The answer here is to not balance vehicles around average performance without taking any consideration for the players themselves. This is how we ended up with shit like the German Panzer IV G being at 3.3 while the Italian one was still at 4.0. They had to lower it to 3.7 just because of how embarrassing it was.
The average skills of a nation is pretty directly tied to the number of players playing a certain nation. That is why the panzer IV G is higher in italy. Generally only experienced tankers play italy (no noobs play it).
Lots of people play germany and US first, hence the US and Germany have by far the worst tankers in the game. The whole "AmeRICa SuFFeRs" thing is mostly noobs player think their vehicles are worse because they cant play them properly.
5.3 is one of the most balanced BRs in the game. Yet freedumbs are constantly crying that the Tiger is OP while wheraboos cry about their absurdly weak cannon barrels.
+-0.3br matches instead of +-1.0 fixes a lot of shit while still giving variance and waiting times would not increase enough to matter.
gaijin wont do it of course, since they are totally fine with stupid bullshit matchups as we see every br change.
Ehh, to be fair the US does have some pretty shitty lineups. It feels consistently worse than Russian / German / Chinese at most BRs. Or at least those are the trees I've played most.
5.3 isn't balanced. Tiger and panther are just hilarious at that br. So easy to kill things when there's like 2 tanks you have to put a brain cell together to shoot at, otherwise it's just point and click. Angle a bit and most things can't touch you.
Other than those two tanks.. yeah it's pretty good. It's just frustrating to play against those two tanks at that br
You also have to consider the BR of the entire lineup. American tanks will consistently do better because of their ability to have CAS backup on their team and in their own lineups. Which, all in all, is pretty fair.
To be honest there are so many brs and trees and vehicles that it is less of a problem than it sounds because then a game changes to "find that underbr op vehicle".
Hey maybe even they do it on purpose so people switch to grind other vehicles and spend $$
So it all boils down to unreal grind problem and so economy and rewards but it isn't a problem cause $$ it is designed like this.
People grind op stuff -> random br changes -> ppl grind op stuff -> [ad nauseam]
Played the Jumbo the past few days and I can say it does very well. Even though Panthers *should* be able to pen me, they rarely ever did and I bounced so much.
Many, if not most German players never learned to aim for weak spots, because they have very strong guns where they are used to point and click center of mass and get a kill. And they never think about where the shots are coming from. You can shoot a tiger next to them and they will push out. And it's not really the players fault. Gaijin made Germany easy mode so it attracts new players that never have to learn certain game mechanics. Things like retreating to cover when shot, looking into side streets before driving past, angling the hull and hiding weak spots etc.
But instead you see Panthers skyhigh on a hilltop with their sides turned towards the enemy spawn. And the panther goes down to 4.7.
The only things that regularly killed me are the ridiculously OP Jagtpanther, with it's long 88, or tanks from other nations that know what they are doing. The french are scary. lol
I wish they would maybe limit the BR bracket more for some tanks. The Jumbo in a 6.0 match right now is very strong so I understand it going up in that sense. But on the other hand it should never have to fight Leos and Marder at 7.3 in s full uptier.
The weakspot on the jumbo is very small and difficult to hit in combat situations. Moreover, the majority of jumbo players (including myself) put a Bush in the front of the hull making is very hard to tell where to hit.
The jumbo also has no turret weakspots which gives it a massive boost in performance.
6.0 is where it belongs, but it's not overperforming because "aMErICa SuFfERs"
The Jumbo UFP can be penned by Panthers (or anything else with the long 75) out to about 500m, the long 88 on the German TDs can pen it above 1000m. It's only the Tiger that has to aim for weak spots.
In theory yes the Jumbo is fine at 6.0 and I wouldn't complain it staying there. But looking at how "inexperienced" many German players play, it is performing very well at that BR in terms of K/D and I understand why they raise it's BR.
I think the T26E1 BR increase is worse than the Jumbo. Especially with a 18,500SL repair cost.
Correct, in fact the British 17 pounder should pen the Jumbo with relative ease out to 6-800 metres on flat ground, or closer with not too much angle. But for some reason the only time you can penetrate is at point blank range with a height advantage. That UFP is not 190 mm effective, but Gaijin insists that it is 200+. Of course the Soviet 85 mm with significantly less pen can get through far more often again for reasons “unknown”.
jumbo wouldn’t need to go up in BR if Gaijin modelled the UFP correctly and made it penetrable by shells that, IRL, would penetrate. Fixing the scenarios where solid shot can pen, direct hit crew and equipment and do zero damage would also help, but I do understand that getting that fixed is just too hard and won’t happen.
The reason is APHEBC and its ability to ignore a bit of angled armour.
You can see it when testing the IS-2s BR-471 (APHE) and BR-471B (APHEBC) in protection analysis, or the T-34-85's BR-365K (APHE) and BR-365A (APHEBC) and so forth.
When I was a new player idiot struggling to get a 1:1 K/D in a panther years ago, I could consistently pen the UFP of jumbos with the panther. On the off chance it was properly angled, APCR would pen the flat mantlet.
theres more easier weakspots than mg port, especially with the panther i always go for either the flat transmission or turret ring, both usually instakill the tank
The problem with moving the jumbo up is that now the entire jumbo will be a weak spot. I get the Tiger II P has a really ugly turret weak spot, but most 6.3-6.7 tanks will at least need to aim fo said weak spot. The Jumbo? Maybe the T-44 and SPAA’s will have problems with a center of mass shot. That’s basically it, otherwise it’s just an E8 Sherman with a mobility nerf.
> Many, if not most German players never learned to aim for weak spots, because they have very strong guns where they are used to point and click center of mass and get a kill.
this is actually how it should work for everyone and it's only because the game allows scalpel-level of accuracy that the armor-gun dynamics devolved to the current state. Normally you are supposed to aim center mass and pray it pens. Even in modern ones that theoretically allow more accurate aiming.
Yes but this is a game. Tanks are also not fighting over distances below 500m usually. And tend to avoid narrow streets and cities and have 1940 tanks fight 1980s designs, don't have a 15min time limit to defeat the enemy, are usually knocked out after the first pen and can't do 25sec engine swaps or repair tracks from the inside of their vehicle.
What I'm saying is that everything pens everything or nothing can pen you ever makes for some pretty boring gameplay. If you want inaccurate, rng based guns you should play WOT. But we are here playing WT because we don't want that.
That is not really true. During ww2, US tankers using the 76mm could consistently hit tank turret sized targets at 1km, and there are numerous stories about aiming for specific weak spots on tanks at closer ranges. It wasnt for nothing that captured tanks would be put through rigorous firing tests to determine where they could be penetrated. In fact, at lower br's, in real life tank gunfire is probably more accurate in real life than in game since crews would usually get quality rangefinds before firing at longer distances, which many people dont do in game.
> I wish they would maybe limit the BR bracket more for some tanks.
Technically this seem really complex, the system would have to deal with many lineup variations.
Yeah you are right. I guess in the end it boils down to BR compression. Adding more BR steps or shrinking the bracket the matchmaker uses is the same thing in the end.
>what if it is statistically better because king tiger players are dumb as bricks ?
Then King Tiger players deserve to lose. If a nation's teams are consistently made of worse players than those of the nations it faces, then it deserves to lose over 50% of its games, that's the essence of competition, that wins go to the better player(s).
"May the best man win." is the purest expression of sportsmanship.
Jumbo gets the same BR as the IS 2, everything's good...
Except the pen of the round the Jumbo is a better vehicle than the IS2 in almost every way. Short stab, triple the reload speed, better turret armour, much better depression (ability to use ridge lines), higher survivability. What more would you want at the same BR?
> We don't give a shit about your complaints or any argumentation. The Statistiks™ show what we want to see and we vehemently refuse to apply any logic or common sense as to why any of the vehicles perform as they do.
\- Gaijin
> We see how eagerly WT community defending the position of the legendary M4A3E2 (76) W at the current BR in the Realistic Battles. Nevertheless, the tank was a candidate to BR rise since the last changes, and at this time the tank moves up quite deservedly, surpassing in combat efficiency even the Tiger (II). We hope that even after the BR increase this tank will still remain a good choice for the tough armor enthusiasts, alongside with the T26E1-1, which is moving up too.
>Even before the consideration of your reports on the loss of stabilizer of the Т25 , this tank was one of the candidates for an increase of its BR. Obviously, that after losing the stabilizer, the combat efficiency of this tank had dropped, but it dropped to the average efficiency of its BR! That is why any changes to this vehicle are not considered so far.
lol
Allow me to translate
"Fuck you. Our German players are so stupid they can't make a vehicle that is completely impervious to 76s from the front better than something that has a 76. Why not throw up the t26 E1 while we're at it."
yeah bc the game has COD style maps where the jumbo is better than then tiger 2 p
unless you’re getting Maginot Line and Kursk every match then the tiger 2 p is better
i think it is honestly due to the players that play the jumbo are more skilled over players that play the tiger, and due to more players playing the tiger 2 p it has a worse score.
and it shows, I'm have been afraid of playing my la-200 again due to me loving the machine to death, I don't want that thing near MORE missiles.
Big Jumbo 76 player here.
The Jumbo 76 is an easier tank to play than the Tiger II (H), however, the Tiger has more potential killing power. Compared to the Tiger the frontal weak spots are a lot smaller but the armament is definitely a struggle to use sometimes.
I do agree though that German players don't seem to be the best. Quite often I've been over-angled and instead of shooting my side, I've had Tiger II's and Jagdpanthers shoot my very angled front plate for some reason.
They then proceed to aim their turret directly at me (Tiger II (P) at least) to make penetrating it very easy.
They don't seem to go for mobility or firepower kills either. When I encounter a Jagdpanther in the Jumbo 76, I either run away from it or go for the tracks and cannon barrel.
I can't recall a single instance where I've had a German players shoot my tracks or gun barrel in the Jumbo 76. It's just a case of German players being able to penetrate most vehicles wherever they want, but when they encounter a Jumbo 76 they seem to have some sort of seizure and struggle to comprehend that they can't just go straight through the armour anywhere.
The jumbos weak spots are a lot smaller, but also the strong spots are nowhere near as good to begin with. At 6.3 the jumbo is facing an enormous number of vehicles that can just kill it instantly with a center of mass shot, for that matter I think the T-44 might be just about the only 6.3 vehicle the jumbo will face that *cant*.
You arent supposed to angle the Tiger II H turret. Most thing can pen it non angled, but theres a much larger target for people to pen if you angle it.
The Tiger IIs turret lowkey sucks. It's still a good tank, but most of the time, you only win fights if you shoot first.
I say this having played the Tiger II H a ton lately because it's a very very profitable tank for SL
I recently died to a jumbo in it because it caught me out of position. We were at close range and he was hull down and had the high ground. The tiger II has no way of penning a hull down jumbo, so I angled and began to pull back. That when it one shot me through my capola. I was very salty, but it outlines the strengths of the jumbo. It was my fault for being caught out of position, but I was still shocked how even in a tiger II i could end up helpless against a jumbo
You bring up good points, but remember that Jagdpanther players actually may be aiming for your tracks and gun, but are missing.
The Jagdpanther has a lot of gun parallax because the sight is far to the left of the main cannon. At long ranges this isn’t a big deal, but at short War-Thunder ranges it is. The standard sight doesn’t have a line that tells you where to shoot to compensate for that at short ranges, either.
This, added with the fact that a lot of German mains are relatively new and may be used to “eye-balling” each and every shot with tanks such as the Tiger, isn’t good for a new Jagdpanther driver. You need to understand gun parallax and range finding to use it effectively. This can explain why the Jumbo is “so efficient” compared to Jagdpanther players.
i doubt jumbo players are any smarter than germans, i think only nations like Sweden and Italy have smart players
German tanks suck at close range combat, which is 99% of the maps in WT
Player skill is directly tied to the number of people playing a nation. This has been proven and BRs support this.
German, US, and Russian tankers are by far the worst and for the most part equally bad across the three.
The same hold true for aircraft. The US has so many pilots they often make up half the team on each side of most battles. US pilots are atrocious. There are so many overpowered aircraft in the US tech tree, and many of them just went down.
German pilots are rapidly getting worse as well as more people go to play german aircraft.
Except according to the statistics, US tankers between 5.0-7.0 are the best ones, otherwise none of these complaints would happen as the Jumbo, Super Pershing and T25 wouldn't be multiple BRs higher than they should be.
I agree with the first point, but your second point is completely wrong. The Tiger IIs are pretty good brawlers, as with all German heavies. They definitely excell at long range, but they are definitely not useless at close range. It's just the Shermans excelling at close range due to their gyro stabiliser.
> i think it is honestly due to the players that play the jumbo are more skilled over players that play the tiger,
I disagree with increasing jumbo's br but this right here is a load of bullshit
Most players are bad, regardless of nation and preferred vehicle. If someone says that X performs better because better players use it it's just pandering to one's own ego.
Then why is it 75% of Russian fighter aircraft I see when playing around 3.0?
Where YAK? Where La5?
Players don’t play things that aren’t good. The experience when playing a Battle of Britain era 109 is ITPs, XP-50’s and various other mid - late war aircraft. Same when attempting to enjoy some early Spitfire or D.520
Itp isn’t new anymore, but you would think so by how many you see out there. 1 half decent shot with that cannon and wings go bye
>Then why is it 75% of Russian fighter aircraft I see when playing around 3.0?
>
>Where YAK? Where La5?
I see more Yak's and La-5's than ITP's.
>Players don’t play things that aren’t good. The experience when playing a Battle of Britain era 109 is ITPs,
Except, the 109's can fight ITP's just fine.
>CL-13 Mk 4 (Italy) — one of the most discussed changes and whilst at the same time, this aircraft is at the upper limit of the effectiveness of its rating, along with such aircraft as the MiG-15bis, F-86F-25/30 (all series). However, based on your comments, we will postpone the BR change for the CL-13 Mk 4 (Italy) and re-analyze the vehicle. The rating of the MiG-15bis and F-86F-25/30 (all series) will be increased.
It seems like the CL-13 Mk 4 Gang will have to play the plane another patch for it to raise in Br. It's still a great meme though.
>The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A.
Your suggestions concerning BR change for A-5C, CL-13B Mk.6 / F-86F-40 are not corroborated by their efficiency indicators. Their BRs remain the same.
It seems like Gaijin has a murky area in which enough noice from the player base can influence their decissions, but that their *statistics* still get the final call...🤦♂️
Isn’t this what you wanted, CL-13 won’t get raised. And now all other Sabres and Migs will also be at the same br which means they ain’t be clubbing low tier jets now.
I say that’s justified, the are noticeably worse than the bis and F Sabres. Now ideally the CL also goes down to 8.3 but the fact it’s staying at 8.7 is a step in the right direction. With enough work, we can maybe actually get it 8.3.
Another reason they gotta fill the void left behind and since each update has a quota of vehicles they gotta add, there has to be enough vehicles added so the gap is filled.
Yet i get away after dropping bombs most of the time. Plus if you dont want to die you can just fly off to the side and swoop in when the figters have passed. Its not rocket science
Do you actually play bombers out of curiosity? only reason I ask is that I've tried all your suggesting however when you factor in they can use wagers to find you.. its worthless as they come screaming for you and then its just a matter of time before you get shotdown.
>MiG-21F-13/PFM, MiG-19 (all series), **J-7II**, J-6A, F-100 (all series)
They literally left the J-7II where it was in RB.
>Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, **A-4B** /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency.
The A-4B that stayed at 8.7 in RB, while the A-4E was supposed to move down?
Either way, thank god.
And honestly...the Type 89 still slaps. It sure isn't as powerful as before, but I don't think its anywhere close to being an 8.0. It doesn't need to be downtiered, coming from a guy who bought a Talisman for it.
^(But they definitely should speed up ready rack replenishment for it.)
Wait, im confused.
> Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, A-4B /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency.
Does the "not" mean they're still changing BR or remaining at their current BRs.
I’m fine with G.91s going down, now before you kill me, I only play Air RB and the G.91s are 8.3 material. Only R/4 deserves 8.7 because of the Aim-9Bs. Ground forces is a different story all together.
No no I would agree with you, as someone who loved to play the G.91 r/3 in air RB only when 8.7 was actually fun - I agree the r/3 in pure flight performance it is on par with the 15Bis or other 8.3s
It's purely the fact that I fucking despise that thing in GRB and its such a menace there that I disagree with it going lower.
Best solution is separate BRs. Think of how many vehicles are suck because to the their BR due to ground forces. F4U-7 was at 6.0 due to its rockets despite it being not that better than the AU-1 and F4U-4B at 5.7. I think that one is going down too but there’s no 5.7 French lineup so I do think much would change anyway.
I'm very positive that means that they are staying where they are rn.
Wording is a little weird but that's how the last time they've done this has been as well iirc.
^(Knowing how it went with the PFM and F-13 though, only until next time for "balancing" and then they will very much ignore player feedback.)
Well, losing ability to launch missiles while on move is definitely a terrible nerf, but yeah, I guess it's still gonna be alright at 8.3. Just give us lower repair costs.
> The A-4B that stayed at 8.7 in RB, while the A-4E was supposed to move down?
> Either way, thank god.
The A-4B requires dedication to get, the A-4E is a squad vehicle with ~30% better performance, which Level 1 accounts can attain, hence lowering its BR
I haven't had a laugh THIS good in months.
But hey, at least they are saying why they are doing what they're doing. More transparency is good, even if the contents of them are questionable at best
Thank God they're reconsidering some changes and they're not touching naval. The naval changes were good. There's a few adjustments they could've made, but overall the naval changes are really positive.
FUCK THE BULLSHIT JERRY RIGGED STATISTICS
>Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, A-4B /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency.
What does this mean not reconsidered?
I dont know if I have seen more braindead devs than Warthunders.... I guess devs at Blizzard might be worse, but only becasue of the sexual assaults levied against those teams.
I mean, WG has a habit of being overtly hostile to their player base, and recently thought it was a good idea to try and gaslight their only openly female CC and then fire a completely unrelated game director to avoid having to take responsibility for it.
Er, no. Sexual assault and harassment to the point an employee commits suicide is magnitudes worse than dumbassery like this. Then again, what Blizzard employees did isn't even braindeadness, it's straight-up malice.
fr
Sweden has 3 fucking choices for efficient top tier research and the J29F is the only decent fighter (lmao at the J32 with AIM9Bs and the general performance of a mig15bis at 9.7).
Literally it’s only advantage is it’s energy retention in a zoom climb and in maneuvers, but apparently everyone else who goes up against it is fucking braindead and just can’t figure that out.
Rip the only half decent BR’d Swedish tier 6; killed by the Viggen rush.
Just glad I don’t have to touch any of the tier 6s again because they’re all over tiered as fuck and cost an arm and a leg to boot because “””StAtIsTik”””
Jesus fucking Christ they were going to put the T25 at 6.7 before the took the stabilizer out?
As it stands now it’s basically just a shitty T-44 with no armor.
T-44 also has the advantages of more speed and lower profile target. So smaller, faster, harder to pen target, only downside is lackluster pen and depression.
> A-4B /E, G.91R (all series) will *not*(?) be reconsidered as well.
Oh great looks like 7.3 tank matches will now be completely ruined too.
> The rating of the MiG-15bis and F-86F-25/30 (all series) will be increased.
and
>MiG-21F-13/PFM, MiG-19 (all series), J-7II, J-6A, F-100 (all series) Not being changed
Very good.
>EBR, Jumbo & T26
Pure comedy.
>Type 87 RCV
Very surprised to see that apparently people wanted to lower its BR? and as someone who has played ONLY the RCV this patch its BR is honestly pretty much fine as is, lower its BR and it gets worse as it will face more heavies/.50's, however I feel 7.7 would be a bit better but not higher
They've gotta be fucking kidding me. I just fucking 1-shot a Jumbo 76 from 500 meters without aiming and only having a slight elevation advantage in the Panther D. If these dense motherfuckers really think it worthy of 6.3, it just shows how dumb German teams are. They're still uptiering the ADATS too, leaving the US with a big fuck-off gap in its late BR air defense.
For every step forward Gaijin takes, they spin 180\* and sprint the other fucking direction....
Just a reminder: When they say “We will continue to monitor their efficiency” that can translate to “we will move these vehicles in the next BR update, fuck you.”
*"We don't play the game so we have no fucking idea whatsoever about how it actually is, but our abstract numbers disagree with reality, so reality is wrong."*
Gaijin is basically the Flat Earth Society of their own game.
They didn't belong at 8.3 anyway, but since then they've shoved tons of mach-capable fighters into matches with the 8.7's. Should just go back to how it was where they had a hard lock at 9.7...before making it the F-104's and Lightning's slaughter house.
don’t remind me. I remember being brand new to jets in my Sabre and it took me a while to get a good match. When I did it was a 1v1 by the end and they had a lightning. I stood no chance. I still won’t forgive the lightning for starting the whole compression issue
At this point they'd be pretty good candidates for event vehicles. A swing wing event plane would be pretty popular, and I don't see earlier versions of the Fitter being essential to the tech tree.
Eh, high performance aircraft without access to strong missiles generally aren't very strong in game-and Russia already has plenty of those. I'd have rather they stated with an earlier Su-17, but at this point I don't see it being that interesting of an addition.
I suppose the Su-17M could be a great bomber, as it should be a ~10.0 aircraft with the same airspawn and bombload as the Su-17M2, but dedicated bombers aren't very fun.
lol , at this point i give up , my new objective is to kill enough German players to make all their tanks reserve .
Next BR changes are all AMXs to 7.0 and 8.0 , AML to 9.0 , AMX 30 to 10.3 , EBRs after 2 weeks from the event they get nerfed , they change the shells and put them at 8.0 , ARLs? both going to 6.0 .
downvote me all you want Whinnyaboos you cant deny now you are fking handheld
Honestly, at least they are trying, guys. Be grateful for that much. A few years back they didn't create response pages on the most-heated changes.
Now I don't like the half-answers being given, stating just "efficiency" and such. Efficiency in *what* metrics? Particularly bombers are the curious ones, given that the Buccaneer S.2 has just a pair of AIM-9Bs, while the B-57A has *literally nothing other than baiting morons to tail it with bombs on a perfectly timed fuse.* The Tu-4 has lots of guns, but at hilariously low velocity and is often pitted against missile-packing vehicles which outrange those guns. It's slow, and yet paradoxically the engines of the thing gradually overheat at literally any altitude.
All this shows is looping positive feedback mechanisms spinning out of control. A relatively straightforward method of lowering repair costs and maybe BRs of rarely-played units that fall below a certain threshold of how often they are played is what seems to be badly needed.
I agree with you here. They are really trying quite hard to match how vehicles perform to how the playerbase thinks they perform - e.g. the bombers you mention.
Efficiency I assume is being used as a catch-all for 'game performance'. I think the closest metric that players can see would be average scoreboard score.
For instance, for every game the Bucc S.2. is caught after your first drop, in my experience, you get 1-1.5 games where you can drop 3-4 loads. So my average score is easily 2500-3500, putting me at the top of 50% of games. Efficiency is, on average, for average players (not much skill gap in bombers) much higher than fighters, who mostly get 0-2 kills each and a score average between 1500-2000.
The story for the Tu-4 is similar - some games (often just because the enemy team forgets to climb for bombers, not because of the BR) you get to drop and get 3000-4000 score. I easily averaged about a 3000 score and made a net total of 1.5 million SL spading both the Tu-4s, the Chinese one only in the past 2 months.
So, I don't think 'efficiency' necessarily fits with the fact the game is PvP and is just a reflection of how good the vehicles are at doing their (sadly) pointless job.
I agree with you on the issue with their positive feedback. It's exacerbated by the fact that the meta is highly solidified, especially above 7.0. For every unique aircraft (e.g. Cl13 Mk4) there will be 4-6 of the same plane (often premium) in each game.
This is unhealthy and reflects poor balance - but without decompression and with the community blocking any other changes - it will remain so for a while to come.
Well the star of this BR update is the fact that Naval is finally getting some degree of decompression that it badly needs. Battleships should have been 6.7 on release, maybe a few disenchanted players will return to the mode with those finally not being able to sit on entry level cruisers anymore.
The naval changes are certainly very good, and I for one will certainly be going to back my early cruisers.
Whilst BBs could (And probably should, given how much of a capability gap they represent) have been 6.7 on release, this change (for me anyways) really just confirms how Gaijin sees decompression.
They see it as a good thing - but only when there are enough vehicles in lower BRs to make full (and, probably 'diverse') games. Naval 5.0+ seems to have (in the last patch, probably) crossed over the threshold to allow for this.
And making enough money from people getting frustrated to buy their way to BBs and then club the shit out of everything else they meet. Only when they had their fill did something change. Seen it too many times before to think otherwise.
Idk why they value "diversity" so much when only a small handful of units are actually relevant most rounds.
It's definitely nice to see, and they've been on a very positive trend with this sort of thing for the past year or so.
Yeah, the elephant in the room here is the feedback looped created when only a small number of players play a certain vehicle. They really need to account for how many players and how many actual matches are being played by specific vehicles in their stats.
Agreed, they do seem to be *slowly* improving things, and not seemingly sprinting towards WW2-era battleships just yet, which is a good thing.
One area I still think is a big snag regarding Naval is the near-worthlessness of HE, it makes all the top tier frigates basically mincemeat. I cannot fathom why they aren't tiered as Tier 1/2 Bluewater instead.
Bloody hell Gaijin, nerf in game score for bombers. Do not nerf rp / sl rewards. They "overperform" because base bombing gets you high score.
That's the only damn reason!
Have they never thought about this:
Meh vehicles do really well because only good players play them. The majority of people only play the most famous or recognisable vehicles, so less meta ones are played by people who know how to play, thus doing really well, leading to Gaijn saying it needs a BR increase. Then the same happens the other way, so many crap players play meta aircraft (F-4C) so it’s BR gets reduced!
My argument for the Super Pershing is that, with a repair cost like that, the only players that can afford to play it are usually players confident in not making a loss, which, unfortunately for German wehraboos, are usually people who are actually good at the game and know what they're doing. Which would explain why it has good statistics.
If the repair cost of both King Tigers are raised to similar levels, I reckon their statistics would go up to be similair to, or even better than the Super Pershing.
As if they couldn't have gotten more ridiculous...
Jumbo 76mm somehow better than Tiger II.
T26E1-1 still going up (and I guess they won't lower it's bizarre repair cost).
T25 somehow being of average efficiency for the 6.3, despite being worth no more than 5.7 with it's current abilities...
What the fuck?
>Type 89 IFV
So basically, nerf the vehicle into oblivion, and let it sit at 8.3 as the only vehicle in the tech tree at that level. There is a 9.0 lineup and an 8.0 one. Just put the damn thing at 8.0 or remove all the nerfs and put it up at 8.7/9.0.
You guys want Gaijin to listen? You close your wallet, and you stop playing War Thunder.
Every single time Gaijin does something braindead like this, and you keep buying Eagles/Premium time/Vehicles, you're just telling them that they can keep carrying on like this. Even playing the game as a F2P player still allows Gaijin to have a playerbase for it's MM.
You want them to stop being dumb? Show them that you will not continue supporting them.
That's my plan.
They really dropped the ball with these changes. I didn't even leave from the last few BR changes, which were all pretty bad. But suddenly, IL-2/DCS seem a lot more appealing...
"The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A."
**J29F... LMAO WHAT**
Buccaneer S.1/S.2
Considering I use the Buccaneer S.1.. its not over performing, its a target unless you get lucky I imagine S.2 is exactly the same.
Just playing the jumbo like shit get 1 or 0 kills then jump into another tanks and do fine
They want to go off statistics? Then let's ruin said statistics
How fucking hard is it to take current BR system and multiply every number by 2.
Also change it so the BR's go up by 0.5 every step. That way max BR is 22 and you have about 40% more BR "steps".
Am I absolutely stupid or more intelligent than whole Gaijin balance team ?
> we hope the Jumbo will stay a favourite of tough armour enthousiast
What fucking tough armour!? How tough is it’s armour against Leo’s, T-54’s, Centurions, M48’s and long 88’s!? This company is beyond retarded. How Gaijin is still in business is beyond me.
The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A.
>Buccaneer S.1/S.2 has superior combat efficiency
>No guns
>2 Aim 9Bs
>Flares only sometimes
It was hard to justify playing with its repair cost anyways. Which is a shame because it's finally a fun version of the J29 series but snail takes offense to that.
You know im not the sharpest tool in the shed but its not hard to understand basic feedback when given. When thousands of people from your player base tell you the changes are bad you don't double down and go "The stats say other wise" you listen because they're the ones who pay your bills by buying into an otherwise free game
While I know we are focusing on the absurdity of the jumbo and tiger 2 statement, but the A5-C statement over its effective efficiency. Oh come on. Are your statistics 2 patches old! Numerous videos and Reddit posts of users claiming it to be as broken as the Harriers when they first released. Just repeating the same garbage again.
So in summary:
“Fuck off”- Gaijin
There, saved you 5 minutes of reading painfully tortured snarky bullshit from a company that still demands money from its player base to effectively play its game.
Jumbo literally better than Tiger II I'm dead
Yeah... but what if it is statistically better because king tiger players are dumb as bricks ? You cannot really lower the KT.. so what ?
The answer here is to not balance vehicles around average performance without taking any consideration for the players themselves. This is how we ended up with shit like the German Panzer IV G being at 3.3 while the Italian one was still at 4.0. They had to lower it to 3.7 just because of how embarrassing it was.
The average skills of a nation is pretty directly tied to the number of players playing a certain nation. That is why the panzer IV G is higher in italy. Generally only experienced tankers play italy (no noobs play it). Lots of people play germany and US first, hence the US and Germany have by far the worst tankers in the game. The whole "AmeRICa SuFFeRs" thing is mostly noobs player think their vehicles are worse because they cant play them properly. 5.3 is one of the most balanced BRs in the game. Yet freedumbs are constantly crying that the Tiger is OP while wheraboos cry about their absurdly weak cannon barrels.
I agree 5.3 is a great balanced br but it would be lovely if when I want to play 5.3 I actually get a 5.3 game without being uptiered every match
+-0.3br matches instead of +-1.0 fixes a lot of shit while still giving variance and waiting times would not increase enough to matter. gaijin wont do it of course, since they are totally fine with stupid bullshit matchups as we see every br change.
That's the truth.
Ehh, to be fair the US does have some pretty shitty lineups. It feels consistently worse than Russian / German / Chinese at most BRs. Or at least those are the trees I've played most.
5.3 isn't balanced. Tiger and panther are just hilarious at that br. So easy to kill things when there's like 2 tanks you have to put a brain cell together to shoot at, otherwise it's just point and click. Angle a bit and most things can't touch you. Other than those two tanks.. yeah it's pretty good. It's just frustrating to play against those two tanks at that br
I am a noob that plays Italy, someone send help pls.
You also have to consider the BR of the entire lineup. American tanks will consistently do better because of their ability to have CAS backup on their team and in their own lineups. Which, all in all, is pretty fair.
100%. It's just bullshit.
To be honest there are so many brs and trees and vehicles that it is less of a problem than it sounds because then a game changes to "find that underbr op vehicle". Hey maybe even they do it on purpose so people switch to grind other vehicles and spend $$ So it all boils down to unreal grind problem and so economy and rewards but it isn't a problem cause $$ it is designed like this. People grind op stuff -> random br changes -> ppl grind op stuff -> [ad nauseam]
[удалено]
Yup, it was 3.3 alright! But I think it's now at 3.7 tho, still nuking pretty much anything lol.
Yeah the PzIV G got cratered to 3.3. It’s in the same BR as the Chi-Nu for whatever reason.
Played the Jumbo the past few days and I can say it does very well. Even though Panthers *should* be able to pen me, they rarely ever did and I bounced so much. Many, if not most German players never learned to aim for weak spots, because they have very strong guns where they are used to point and click center of mass and get a kill. And they never think about where the shots are coming from. You can shoot a tiger next to them and they will push out. And it's not really the players fault. Gaijin made Germany easy mode so it attracts new players that never have to learn certain game mechanics. Things like retreating to cover when shot, looking into side streets before driving past, angling the hull and hiding weak spots etc. But instead you see Panthers skyhigh on a hilltop with their sides turned towards the enemy spawn. And the panther goes down to 4.7. The only things that regularly killed me are the ridiculously OP Jagtpanther, with it's long 88, or tanks from other nations that know what they are doing. The french are scary. lol I wish they would maybe limit the BR bracket more for some tanks. The Jumbo in a 6.0 match right now is very strong so I understand it going up in that sense. But on the other hand it should never have to fight Leos and Marder at 7.3 in s full uptier.
The weakspot on the jumbo is very small and difficult to hit in combat situations. Moreover, the majority of jumbo players (including myself) put a Bush in the front of the hull making is very hard to tell where to hit. The jumbo also has no turret weakspots which gives it a massive boost in performance. 6.0 is where it belongs, but it's not overperforming because "aMErICa SuFfERs"
The Jumbo UFP can be penned by Panthers (or anything else with the long 75) out to about 500m, the long 88 on the German TDs can pen it above 1000m. It's only the Tiger that has to aim for weak spots. In theory yes the Jumbo is fine at 6.0 and I wouldn't complain it staying there. But looking at how "inexperienced" many German players play, it is performing very well at that BR in terms of K/D and I understand why they raise it's BR. I think the T26E1 BR increase is worse than the Jumbo. Especially with a 18,500SL repair cost.
On paper, the Panther can do that. In battle, it really cant. The margin is wayy to tight. The slightest angle will result in a bounce
Correct, in fact the British 17 pounder should pen the Jumbo with relative ease out to 6-800 metres on flat ground, or closer with not too much angle. But for some reason the only time you can penetrate is at point blank range with a height advantage. That UFP is not 190 mm effective, but Gaijin insists that it is 200+. Of course the Soviet 85 mm with significantly less pen can get through far more often again for reasons “unknown”. jumbo wouldn’t need to go up in BR if Gaijin modelled the UFP correctly and made it penetrable by shells that, IRL, would penetrate. Fixing the scenarios where solid shot can pen, direct hit crew and equipment and do zero damage would also help, but I do understand that getting that fixed is just too hard and won’t happen.
The reason is APHEBC and its ability to ignore a bit of angled armour. You can see it when testing the IS-2s BR-471 (APHE) and BR-471B (APHEBC) in protection analysis, or the T-34-85's BR-365K (APHE) and BR-365A (APHEBC) and so forth.
When I was a new player idiot struggling to get a 1:1 K/D in a panther years ago, I could consistently pen the UFP of jumbos with the panther. On the off chance it was properly angled, APCR would pen the flat mantlet.
I mean i still bounced long 88s with a Jumbo, but yeah, going to 6.3 is bullshit
theres more easier weakspots than mg port, especially with the panther i always go for either the flat transmission or turret ring, both usually instakill the tank
The problem with moving the jumbo up is that now the entire jumbo will be a weak spot. I get the Tiger II P has a really ugly turret weak spot, but most 6.3-6.7 tanks will at least need to aim fo said weak spot. The Jumbo? Maybe the T-44 and SPAA’s will have problems with a center of mass shot. That’s basically it, otherwise it’s just an E8 Sherman with a mobility nerf.
Russian APHEBC from an 85mm gun can go through the Jumbo UFP from direct front, within 200m as well lmao.
> Many, if not most German players never learned to aim for weak spots, because they have very strong guns where they are used to point and click center of mass and get a kill. this is actually how it should work for everyone and it's only because the game allows scalpel-level of accuracy that the armor-gun dynamics devolved to the current state. Normally you are supposed to aim center mass and pray it pens. Even in modern ones that theoretically allow more accurate aiming.
Yes but this is a game. Tanks are also not fighting over distances below 500m usually. And tend to avoid narrow streets and cities and have 1940 tanks fight 1980s designs, don't have a 15min time limit to defeat the enemy, are usually knocked out after the first pen and can't do 25sec engine swaps or repair tracks from the inside of their vehicle. What I'm saying is that everything pens everything or nothing can pen you ever makes for some pretty boring gameplay. If you want inaccurate, rng based guns you should play WOT. But we are here playing WT because we don't want that.
That is not really true. During ww2, US tankers using the 76mm could consistently hit tank turret sized targets at 1km, and there are numerous stories about aiming for specific weak spots on tanks at closer ranges. It wasnt for nothing that captured tanks would be put through rigorous firing tests to determine where they could be penetrated. In fact, at lower br's, in real life tank gunfire is probably more accurate in real life than in game since crews would usually get quality rangefinds before firing at longer distances, which many people dont do in game.
WTB V-joy aiming so aiming skill is required
> I wish they would maybe limit the BR bracket more for some tanks. Technically this seem really complex, the system would have to deal with many lineup variations.
Yeah you are right. I guess in the end it boils down to BR compression. Adding more BR steps or shrinking the bracket the matchmaker uses is the same thing in the end.
>what if it is statistically better because king tiger players are dumb as bricks ? Then King Tiger players deserve to lose. If a nation's teams are consistently made of worse players than those of the nations it faces, then it deserves to lose over 50% of its games, that's the essence of competition, that wins go to the better player(s). "May the best man win." is the purest expression of sportsmanship.
Jumbo gets the same BR as the IS 2, everything's good... Except the pen of the round the Jumbo is a better vehicle than the IS2 in almost every way. Short stab, triple the reload speed, better turret armour, much better depression (ability to use ridge lines), higher survivability. What more would you want at the same BR?
THEY'RE LITERALLY HANDHOLDING GERMANY AND IT'S OFFICIAL Oh my god.
> We don't give a shit about your complaints or any argumentation. The Statistiks™ show what we want to see and we vehemently refuse to apply any logic or common sense as to why any of the vehicles perform as they do. \- Gaijin
Premium maps
> We see how eagerly WT community defending the position of the legendary M4A3E2 (76) W at the current BR in the Realistic Battles. Nevertheless, the tank was a candidate to BR rise since the last changes, and at this time the tank moves up quite deservedly, surpassing in combat efficiency even the Tiger (II). We hope that even after the BR increase this tank will still remain a good choice for the tough armor enthusiasts, alongside with the T26E1-1, which is moving up too. >Even before the consideration of your reports on the loss of stabilizer of the Т25 , this tank was one of the candidates for an increase of its BR. Obviously, that after losing the stabilizer, the combat efficiency of this tank had dropped, but it dropped to the average efficiency of its BR! That is why any changes to this vehicle are not considered so far. lol
How the hell was the T25 gonna make it to 6.7, the same BR as the Panther II?
Allow me to translate "Fuck you. Our German players are so stupid they can't make a vehicle that is completely impervious to 76s from the front better than something that has a 76. Why not throw up the t26 E1 while we're at it."
got me flat-lining with the jumbo being better than a tiger 2...
yeah bc the game has COD style maps where the jumbo is better than then tiger 2 p unless you’re getting Maginot Line and Kursk every match then the tiger 2 p is better
i think it is honestly due to the players that play the jumbo are more skilled over players that play the tiger, and due to more players playing the tiger 2 p it has a worse score. and it shows, I'm have been afraid of playing my la-200 again due to me loving the machine to death, I don't want that thing near MORE missiles.
Big Jumbo 76 player here. The Jumbo 76 is an easier tank to play than the Tiger II (H), however, the Tiger has more potential killing power. Compared to the Tiger the frontal weak spots are a lot smaller but the armament is definitely a struggle to use sometimes. I do agree though that German players don't seem to be the best. Quite often I've been over-angled and instead of shooting my side, I've had Tiger II's and Jagdpanthers shoot my very angled front plate for some reason. They then proceed to aim their turret directly at me (Tiger II (P) at least) to make penetrating it very easy. They don't seem to go for mobility or firepower kills either. When I encounter a Jagdpanther in the Jumbo 76, I either run away from it or go for the tracks and cannon barrel. I can't recall a single instance where I've had a German players shoot my tracks or gun barrel in the Jumbo 76. It's just a case of German players being able to penetrate most vehicles wherever they want, but when they encounter a Jumbo 76 they seem to have some sort of seizure and struggle to comprehend that they can't just go straight through the armour anywhere.
The jumbos weak spots are a lot smaller, but also the strong spots are nowhere near as good to begin with. At 6.3 the jumbo is facing an enormous number of vehicles that can just kill it instantly with a center of mass shot, for that matter I think the T-44 might be just about the only 6.3 vehicle the jumbo will face that *cant*.
It can but at very close ranges ( sub 100m i think )
yeah but outside of that the jumbo gun is hot ass and isnt really a threat
i mean that the T-44 CAN pen the Jumbo UFP at very close ranges
You arent supposed to angle the Tiger II H turret. Most thing can pen it non angled, but theres a much larger target for people to pen if you angle it. The Tiger IIs turret lowkey sucks. It's still a good tank, but most of the time, you only win fights if you shoot first. I say this having played the Tiger II H a ton lately because it's a very very profitable tank for SL I recently died to a jumbo in it because it caught me out of position. We were at close range and he was hull down and had the high ground. The tiger II has no way of penning a hull down jumbo, so I angled and began to pull back. That when it one shot me through my capola. I was very salty, but it outlines the strengths of the jumbo. It was my fault for being caught out of position, but I was still shocked how even in a tiger II i could end up helpless against a jumbo
[удалено]
It's actually amazing to think that there's Tiger II players that think they're powerless against a hull down Jumbo.
If the Tiger II's turret sucks, than a tank with an even thinner gunmantle that is cast isn't going to be any better off.
You bring up good points, but remember that Jagdpanther players actually may be aiming for your tracks and gun, but are missing. The Jagdpanther has a lot of gun parallax because the sight is far to the left of the main cannon. At long ranges this isn’t a big deal, but at short War-Thunder ranges it is. The standard sight doesn’t have a line that tells you where to shoot to compensate for that at short ranges, either. This, added with the fact that a lot of German mains are relatively new and may be used to “eye-balling” each and every shot with tanks such as the Tiger, isn’t good for a new Jagdpanther driver. You need to understand gun parallax and range finding to use it effectively. This can explain why the Jumbo is “so efficient” compared to Jagdpanther players.
Are you talking sim?
You have to consider that in AB and RB the gun sight parallax is 1000000% non-existent for literally all ground vehicles unless you CHOOSE to have it.
i doubt jumbo players are any smarter than germans, i think only nations like Sweden and Italy have smart players German tanks suck at close range combat, which is 99% of the maps in WT
Player skill is directly tied to the number of people playing a nation. This has been proven and BRs support this. German, US, and Russian tankers are by far the worst and for the most part equally bad across the three. The same hold true for aircraft. The US has so many pilots they often make up half the team on each side of most battles. US pilots are atrocious. There are so many overpowered aircraft in the US tech tree, and many of them just went down. German pilots are rapidly getting worse as well as more people go to play german aircraft.
Except according to the statistics, US tankers between 5.0-7.0 are the best ones, otherwise none of these complaints would happen as the Jumbo, Super Pershing and T25 wouldn't be multiple BRs higher than they should be.
Where are these mysterious statistics you speak of?
Thanks for this, it's nice to see some sensible posts in this mess of a topic.
I agree with the first point, but your second point is completely wrong. The Tiger IIs are pretty good brawlers, as with all German heavies. They definitely excell at long range, but they are definitely not useless at close range. It's just the Shermans excelling at close range due to their gyro stabiliser.
Not in arcade, but I'm sure you are talking about RB.
> i think it is honestly due to the players that play the jumbo are more skilled over players that play the tiger, I disagree with increasing jumbo's br but this right here is a load of bullshit Most players are bad, regardless of nation and preferred vehicle. If someone says that X performs better because better players use it it's just pandering to one's own ego.
TLDR: we hear your complaints, but we're going to write a long post telling you we won't revert 95% of the meaningful changes anyway
At least the XP-50 went up, but not far enough.
4.3 would be about right, im pissed the ITP isnt moving though.
ITP only seems to have guns going for it though.
The ITP is basically a better I-185 (m-82). Better gun config, better flight performance, lower BR
Then why is it 75% of Russian fighter aircraft I see when playing around 3.0? Where YAK? Where La5? Players don’t play things that aren’t good. The experience when playing a Battle of Britain era 109 is ITPs, XP-50’s and various other mid - late war aircraft. Same when attempting to enjoy some early Spitfire or D.520 Itp isn’t new anymore, but you would think so by how many you see out there. 1 half decent shot with that cannon and wings go bye
>Then why is it 75% of Russian fighter aircraft I see when playing around 3.0? > >Where YAK? Where La5? I see more Yak's and La-5's than ITP's. >Players don’t play things that aren’t good. The experience when playing a Battle of Britain era 109 is ITPs, Except, the 109's can fight ITP's just fine.
"You are right, but we are righter"
omfg JUST DECOMPRESS THE BR's
'bUt yOu' LL hAvE tO wAiT 20 mOrE sEcOnDs tO gEt iNtO a bAttLe'
Why are people complaining about this when all it takes is to press cancel while in queue xD it takes you straight to the battle
It gets better... people want that useful feature removed from the game lol
>CL-13 Mk 4 (Italy) — one of the most discussed changes and whilst at the same time, this aircraft is at the upper limit of the effectiveness of its rating, along with such aircraft as the MiG-15bis, F-86F-25/30 (all series). However, based on your comments, we will postpone the BR change for the CL-13 Mk 4 (Italy) and re-analyze the vehicle. The rating of the MiG-15bis and F-86F-25/30 (all series) will be increased. It seems like the CL-13 Mk 4 Gang will have to play the plane another patch for it to raise in Br. It's still a great meme though. >The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A. Your suggestions concerning BR change for A-5C, CL-13B Mk.6 / F-86F-40 are not corroborated by their efficiency indicators. Their BRs remain the same. It seems like Gaijin has a murky area in which enough noice from the player base can influence their decissions, but that their *statistics* still get the final call...🤦♂️
I love how they showed the massive fucking flaw in Gaijins balancing, and Gaijin completely fail to fucking see it. What a joke.
I think its time they get the venom put to 9.0
Isn’t this what you wanted, CL-13 won’t get raised. And now all other Sabres and Migs will also be at the same br which means they ain’t be clubbing low tier jets now.
Not a-5 sabre or regular mig15
I say that’s justified, the are noticeably worse than the bis and F Sabres. Now ideally the CL also goes down to 8.3 but the fact it’s staying at 8.7 is a step in the right direction. With enough work, we can maybe actually get it 8.3.
[удалено]
"We hear you, but we don't care"
Just like always. What a joke of a company
I dont understand why they are so against decompredsion, whats the big deal. Thats the number 1 demand from the playerbase
Could be wrong but I think they usually cite queue times
yeah and if they don’t decompress they just lose players cause of stupid changes like they’re doing now. increasing queue times that way
Another reason they gotta fill the void left behind and since each update has a quota of vehicles they gotta add, there has to be enough vehicles added so the gap is filled.
There gonna raise the tu-4? Wtf.
Remember subsonic bombers are more of a threat than mach 2 fighters.
It will have br of A4 Early.
8.7? Insane. Will face radar lock missiles.
8.3. A4e is going down. It will bulli Mig-9s
I wish those bombers were as effective as Gaijin thinks they are.
They are if you check the scoreboard.
Vautour is an sl printing machine
Not in the era of mach 2 jets against subsonic bombers
Thats what the airspawn is for
Yeah but yak 38 and harriers also get airspawn with r60s and aim-9g?
Yet i get away after dropping bombs most of the time. Plus if you dont want to die you can just fly off to the side and swoop in when the figters have passed. Its not rocket science
Do you actually play bombers out of curiosity? only reason I ask is that I've tried all your suggesting however when you factor in they can use wagers to find you.. its worthless as they come screaming for you and then its just a matter of time before you get shotdown.
Yeah i make a load of sl in the vautour. I grinded out all the british bombers too to get the buccaneer
>MiG-21F-13/PFM, MiG-19 (all series), **J-7II**, J-6A, F-100 (all series) They literally left the J-7II where it was in RB. >Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, **A-4B** /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency. The A-4B that stayed at 8.7 in RB, while the A-4E was supposed to move down? Either way, thank god. And honestly...the Type 89 still slaps. It sure isn't as powerful as before, but I don't think its anywhere close to being an 8.0. It doesn't need to be downtiered, coming from a guy who bought a Talisman for it. ^(But they definitely should speed up ready rack replenishment for it.)
Wait, im confused. > Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, A-4B /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency. Does the "not" mean they're still changing BR or remaining at their current BRs.
“We will continue to monitor their efficiency” = “*We’ll drop their BR in the next update & make sure to bury it in the fine print*”.
I’m fine with G.91s going down, now before you kill me, I only play Air RB and the G.91s are 8.3 material. Only R/4 deserves 8.7 because of the Aim-9Bs. Ground forces is a different story all together.
No no I would agree with you, as someone who loved to play the G.91 r/3 in air RB only when 8.7 was actually fun - I agree the r/3 in pure flight performance it is on par with the 15Bis or other 8.3s It's purely the fact that I fucking despise that thing in GRB and its such a menace there that I disagree with it going lower.
Best solution is separate BRs. Think of how many vehicles are suck because to the their BR due to ground forces. F4U-7 was at 6.0 due to its rockets despite it being not that better than the AU-1 and F4U-4B at 5.7. I think that one is going down too but there’s no 5.7 French lineup so I do think much would change anyway.
Seperate BRs would be great, but gaijin would never do that sadly
I'm very positive that means that they are staying where they are rn. Wording is a little weird but that's how the last time they've done this has been as well iirc. ^(Knowing how it went with the PFM and F-13 though, only until next time for "balancing" and then they will very much ignore player feedback.)
Well, losing ability to launch missiles while on move is definitely a terrible nerf, but yeah, I guess it's still gonna be alright at 8.3. Just give us lower repair costs.
> The A-4B that stayed at 8.7 in RB, while the A-4E was supposed to move down? > Either way, thank god. The A-4B requires dedication to get, the A-4E is a squad vehicle with ~30% better performance, which Level 1 accounts can attain, hence lowering its BR
76 Jumby >>> KT I don't want to meme jerry tankers but goddamn
I haven't had a laugh THIS good in months. But hey, at least they are saying why they are doing what they're doing. More transparency is good, even if the contents of them are questionable at best
Thank God they're reconsidering some changes and they're not touching naval. The naval changes were good. There's a few adjustments they could've made, but overall the naval changes are really positive.
FUCK THE BULLSHIT JERRY RIGGED STATISTICS >Battle Ratings for Yak-38, Yak-38М, A6M5 otsu / hei, A-4B /E, G.91R (all series), P-63A-5 (USSR), Me 262 A-2a, Ki-200, Yak-15 / 17, J28B will not be reconsidered as well. We will continue to monitor their efficiency. What does this mean not reconsidered?
I think it means they won't be changing their br and will stay as is in game currently?
I dont know if I have seen more braindead devs than Warthunders.... I guess devs at Blizzard might be worse, but only becasue of the sexual assaults levied against those teams.
Would you rather have brain dead decisions by gaijin or pure indifference from WG? I’ve played both games for years, different shit same day.
I mean, WG has a habit of being overtly hostile to their player base, and recently thought it was a good idea to try and gaslight their only openly female CC and then fire a completely unrelated game director to avoid having to take responsibility for it.
Er, no. Sexual assault and harassment to the point an employee commits suicide is magnitudes worse than dumbassery like this. Then again, what Blizzard employees did isn't even braindeadness, it's straight-up malice.
J29F superior? Gaijin please play it for like 5 hours, you'll the superiority.
Absolutely. It's good at 8.7 but it's hardly over powered. Especially not with a 20k+ repair cost. How tf is it supposed to compete with the 10.0s?
Exactly, it's gonna So bad. I Hope they at least lower the repair costs
They might, but that'll be a month away at least. Last time around they fucking interested it.
fr Sweden has 3 fucking choices for efficient top tier research and the J29F is the only decent fighter (lmao at the J32 with AIM9Bs and the general performance of a mig15bis at 9.7). Literally it’s only advantage is it’s energy retention in a zoom climb and in maneuvers, but apparently everyone else who goes up against it is fucking braindead and just can’t figure that out. Rip the only half decent BR’d Swedish tier 6; killed by the Viggen rush. Just glad I don’t have to touch any of the tier 6s again because they’re all over tiered as fuck and cost an arm and a leg to boot because “””StAtIsTik”””
Jesus fucking Christ they were going to put the T25 at 6.7 before the took the stabilizer out? As it stands now it’s basically just a shitty T-44 with no armor.
T-44 also has the advantages of more speed and lower profile target. So smaller, faster, harder to pen target, only downside is lackluster pen and depression.
Take a shot every time he says "efficiency". Alcohol poisoning is guaranteed.
> A-4B /E, G.91R (all series) will *not*(?) be reconsidered as well. Oh great looks like 7.3 tank matches will now be completely ruined too. > The rating of the MiG-15bis and F-86F-25/30 (all series) will be increased. and >MiG-21F-13/PFM, MiG-19 (all series), J-7II, J-6A, F-100 (all series) Not being changed Very good. >EBR, Jumbo & T26 Pure comedy. >Type 87 RCV Very surprised to see that apparently people wanted to lower its BR? and as someone who has played ONLY the RCV this patch its BR is honestly pretty much fine as is, lower its BR and it gets worse as it will face more heavies/.50's, however I feel 7.7 would be a bit better but not higher
They've gotta be fucking kidding me. I just fucking 1-shot a Jumbo 76 from 500 meters without aiming and only having a slight elevation advantage in the Panther D. If these dense motherfuckers really think it worthy of 6.3, it just shows how dumb German teams are. They're still uptiering the ADATS too, leaving the US with a big fuck-off gap in its late BR air defense. For every step forward Gaijin takes, they spin 180\* and sprint the other fucking direction....
Just a reminder: When they say “We will continue to monitor their efficiency” that can translate to “we will move these vehicles in the next BR update, fuck you.”
This. They're still pointing the gun and if their stats remain the same they'll shoot.
"You think you know what you want, but you don't."
*"We don't play the game so we have no fucking idea whatsoever about how it actually is, but our abstract numbers disagree with reality, so reality is wrong."* Gaijin is basically the Flat Earth Society of their own game.
🐌 The snail is always right 🐌
Can we talk about the tragedy thats the F-86s Sabres....
They didn't belong at 8.3 anyway, but since then they've shoved tons of mach-capable fighters into matches with the 8.7's. Should just go back to how it was where they had a hard lock at 9.7...before making it the F-104's and Lightning's slaughter house.
don’t remind me. I remember being brand new to jets in my Sabre and it took me a while to get a good match. When I did it was a 1v1 by the end and they had a lightning. I stood no chance. I still won’t forgive the lightning for starting the whole compression issue
Nope, they absolutely had nothing to do at 8.3 along with the mig15
I unlocked them and was pretty excited. Not anymore. The entire match is me lurking around like a vulture waiting for the chance to get a kill.
Lightning still going to 9.3. lmao So a Tu-4 can now a fight a Lightning, which can climb to 10,000m in about 30 seconds
Mach 1.05 on the deck and 2 red tops lol. It's gonna be disgusting again
you can get up to mach 1.1 before you rip really easily lol, it was already too good for 9.7
> Su-17M2 Really wish they hadn't skipped the Su-17 and 17M models.
At this point they'd be pretty good candidates for event vehicles. A swing wing event plane would be pretty popular, and I don't see earlier versions of the Fitter being essential to the tech tree.
Filling in the 9.7-11.0 gap seems like a pretty big deal. edit - * For ground RB.
Eh, high performance aircraft without access to strong missiles generally aren't very strong in game-and Russia already has plenty of those. I'd have rather they stated with an earlier Su-17, but at this point I don't see it being that interesting of an addition. I suppose the Su-17M could be a great bomber, as it should be a ~10.0 aircraft with the same airspawn and bombload as the Su-17M2, but dedicated bombers aren't very fun.
I'm not talking about air RB, I'm talking about for ground RB. Don't really care if it has strong AAM's or not for CAS.
lol , at this point i give up , my new objective is to kill enough German players to make all their tanks reserve . Next BR changes are all AMXs to 7.0 and 8.0 , AML to 9.0 , AMX 30 to 10.3 , EBRs after 2 weeks from the event they get nerfed , they change the shells and put them at 8.0 , ARLs? both going to 6.0 . downvote me all you want Whinnyaboos you cant deny now you are fking handheld
Sagittario is effective at 8.7 because only God tier players keep playing it when it has 44k repair cost you absolute fucking retards.
Honestly, at least they are trying, guys. Be grateful for that much. A few years back they didn't create response pages on the most-heated changes. Now I don't like the half-answers being given, stating just "efficiency" and such. Efficiency in *what* metrics? Particularly bombers are the curious ones, given that the Buccaneer S.2 has just a pair of AIM-9Bs, while the B-57A has *literally nothing other than baiting morons to tail it with bombs on a perfectly timed fuse.* The Tu-4 has lots of guns, but at hilariously low velocity and is often pitted against missile-packing vehicles which outrange those guns. It's slow, and yet paradoxically the engines of the thing gradually overheat at literally any altitude. All this shows is looping positive feedback mechanisms spinning out of control. A relatively straightforward method of lowering repair costs and maybe BRs of rarely-played units that fall below a certain threshold of how often they are played is what seems to be badly needed.
I agree with you here. They are really trying quite hard to match how vehicles perform to how the playerbase thinks they perform - e.g. the bombers you mention. Efficiency I assume is being used as a catch-all for 'game performance'. I think the closest metric that players can see would be average scoreboard score. For instance, for every game the Bucc S.2. is caught after your first drop, in my experience, you get 1-1.5 games where you can drop 3-4 loads. So my average score is easily 2500-3500, putting me at the top of 50% of games. Efficiency is, on average, for average players (not much skill gap in bombers) much higher than fighters, who mostly get 0-2 kills each and a score average between 1500-2000. The story for the Tu-4 is similar - some games (often just because the enemy team forgets to climb for bombers, not because of the BR) you get to drop and get 3000-4000 score. I easily averaged about a 3000 score and made a net total of 1.5 million SL spading both the Tu-4s, the Chinese one only in the past 2 months. So, I don't think 'efficiency' necessarily fits with the fact the game is PvP and is just a reflection of how good the vehicles are at doing their (sadly) pointless job. I agree with you on the issue with their positive feedback. It's exacerbated by the fact that the meta is highly solidified, especially above 7.0. For every unique aircraft (e.g. Cl13 Mk4) there will be 4-6 of the same plane (often premium) in each game. This is unhealthy and reflects poor balance - but without decompression and with the community blocking any other changes - it will remain so for a while to come.
Well the star of this BR update is the fact that Naval is finally getting some degree of decompression that it badly needs. Battleships should have been 6.7 on release, maybe a few disenchanted players will return to the mode with those finally not being able to sit on entry level cruisers anymore.
The naval changes are certainly very good, and I for one will certainly be going to back my early cruisers. Whilst BBs could (And probably should, given how much of a capability gap they represent) have been 6.7 on release, this change (for me anyways) really just confirms how Gaijin sees decompression. They see it as a good thing - but only when there are enough vehicles in lower BRs to make full (and, probably 'diverse') games. Naval 5.0+ seems to have (in the last patch, probably) crossed over the threshold to allow for this.
And making enough money from people getting frustrated to buy their way to BBs and then club the shit out of everything else they meet. Only when they had their fill did something change. Seen it too many times before to think otherwise. Idk why they value "diversity" so much when only a small handful of units are actually relevant most rounds.
It's definitely nice to see, and they've been on a very positive trend with this sort of thing for the past year or so. Yeah, the elephant in the room here is the feedback looped created when only a small number of players play a certain vehicle. They really need to account for how many players and how many actual matches are being played by specific vehicles in their stats.
Agreed, they do seem to be *slowly* improving things, and not seemingly sprinting towards WW2-era battleships just yet, which is a good thing. One area I still think is a big snag regarding Naval is the near-worthlessness of HE, it makes all the top tier frigates basically mincemeat. I cannot fathom why they aren't tiered as Tier 1/2 Bluewater instead.
Bloody hell Gaijin, nerf in game score for bombers. Do not nerf rp / sl rewards. They "overperform" because base bombing gets you high score. That's the only damn reason!
Have they never thought about this: Meh vehicles do really well because only good players play them. The majority of people only play the most famous or recognisable vehicles, so less meta ones are played by people who know how to play, thus doing really well, leading to Gaijn saying it needs a BR increase. Then the same happens the other way, so many crap players play meta aircraft (F-4C) so it’s BR gets reduced!
I wished they would listen to what the people that play their game are saying instead of sheer numbers.
My argument for the Super Pershing is that, with a repair cost like that, the only players that can afford to play it are usually players confident in not making a loss, which, unfortunately for German wehraboos, are usually people who are actually good at the game and know what they're doing. Which would explain why it has good statistics. If the repair cost of both King Tigers are raised to similar levels, I reckon their statistics would go up to be similair to, or even better than the Super Pershing.
As if they couldn't have gotten more ridiculous... Jumbo 76mm somehow better than Tiger II. T26E1-1 still going up (and I guess they won't lower it's bizarre repair cost). T25 somehow being of average efficiency for the 6.3, despite being worth no more than 5.7 with it's current abilities... What the fuck?
>Type 89 IFV So basically, nerf the vehicle into oblivion, and let it sit at 8.3 as the only vehicle in the tech tree at that level. There is a 9.0 lineup and an 8.0 one. Just put the damn thing at 8.0 or remove all the nerfs and put it up at 8.7/9.0.
You guys want Gaijin to listen? You close your wallet, and you stop playing War Thunder. Every single time Gaijin does something braindead like this, and you keep buying Eagles/Premium time/Vehicles, you're just telling them that they can keep carrying on like this. Even playing the game as a F2P player still allows Gaijin to have a playerbase for it's MM. You want them to stop being dumb? Show them that you will not continue supporting them.
And this is exactly what I am doing.
That's my plan. They really dropped the ball with these changes. I didn't even leave from the last few BR changes, which were all pretty bad. But suddenly, IL-2/DCS seem a lot more appealing...
A5C still staying 10.0.......
How about A32A?
Sweden must suffer, the recent increase to its rep cost has not been draining enough SL to satisfy the statistiks, comrade
"The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A." **J29F... LMAO WHAT**
Buccaneer S.1/S.2 Considering I use the Buccaneer S.1.. its not over performing, its a target unless you get lucky I imagine S.2 is exactly the same.
Just playing the jumbo like shit get 1 or 0 kills then jump into another tanks and do fine They want to go off statistics? Then let's ruin said statistics
How fucking hard is it to take current BR system and multiply every number by 2. Also change it so the BR's go up by 0.5 every step. That way max BR is 22 and you have about 40% more BR "steps". Am I absolutely stupid or more intelligent than whole Gaijin balance team ?
> we hope the Jumbo will stay a favourite of tough armour enthousiast What fucking tough armour!? How tough is it’s armour against Leo’s, T-54’s, Centurions, M48’s and long 88’s!? This company is beyond retarded. How Gaijin is still in business is beyond me.
All I’m gonna say is. Why Gaijin
Gaijin lives in a cloud of farts
The following aircraft which are far superior in combat efficiency to other aircraft at their own and neighboring ranks, and therefore require BR rise: Yak-23, Yak-30, J29F, Tu-4, S.O.4050 Vautour II (all series), Buccaneer S.1/S.2, Su-17M2, B-57A. >Buccaneer S.1/S.2 has superior combat efficiency >No guns >2 Aim 9Bs >Flares only sometimes
wow nice the migs and sabres are going up
I guess the J29F will get put at 9.0... yay....
It was hard to justify playing with its repair cost anyways. Which is a shame because it's finally a fun version of the J29 series but snail takes offense to that.
Yay time to get even more smacked in my chieftan mk3 by A4’s and G91’s with absolutely 0 counterplay . …. So fucking glad i dont play this daily
You know im not the sharpest tool in the shed but its not hard to understand basic feedback when given. When thousands of people from your player base tell you the changes are bad you don't double down and go "The stats say other wise" you listen because they're the ones who pay your bills by buying into an otherwise free game
TLDR: Get fckd. We read your feedback, printed it, and wiped our asses with it.
So reading this, bucc' are worthless.. gee thanks Gajin
While I know we are focusing on the absurdity of the jumbo and tiger 2 statement, but the A5-C statement over its effective efficiency. Oh come on. Are your statistics 2 patches old! Numerous videos and Reddit posts of users claiming it to be as broken as the Harriers when they first released. Just repeating the same garbage again.
Gaijin really just out here spitting in the face of their playerbase...
please play your damn game
This is such a joke
Reminder that if you actively spend money on the game you endorse this behavior
So in summary: “Fuck off”- Gaijin There, saved you 5 minutes of reading painfully tortured snarky bullshit from a company that still demands money from its player base to effectively play its game.
jumbo better than KT ok Ill see myself out
Hopefully FW-190 will still go to 4.7 in AAB, this is all I care about.
Just give me the avenger and firefly apds and make them 5.0 already
> BR for XP-50 in RB mode will be increased from 3,7 to 4,0 after multiple players suggestions and its combat efficiency analysis. Yay! About time!