A1 – equal or superior in every respect except reload speed.
Challenger – falls short only in mobility and reload speed.
As for the Arietes… I’m all for it, provided they all have the DM53 round taken away and get moved from 11.7 down to 11.0–11.3, and from 12.3 down to 11.7.
2 Likes
1 Like
Yes, this would make it more realistic. Then we could have a 1944 vintage Early A30 Challenger with worse armour and no APDS at 4.7.
1 Like
F-14A IRIAF at 13.7 is a non sense
A plane from 1974 facing 4.0 / 4.5 gen fighters
With a very limited radar, very limited missile, very limited countermeasures
You guys should give away some GE for those that have it and remove it from the game once and for all.
Cause It’s already unplayble .
We know the only people getting themselves killed in F-14s these days are the premium players—GJ’s little darlings—which is why they pull this shit.
Vehicle: F-16CM Block 52 PoBIT
Mode: Air Realistic
Change: 14.3 → 14.0
Reasoning:
The F-16CM PoBIT lacks any real ability to compete at its own BR due to its lackluster speed, dogfight performance, and missile count. The only redeeming factor of the PoBIT is an AESA radar, except the majority of planes at 14.3 have an AESA radar, and a decent number still have better radars than the PoBIT.
Similarly, many 14.0 or even 13.7 aircraft hold significant advantages over the PoBIT in both an ARB environment and in a one on one engagement.
3 Likes
Vehicle: F-16V Block 72
Mode: Air Realistic
Change: 14.3 → 14.0
Reasoning:
Same as with my F-16CM PoBIT reply, the F-16V has zero ability to compete at its own BR since it is significantly lacking in almost every aspect compared to its competition at 14.3, and many 13.7 or 14.0 aircraft are superior in both an ARB environment and in a 1v1 secnario.
3 Likes