Seeing that there is something strange, let's take into consideration another nations Tier2 and Tier1 instead of only 1 tier. It also has a much better max altitude and altitude at which the topspeed can be achieved (6000m vs 4500m). The ACh-30B /Late is better concerning bombload, defensive weaponry, stock climbrate, stock turntime and stock topspeed. It also features 2 turret with 1x 12.7mm Berezin UB MG each, aswell as 1 turret featuring a single 20mm ShVAK cannon. It also features 2 turrets with 1x7.62mm ShKAS each, aswell as 1 turret featuring a single 12.7mm Berezin UB MG. Might be due to the fact that the Yer-2 ACh-30B /Late and Yer-2 M-105R TAT are pretty equal in combat performance? No. Yer-2 ACh-30B /Late (Former Tier12): Battle Rating 4.7 Yer-2 M-105R TAT (Former Tier11): Battle Rating 4.7Īnd if I had it unlocked, instead of the M105R TAT I'd have the Yer-2 ACh-30B /Late: Yak-3P (Former Tier11): Battle Rating 4.7 Let's do two more comparisons as confirmation. LaGG-3-66 (Former Tier6): Battle Rating 3.0 I just took a look at my Tier2 Soviet Setup: How exactly can an IL-2 be 2.7 Battle Rating, and an IL-2M, with the only addition being a rear gunner, 3.7? So what I'd like to know is just how is battle rating determined, what effect it has on MM and why are there such massive gaps between similar or even identical aircraft? And then comparing nation vs nation the whole thing can go out of whack. Though there are some completely inexplainable oddities that simply make no sense what-so-ever. The system seems fairly solid for the most part when comparing aircraft lines from nations individually. The difference between the Wellington MkX and the MkIII is a staggering 1.3 even though they're effectively the same aircraft with the same bomb load and defensive armament. The entire Bf109 line which used to go from rank 4 to rank 16 is contained within a 3.6 spread, the Yak prop line is 3.3 and the Spitfire line is 3.0.īut then the B-17G which now carries a smaller bomb load and has basically the same performance with only a slightly improved defensive armament is 1.0 above the E/L. The MkVc Spit is also 1.0 higher than the Vb with the addition of 2 cannons and marginally better speed. 50 cals and the 1c's performance is better. The gap between the F4U-1d and the 1c is 1.0, could be worse I guess considering 4 20mm's are a fair bit more powerful than 6. The Hei is vastly out performed by the Ki-84 Ko and yet is has the same battle rating. In what way does the addition of 2 cannons increase it's rating by that much, considering the A6M5's is only another 0.3 higher. Take a look at the Ki-61 line too, the Otsu with 4 12.7mm MG's has a battle rating of 3.0, the Hei which is only different in that it has 2 MG 151/20's and 2 12.7mm MG's and yet it has a rating of 4.7. Case in point Me 262's are getting matched with MiG 15's and Sabres and it's battle rating is only 0.5 less, which is just silly considering its only real advantage is armament. Because I have a feeling that it may be the cause of these MM problems. So what exactly is the "Battle Rating", how is it determined and what bearing does it have on gameplay.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |