compare it to the premium Panzer IV in germany that should have good KD
F8F-1
AIR RB
4.7->5.3
most OP 4.7 at 4.7 genuinely insuffereble to play against a late 1944 aircraft against EARLY ZEROS why and how did anyone think this is fair it has near 3000 HP at 4.7
5 Likes
M14/41 (47/40)
it_m14_41_47_40
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.3 → 2.0
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.3 → 2.0
-
47 mm Reload Speed: 2.9 s → 3.1 s
-
8 mm Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.0 s
Rationale
It takes Italy until 2.3 for one of their tanks to get a gun that is almost as powerful as the 45 mm 20-K that the Soviets get at 1.0. I think that speaks for itself.
Compared to the bog standard M14/41, the M14/41 (47/40) isn’t a significant enough step up in terms of performance to warrant facing 3.3 vehicles, as the 47/40 gun is still generally inferior to most other guns in the 45-50 mm category.
14 Likes
M15/42
it_m15_42
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.3
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.0
-
47 mm Reload Speed: 2.9 s → 3.1 s
-
8 mm Reload Speed: 8.0 s → 3.0 s
Rationale
The M15/42 is not on the same level as other light and medium tanks at its BR (T-50, Pz.III J1, Chi-He, M3 Lee, and Strv m/42 EH), and in some cases, those lower than it at 2.3 (T-28E, Pz.IV F1, and Pz.III J).
The mobility, while better than its predecessors, is still only mediocre and the armor is only improved along one part of the front. The gun is still outperformed by Soviet reserve vehicles, resulting in it being quite uncompetitive, even in just slight uptiers.
13 Likes
Vehicle: German P47D
Gamemode: Air Realistic
Br change: 4.3 → 3.7
Reason: similar in performance with P-47D-16-RE but it is still sitting at a higher Br
1 Like
Vehicle: German P47D
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR Change: 4.3 —> 3.7
Reason: similar in performance with the P47D-16-RE but it’s still sitting at a significant higher Br.
2 Likes
Hawk H-75A-2
h-75a-2_finland
-
Rank: Rank II → Rank I
-
Arcade Battle BR: 2.7 → 1.7
-
Realistic Battle BR: 2.7 → 2.0
Rationale:
This isn’t even really a proper balance change imo. This plane was just completely forgotten about when other aircraft were moved long ago.
For whatever reason, it’s placed at a significantly higher in BR than H-75A-4 despite being the exact same thing with a worse engine. It should fall between the two French tree H-75 variants in BR since it is, in the purest sense, an intermediate of the A-1 and A-4.
10 Likes
Vehicle: Teledyne Expeditionary Tank (Called “AGS” in game)
Suggested change: Add M900 APFSDS or Hellfire/TOW-2 coaxial pods as a modification to equip on the tank (missile pods not really serious suggestion)
Reasoning: The missile pods would be funny. M900 is more realistic, as M833 is pretty mediocre against the more and more well armored 12.7 BR MBT/BMPT swarms. Not as if M833 is unusable but it’s a battle very much against you. M900 would level the playing field.
Especially considering the (arbitrary nerf mechanic) “additional modules” are being worked on for this tank that will massively downgrade the combat capabilities of the tank. Light tanks with the “additional modules” are significantly inferior to ones without.
Vehicle: all tanks with “additional modules” (barring SAM systems with remote controlled weaponry/truly unmanned turrets (AGS, BMPT, M1128 do not have truly unmanned turrets they are overhead turrets/low profile turrets))
Suggestion: Unify behavior of all additional module systems across all tanks (FCS destruction on all tanks will disable stabilizer, LRF, etc but still permit firing)
Reasoning: Additional modules are an arbitrary hard nerf to the tanks with them, and their inconsistent effects are both annoying and unbalanced.
Why do light vehicles require fully functional modules to fire anything; while MBTs can lose many modules and still fire their weapons with backup systems? This inconsistency solely serves to punish light armor players for not following the herd and playing MBTs. Light armor above BR 11.7 is already fairly rare and these module nerfs make playing non-MBTs significantly less enjoyable.
Backup systems should either be modeled for all or none. Modeling these for few vehicles is unacceptable.
Well I guess Gaijin is going to have to find something for 7.3 Japan. Hopefully they look deep with the coming update because Japan’s ground line ups are nuked now especially concerning the A6M. A6M at 4.7 was a good time so many line ups.
1 Like
Vehicle: G.55 sottoserie 0
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR change: 4.3 → 4.0
The sottoserie 0 has poor climb rate, poor speed, poor turnrate and maneuvering. The MG151 has been underwhelming since the latest changes and the Breda SAFAT are some of the worst MGs in the game.
It’s an inferior plane to everything else at its own BR and it should go down.
4 Likes
Vehicle: G.55 serie 1
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR change: 5.3 → 5.0
The serie 1 has poor performance and is prone to overheating. It climbs and turns worse than the G.55s. The only advantage are the 2 additional Breda SAFAT MGs which are anemic and add very little.
It’s also one of the slowest planes at its BR. It should definitely go down in BR.
6 Likes
Vehicle: Ta 152 C-3
Gamemode: Air Realistic
BR change: 6.3 → 5.3
Add separate Ground Realistic Battles BR
The Ta 152 C-3 has abismal performance. It climbs bad, has the worst turn of any prop plane in the game, and is extremely heavy. The only upside are the guns. The MK103 is good in ground RB (though the MG151 are almost useless in ground, even with the armor piercing shells, since they can’t really pen the top of any tank).
It should absolutely get a split BR, allowing it to remain high in GRB, but be significantly lower in ARB
5 Likes
Mode: Ground Realistic Battles
Vehicle: Centurion Mk.1
Change: 6.0 → 5.7
Reasoning: The turret frontal armor of the tank has long been only 127 mm, not 152 mm, which makes it vulnerable to most guns at BR 6.0. The vehicle’s survivability is low, as 3 out of 4 crew members are located in the turret, and any hit to it often results in the tank being destroyed.
The gun has good nominal penetration; however, due to the use of sub-caliber and solid-shot rounds without explosive filler, it deals poor post-penetration damage. The high rate of fire is further limited by the 5+1 round mechanic, which negates its advantage in combat.
In addition, the tank’s mobility is unsatisfactory - its maximum speed is only 36-38 km/h, which does not allow it to maneuver effectively on the battlefield.
Taken together, these drawbacks indicate that the Centurion Mk.1 does not fit BR 6.0, and lowering it to 5.7 would be a more balanced solution.
5 Likes
Mode: Air Realistic Battles
Aircraft: Me 262 A-1a, Me 262 A-1a/Jabo, and Me 262 A-2a
Change: 7.0 → 6.3, 7.0 → 6.3, and 6.7 → 6.3
Reasoning: These were the world’s first mass-produced jet aircraft. They have poor maneuverability and take a long time to build up speed, which means they can only rely on their velocity - something that is rarely achievable at BR 7.0 (where they very often face 7.7 and 8.0). In addition, they are equipped with a very specific armament: four 30 mm MK 108 cannons with extremely poor ballistics.
It should also be noted that at BR 6.3 (new 6.0) there is already the Me 262 A-1/U4, armed with the 50 mm Mk.214a cannon, which offers far superior ballistics and aiming performance, and yet it does not cause any balance issues.
2 Likes
Mode: Naval Arcade & Realistic Battles
Ship: RN Zara and RN Pola
Change: 6.0 → 5.7
Reasoning: One of the longest reload times for 203 mm guns among its counterparts, weak damage from their 203 mm shells, low accuracy of the same 203 mm guns, lack of torpedo armament, not the best armor.
2 Likes
The German premium Panzer IV is the J variant. The performance of the J type is notably inferior to that of the H type; its turret traverse speed is only 10° /s much slower than the H type’s 16°/s
Correct.
Much more useful to compare the Italian Pz IV G with the Italian Sherman Ic. Both are premiums, both are in the same tree and a minor nation tree at that, and until recently they were even at the same BR. The comparison should prove… Illuminating.
R2Y2 still a rotting corpse at 8.0 Air RB…
4 Likes
I have posted a lot of coastal suggestions, only for them to get ignored. If they are going to consider any naval change now, I will repost them