On Land and at Sea
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal medal

Community Reputation

892 Excellent

About *sigma__zero

  • Rank
    Killjoy First Class

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Destroying Stalin's minions.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,444 profile views
  1. Because it isn't your plane. You didn't grind for it, you didn't unlock it, you did buy it, you didn't pay for crew training for it, you didn't choose a crew to use it, you didn't choose the payload and you won't earn RP for that particular plane. Your tank crew didn't magically teleport from the tank into the plane. It's not your plane or an extension of your tank.
  2. Yes, that sounds worth trying. If you pick the fastest, most obvious route you'll find a P-51 or P-61 waiting for you and they just need to shoot off an aileron to kill you. I actually found that a few of my usual tactics on familiar maps do work well, bombing ground targets instead of bases. When it's safer then you can go to low altitude on AC-130 mode to destroy soft targets with the guns and fire on any fighter foolish enough to get close.
  3. I did mention a few "infamous" planes. But from my understanding Tu-4s spend most of the time being slaughtered by 9.0 BR jets nowadays.
  4. Which maps are you playing in? It seems to vary between maps. The AA in Berlin is deadly, but in Bastogne it's rather mediocre and it's completely useless in Ruhr (I'm not even sure if there are AA guns there). I had a mixed match in Britain and the AAA literally did nothing while I was murdered by Meteors.
  5. RB. Their BR in AB is 3.3.
  6. So I bought the BV 238 after getting a discount. I heard it was still a good plane and a SL maker even after the nerf and uptiering, but I'm starting to have doubts about it. It seems to be an all-or-nothing suicide bomber, pretty much like the B-29. You either destroy a couple of bases and damage the airfield or get shot down before reaching the first base. A group of four 238s can even destroy the airfield, but it seems unlikely that two will survive the trip. The armament is decent, you can swat down tailsitters without much trouble, but any fighter with two working brain cells can easily shoot you down. I can see it's not a fast rusher or a sneaky dodger. Going to high altitude is out of the question as well. So what's the best way of using this thing outside the typical dumb suicide roulette tactic?
  7. I have seen a few players that keep landing even after you explain to them why it's better to respawn. They stubbornly refuse and either ignore you or don't give any other reason than "I don't want to". That's fine and all, but most of the times they are also the ones with 2-3 kills and no assists at the end of the game. When you manage to win a game with over 40 kills and 8 deaths while he got 2-3 kills, no deaths and receives the same rewards as you it's hard not to think they aren't freeloading. It's not justification for intentional teamkilling, but I can see why some players get frustrated with teammates that land. The problem is when you're using the mode to grind and spade planes. Trying to shoot down anything with the He 162 with stock belts is a pain, while teammates with MiG-15s and Hunters can easily destroy wave after wave of bombers. US jets with .50 cals also seem to have trouble keeping up.
  8. Glad I could help. Yeah, it's a great way to take screenshots, fool around or bully tier 1 bots with high tier vehicles .
  9. You can go to Test Flight, choose the Mission Editor and play a mission against bots, but it's a bit limited and you can't use tanks. You can also create a Custom battle, choose any air or ground map, then include bots of any rank you want and practice against the bots and the AI ground targets. If you put a password to the room you can start the battle by yourself and play with no pressure.
  10. While it doesn't warrant a TK, landing is a very bad idea in assault mode. It wastes too much time to land, repair and climb back to altitude when you can simply bail out, respawn and get instant altitude. It costs SL, but you get much more if your team succeeds or at least lasts for longer. I usually die 7-8 times and still make a good profit.
  11. Right after the update I noticed a bit of stuttering in a match with heavy clouds (RB Berlin, I think). Then I had another match (Assault) where it seemed like the instructor was struggling to keep the plane flying on a straight line, as if I was under extreme lag. It went away after that match and I haven't had any major problems since, except for a few mini-freezes (but those already happened before the patch).
  12. Now that's something that doesn't look like a bathtub toy. Nice.
  13. teamkilling

    There are no restrictions in air AF or Assault. You can freely fire on allies. I've had a couple of incidents in Assault where I accidentally TKed an ally and they go out of their way to kill me for revenge. One of them was even kicked out of the game for his effort.
  14. The score is more or less irrelevant under most circumstances (you even get points for being hit), but yes. Using a fighter for what it is intended to do, and survive, should be more rewarding than ramming to get a kill by hull break. And this is an example of why bombing spawn points is a stupid idea. The 500kg bombs have a kill radius of 11m (roughly the length of two medium tanks). Any vehicle outside of that zone will only suffer light damage. Don't bomb enemies that are aware and can easily dodge your bombs. Target those that are immobilized, pinned down or unaware of you.
  15. teamkilling

    I'm not sure if anyone has posted something about this, but why is team killing even allowed in Assault mode? Most of the times it's a minor annoyance, if you're TKed you just respawn and keep going, but this time I found myself kicked for accidentally teamkilling two allies. The first time the allied Ki-102 dived in front of me. By the time I noticed him he had lost his wing and I am credited a friendly kill. On the same match I got too close to a Ju 88 and while I'm trying to figure out where exactly is the bomber I suddenly get kicked. I didn't really understand what happened until I see I had two friendly kills credited So, why isn't friendly fire turned off for this mode? It's the second match where I get booted because of incidents like this
  16. I've never disabled autorepair. I only play one nation at a time and I'm not waiting several days before I can use my vehicle again. Stick to tier 1-3. Tier 4 and 5 are made to drain your SL very fast. A premium account can help you cover costs up to tier 4, but you won't be making any profit. Avoid using vehicles with high repair costs. It's a very bad time to use late tier German SPAAs due to hull break, so stay away from anything past the Ostwind. Consider buying premium vehicles. The German P-47 is a very nice money maker and I'm sure there are others that are better.
  17. It's not a problem with any type of vehicle (bombers, attackers or fighters). It's the poor integration of objectives in the game. We effectively have three types of planes (fighters, attackers/light bombers and medium/heavy bombers) each playing their own game, with a different objective that they can't really affect each other. Attackers and lighter bombers can destroy ground targets, but don't have enough payload to do damage to airfields. Heavier bombers lack the accuracy to destroy ground targets, so they target bases and airfields. Neither (with certain infamous exceptions) effectively combat other planes. Meanwhile fighters can effectively destroy each other, but they can't scratch airfields or, most of the time, destroy the ground targets that are relevant for the objective (tanks, pillboxes, ships). So instead of cooperating for a single objective they are going on their own, often directly or indirectly interfering each other. If you're on a bomber you know fighters won't go out of their way to help you and the "enemy team lost all vehicles" win condition keeps you from destroying more target. As a fighter you know bombers are useless to help you wipe out the enemy team and if they manage to destroy the enemy airfield you won't be able to keep fighting. The other problem is the poor map design. Objectives aren't realistic. We have maps that need people to destroy 30 tanks, sink 20 ships and the like, when most attackers and bombers can destroy one or two before needing to rearm. Few bombers can destroy bases and the airfield in a single pass, while surviving long enough to make a second pass is impossible in most cases. What's needed is not another system to put bombers and fighters at odds by interfering with each other's objectives, but instead work towards more cooperation. Or at the very least remove the objectives that interfere with each other, like removing both the "destroyed airfield" and "enemy team lost all vehicles" win conditions.
  18. Hitting a tank in a 90° dive is easier said than done and isn't that effective. Default belts are never loaded with pure AP shells, so they might injure a crew member or two or damage some modules, but rarely do any sort of lethal damage. And if the tank moves, hitting it becomes much, much harder. The only tank I've lost to these type of strafers was a M22 Locust, but its armor is made out of wet cardboard, anyway. There is no ram damage. It makes me wonder why they kept it in GF.
  19. If you mean AB, then yes and yes. It's only bots that don't count. I believe bot planes that were under control of a player and were taken over by the AI when the air battle is over also count.
  20. I see why rockets could use a fuze restriction to prevent ramming, but why bombs? Ramming while dropping bombs would give exactly zero advantages to the kamikaze if the ramming caused zero damage. The bomb fuze countdown remains exactly the same, it does not give any accuracy advantage over a low level drop and gives a much noisier warning than a the simple whistling of a falling bomb. The only problem I find with it is that it's annoying, but it's pretty much like being hit with machine guns by allies at the start of the match. It was bad when it actually caused damage, but they removed the damage and now it's an annoying but ultimately harmless behavior. About cannons and machine guns, they only represent a threat to vehicles with exposed crews. Bullets damage crew members whether they're fired point blank or not, so I don't see a need to restrict them either. They were "level" bombers for technical reasons. Diving put the airframe under stress and complicated the use of manually-calibrated bombsights. Most bombers could definitely handle shallow dives and, in the game (arcade), it makes sense to have an automated bombsight and immunity to g-force overload. Most bombers already have a drop restriction that prevents bombs from being dropped if they exceed a certain angle (which is why the Pe-2 sucks as a dive bomber, you can't drop bombs in a steep dive). 10-15°? Not even torpedoes need such a flat trajectory. Accurate drops depend on shallow dives to succeed. 300m sounds pretty reasonable. It's enough to get close for an accurate hit and not far enough to be affected much by rocket spread.
  21. I really don't care how unrealistic mixed battles are or not. What I hate about them is that the choice of maps is absolutely terrible. I'm using my Ar 234 C-3 and what kind of maps I'm getting? Small tier 1 maps with tiny runways made for biplanes and small Front Line maps literally pulled out from Arcade, and these aren't the bad ones. There are also Pacific maps with no ground targets or runway to land on and several other maps completely unsuitable or unbalanced for ground attack. Worst thing is that I have to wait 8-10 minutes for each map. It's bad enough that regular map rotation includes bad maps like Spain, Norway and Ruhr, but with these mixed battles I'm literally spending more times on queue and crew locks than playing the game.
  22. I've seen a few suggestions like that, including the one I suggested (being able to earn points through battle actions and use those points to choose what plane to spawn and what armament to use, with better planes and better weapons being more expensive). Unfortunately the devs are ignoring the simple and obvious solutions, so I'm not being optimistic about seeing more complex systems being implemented.
  23. The simplest, most obvious solution would be removing the damage done by ramming. No ramming, no hull break, no one-shot kills without firing a single bullet.
  24. Everything tends to be much more mobile in AF. Tank columns never stop moving. Furballs aren't static and bombers tend to move as fast as possible to avoid being picked off by fighters, or stay high if they plan to bomb bases. Planes really don't have a reason to hang around a small portion of the map like they do in GF. If you've ever played SPAA, how often do you get to shoot down the bombers that rush in, drop bombs and fly on without turning back for a second run? I've been on both sides (the SPAA and the bomber) and I know it's pretty damn hard to shoot down a bomber that flies off after the first pass. The effectiveness of SPAAs increases at higher tiers, but so do the planes they face. It's likely that they would be most effective at low tiers, where biplanes fly low and newbies waste a lot of time strafing ground targets, but in higher tiers with faster planes, bigger bombs and fighters that are more likely to climb.
  25. Well, any way to disable or block runways is a perfectly legitimate tactic, including parking tanks on them. If we want to make it a more close "equivalent" to AB GF, up to two tank destroyers would be able to spawn to prevent the runway from being blocked. Attackers or bombers would still be able to fire back and destroy the blocking tank. And the runway block would last less than a minute.
  26. The last post before mine lead me to think it was the average complaint thread. My bad. As far as I know the game isn't supposed to give you a crew lock if it detects you were killed by an enemy regardless of the cause (when the "Player 1 [Kill icon] Player 2" appears in the event log). If it does, it's probably thanks to the Hull break mechanic and probably another problem that would be solved if damage from ramming was disabled.
  27. Mods, can you please delete or at least merge these kind of threads? It's always the same old complaints and posts proposing same old tired "solutions" over and over and over without adding anything new and constructive. These threads keep being resurrected and do nothing but to clutter up the forums.
  28. Assuming they want to get into the era of modern weaponry, of course. A-10 and Su-25 are still subsonic planes, slower than most jet bombers in the game and easily intercepted by high tier jet fighters. They are not invincible to AA fire either. And if standoff weaponry was modeled (which would probably be manually-aimed or guided), countermeasures would be added. For example, if laser guided bombs would require a laser designator to be aimed by hand, requiring the player to fly in a steady trajectory and leave the plane vulnerable to interceptors or AA fire (if short-range SAMs are not introduced). Mavericks use electro-optical guidance which, like lasers, could be disrupted by smoke deployed by tanks (they already showed us tanks using smoke screens).
  29. The rank restrictions were removed several patches ago. Now it's only BR that is taken into account for MM.
  30. It's a completely different game there. All the ground AI targets in air battles are dumb tank and armored vehicle columns moving along the same roads every match and static targets like pillboxes and artillery guns. AA guns rarely hit anything (except the ones on airfields). And at least in RB, ground attack rarely has an impact on the results of the match, while good tactical use of planes in GF can turn the tide of a match. The game was an air sim even before it was decided to turn it into a combined arms game. Tanks and boats are being developed in what was an air sim engine, making it more difficult to add player tanks and boats into air battles than to add planes into ground and sea battles. And the people who want tank-only matches are just a fraction of the player base, which is probably why Gaijin doesn't make the tank-only mode some people have suggested over and over (that their precious queue times). I remember seeing more people saying that planes in ground battles are fine, but it's kamikazes and suicide rocket attackers that get on their nerves. You are overestimating the effectiveness of SPAAs and the impact it would have on the game. Let's compare the size of maps and the effective radius of SPAAs at low altitudes, putting roughly their effective range at a generous 2km in green and a more realistic 1km in red (I know my MS Paint editing sucks and the distances are very rough estimates, but please bear with me). First is the Stalingrad ground map seen from the air. Note the size of the playable area compared to the size of the map (roughly the same as the RB map, AB maps are smaller). Second is the AB size of the Air Domination version of the map. It's smaller and has no airfields. And finally the Ground Strike version of the map (It's the non-winter version of the same map). It's a "light vehicles" map, so it's made for low tier planes and smaller than other GS maps. Also note that this is the maximum range against vehicles flying at tree top level. The range is reduced when planes fly at higher altitudes. So how upset air players would be if player SPAAs started popping up in air matches? They'd probably drop a non-fuzed 500-5000kg bomb on them and thank Gaijin for the easy kill.
  31. Some objects don't always match their hitboxes. I don't remember any glaring examples in Ground battles, but pillboxes in Air battles are very bad offenders. Bombs simply go through them unless you aim at their base. In snow maps the snow is modeled as an extra layer, so it sometimes seems like shells are going through the top of hills when they're actually going through the snow layer. I suggest checking the server replay to see if it was really a problem with hitboxes or just lag and file a bug report if something looks wrong.
  32. I simply brought it alone to the battle. Any lower BR tank is just fodder to the enemy. The Na-To might have a chance of penning enemy tanks despite being a full BR lower, since it has basically the same gun as the Chi-To, but it has the obvious drawbacks. I would have suggested using the So-Ki and hang around in the back, but Hull Break has made SPAAs a bad joke. As to how to use the Chi-To, it's basically a somewhat underpowered TD. Play it as if it were one. You know, don't rely on armor as you don't have any and play defensively. T-34s are not to be faced direcly or they'll nuke you to oblivion. If you have to face one, aim for the sides or the front of the hull (avoid the driver's hatch) and pray you disable it. Same with KVs and I think Jumbos are also tough to pen frontally, so side attacks are preferred. Never aim for the turrets. And the Comet, just sneeze in its general directions and it will explode, but watch out for its needle gun.
  33. No, it wouldn't solve anything. It would only frustrate the people who get a kill "legitimately" and die from any other cause (interceptors and SPAAs don't stop shooting at you after you drop your bombs, tanks and even artillery barrages can still kill you and they're all beyond the control of the player). You might suggest adding conditions to it, like "deny kills only when they crash", but we're back to the initial point. Any system that solves a problem that frustrates some people by frustrating another group of people is poorly done, IMO.
  34. Can you guys avoid dragging politics and controversy to a thread like this? The OP asked if the symbol in question was historically used in tanks. What the symbol represents or whether it's allowed to use it in the game is another matter.
  35. That's a problem with the player base that can't be easily fixed. Air AB? People form lemming lines behind a single target, shoot and crash into each other just to try and get a kill. Bombers crash deliberately after dropping bombs to spawn bomber after bomber until they finish the mission (which can end in a couple of minutes if organized squads are involved). Air RB? People rush to the center of the map, dive on the first attacker they see and are slaughtered by the enemies that bothered to climb. Fighters strafe a couple AA guns and crash, start shooting bot aircraft while they're surrounded by enemy fighters. I don't play Ground RB or any form of SIM, but I bet people do stupid things there too. And it's not just once every few matches. That kind of things happen pretty much in every match. The thing is, all of those actions cost people a spawn (the only one they have in RB) and repair costs and they still do it. Even if the repair costs outweigh their SL earning. Even if it means sitting 8 minutes more to get into a new match.
  36. As far as I know the Hakenkreuz (the swastika) was included on aircraft as a fin flash, a form of aircraft national identification painted on the tails of aircraft, which often includes symbols or flags of the aircraft's nation. The Balkenkreuz is on the wings and the fuselage. Tanks only need to carry their army's symbols of identification, not something like a fin flash.
  37. A badly built lineup or squad dragging a lower BR teammate along, I guess. M6A1's BR is 4.7. I know the Marder can survive strafing from the rear, the driver and the machine gunner are well protected inside the hull, but you're likely to lose the loader and the gunner. If he was damaged already he had probably lost crew already and had no more to replace his dead gunner. And that's what I mean about those "free" air points. The team needs to be steamrolling and keeping a tight hold on the cap point(s) before anyone receives them. Being in the losing team doesn't get you anything. I'm not saying this system is perfect, fair or balanced, just that "you get free points out of nothing" is mostly a myth.
  38. Can you share the server replay link? Not that I don't believe you. Russian AA trucks can be killed by rifle-caliber MGs and killing a Marder by strafing is not easy but possible, especially if it was damaged already.
  39. Rammed them or strafed them?
  40. Because the current system favors kamikazes. Remove the mechanics that favor kamikazes and the number of people who do it (and most importantly, their impact) will be reduced. All without affecting the rest of the players. It's easier to target tanks in flatter maps, which benefits kamikazes. Unless you're behind a house or a rock you can expect for planes to rain on you if you're driving something like a Marder or a Sturmpanzer. But maps with hilly terrain are the worst (at least for me) when trying to use planes and survive the air battle. Sinai can be bad as well, those large antenna-like towers can be dangerous obstacles. It requires for the team to hold cap points for a long time, which usually takes an amount of teamwork. The guy that stays back and does nothing can spawn on a bomber and maybe get one kill (which can be a blessing if you're trying to grind a bad tank that can't be exposed to enemy fire due to the lack of FPE when stock, or if you're having a particularly bad day), but that's it. Four fighters? How much of an impact in the game did it have?
  41. The air points needed to spawn one aren't.
  42. This is AB, though.
  43. You still have to pay for spawning a plane. Miss and go empty-handed.
  44. Not exactly a price, but the air points you paid to spawn a plane go to waste.
  45. You mean the plane they unlocked, that they chose to spawn with no armament or fuze restrictions and with which they had no time limit restrictions to plan a proper attack run? It depends. If they can still control it they can choose to land and get repairs. If not, they crash and lose one of the multiple spawns (up to nine or ten) they still have available. And they can still spawn the same plane with a backup vehicle. But hey, other mode, other mechanics.
  46. They crash. They lose the opportunity for a second bombing run. So what's the point?
  47. Read my posts again. I'm not saying nothing should be done about rammers, I said measures should be taken so ramming isn't encouraged or rewarded since there will always be rammers (just as there are Team Killers despite the fact that TKing is supposed to be punished). What I really am against is any system that punishes everyone for the behavior of a few (rammers are not really just a few, but you get my point).
  48. There is a big difference between "didn't even bother to try recovering from a dive" and "tried to recover from the dive and clipped a wing on a tree/tower and crashed". Isn't the former people were complaining about?
  49. And again, remove damage from rams and add fuze limits to rockets so rams are harmless. Try strafing a tank with a PBJ-1 after a bombing run in a map like Kuban or Korea and come back to tell me that crashing is a L2P issue. What planes in GF have air brakes aside from tier 1 dive bombers? IL-2s, IL-10s, Pe-3s and all the other rocket attackers don't have them. P-47s and Fw 190s? No brakes, and they pick a lot of speed during dives even at 0% throttle (and you can't go to MEC and lower the prop pitch or open radiators for additional drag). PBJs? Those things are awfully easy to crash if you try to go for strafing runs.
  50. Again, if damage from ramming and Hull break were removed this wouldn't be a problem. It's a very bad time to play SPAA right now. Same as above. Strafing tanks with fighters does no damage the majority of times, even to open tops. Hull break is a different story. Any tanker that is aware that there's a risk of being bombed and hears a bomb approaching will try to get out of the way and if they smart they will change direction and speed to complicate aiming to the bomber. This involves a lot of guesswork. This is why bombing tanks in the spawn point or moving tanks is a dumb idea. The best target is the one that is distracted, immobilized or pinned down by your allies. I said it's a harder target for fighters, not for SPAAs. Flying low actually makes them easier target for SPAAs, which sounds like something positive to me as that's the only source of targets for them. That high speed makes it harder to pull from a dive. Planes are less responsive at high speed.
  51. You have to go through that bridge at the same time as an enemy or allied tank in every single match? That's not how air battles work. Flying high is a very stupid idea for several reasons. Diving allows you to trade altitude for speed, which is necessary if you actually want to reach the targets before time runs out or interceptors tear you apart. Higher altitude increases the bomb's spread and thus lower the accuracy of the bombing run and makes subsequent runs much more difficult. It also makes you an easier target for interceptors, as any fighter knows that a diving bomber is a much harder target than one flying level. Attackers need to fly at tree top level, as rockets are next to impossible to use beyond a few hundred meters. Obviously you start by flying at low altitude, attack in a shallow dive and climb back. And this is why it's so easy to crash. There are a lot of tall structures, hills and the like and even an experienced pilot can easily crash. The error margin is just one fraction of a second. I recommend you to try air battles yourself to learn how air battle mechanics work.
  52. The HE shell has very little penetration (26mm), so unless you're fighting thinly armored vehicles don't bother using it. The HEAT shell has more reliable penetration but doesn't do as much damage as the APHE shell on the M10 (The M10 is a tank destroyer, the 105mm howitzer wasn't really made to fight tanks, That explains why one is better than the other). I suggest sticking with the HEAT shell. Grinding this tank is very tedious, which is why I never finished spading it or going further on the US tree.
  53. Their models are actually well done and detailed. Just look at those rifles. They kinda make me wish there were playable infantry in the game.
  54. Was it AB or RB? In Assault mode I frequently see parts of bombers hitting my plane without doing any damage.
  55. I said parts. Detached parts like wings or the tail section in this case. The fuselage can still hit you.
  56. The parts detached from a plane loss all their mass and can't hit other planes. It happens with all planes, not just with premium ones.
  57. Damn, I must have missed the last 9. Last time I heard there were only two. I don't trust Thunderskill. It says I'm a "good player", which I'm really not.
  58. There is a problem with this, and it's that it's unlikely that they'd go through the trouble of creating additional and very specific rules to punish a certain specific type of players. Look at Gaijin's history, they'd be more likely to introduce new broken rules that affect everyone, and people would start abusing loopholes as always. If your intention is to stop people from doing stupid things, no punishment is going to work. No one gets anything from rams in AF, but that doesn't stop people from ramming others they can't kill. TKing? Still common there. In tank AB you pay repair costs and a spawn for every death, but what stops people from suicidally rushing forward to get a kill or die trying? If planes were to cost a spawn and repair costs anyway, what would stop me from spawning on a disposable reserve tank, spawn a plane and suicide trying to destroy a particularly annoying enemy, especially if I don't have a second or third tank in the same BR to have a fair fight? The only reasonable thing to do is to remove any game mechanics that encourage tank ramming. It will still happen, but there would be less people doing it when they realize they get no advantage for it. The tank pushed off a bridge is a poor analogy. There are no tanks that require to be on a bridge to be effective, whereas planes must be flying low and fast to have a chance of being effective. Bridges are not as common features as trees, hills and tall buildings.
  59. If you're shooting at a tank 10 times and not killing it, you're either aiming at the wrong part of the tank, using the incorrect ammunition or possibly both. If you damage the turret and kill the gunner but keep hitting the same spot with subsequent shots the enemy will simply replace his/her dead gunner, aim back and probably kill you. Aim to disable the remaining enemy crew or to damage vital parts like the engine or ammo racks. Or if that's not possible, time your shots so you can disable the gunner again as soon as he's replaced (when the turret starts moving, shoot again). About ammunition, don't just use the one with the highest penetration value. The game makes shells with explosive filler much more useful than those without it (which sucks for British tanks as they mostly use solid shot). APCR is particularly bad, as despite the relatively high pen value, it does little damage and it tends to bounce off sloped armor very often. As a rule of thumb you'll want to use shells that offer the best compromise between penetration and explosive filler. HE shells are only useful if you have a massive caliber cannon, the the 150mm howitzers on the Sturmpanzer II, KV-2 and Ho-Ro. Relying on armor is usually a bad idea. Even if you have a heavily armored tank (like the Churchill) getting uptiered means you'll have enemies capable of piercing your armor easily. You also have to learn how to angle your armor for maximum effectiveness. Ideally you want to show the enemies the least flat part of you armor as possible, without exposing the softer side armor. Also fight at the range that takes the best advantage from your gun and your armor. A Tiger I, for example, has a heavy armor, but it will constantly face better opponents than it. To increase your chances of survival you need to stay far from the enemy, angle your armor and snipe. Vitality helps your crew to survive the secondary fragmentation of shells, but it won't save them from a direct hit. Are you building even lineups or taking low BR planes into your battles? Unless your only 20mm cannon-armed fighter is the Beaufighter, there's a big difference between cannon-armed fighters (Spits don't get Hispano cannons until 3.7 BR) and and the ones armed with 7.7mms (2.7 BR). At 3.7 you will be facing very heavily armed beasts. Kingcobras, 4 cannon Mustangs, Bf 109 F-4s and the like. If you're taking your MG-armed fighters to those matches you will be easily outgunned by everything.
  60. What about those that crash unintentionally? Some have argued that if you crash you were not being careful enough, but the many of the maps have a small size and terrain that contribute a lot to the risk of crashing. Hills with trees, tall houses and towers, for example. There's also the fact that you only have a few seconds to identify a proper attack path, make the attack run and pull out, many times while under fire. Crashing is easy even if you're careful. About Gaijin fixing things, I have no idea. I guess I'll never understand their concept of logic.
  61. There are just two frustrating aspects of this mode I find frustrating. One is the accuracy of the bombers, which can probably be adjusted to make them less deadly. The other is the poor quality of teams, but that isn't exclusive to the mode anyway. I do play for the rewards, specifically the RP. It's immensely helpful to grind basic mods on a stock plane before you even consider going to PvP mode, or spade it altogether if you're patient enough, so I don't mind losing lions (again, tier 4 and 5 are designed to drain your lions in every mode). I'd probably lose SL more if I went to grind mods in PvP with an uncompetitive plane, and that would be much more frustrating.
  62. It's a fallacy caused by the BR system. At first you might believe that when you unlock a 2.0 BR vehicles you will be dominating 1.0 BR matches, except the matchmaking doesn't work that way. The matches where you get downtiered to 1.0 BR matches are just a fraction of the total. In reality you will be facing 2.3, 2.7 and 3.0 vehicles most of the time. Get a 3.0 vehicle and you'll be facing vehicles all the way up to 4.0. Another thing to consider is that all players start playing in newbie-only rooms until they achieve a certain level of progress (I don't know exactly what it is. I believe it involves unlocking the first tier 2 vehicle, but there might be other criteria for this). If you achieve a certain level of performance in these newbie rooms and are released into the rooms with more experienced players, the change can be jarring. Older players have advantages such as better crews and spaded vehicles (all modifications unlocked), but most importantly, they have experience. They know vehicles, their strengths and weaknesses, where to shoot, have map knowledge and the like. It's something you acquire with time and practice.
  63. b29

    I don't remember that happening since I turned off the "Join already going battles" option. But yeah, it's annoying when it happens. I always quit even if it means taking a crew lock. Most of the time it's the poor map design. Bases are placed too far away from the spawn point and too close to the enemy airfield. Fighters can easily intercept you before you even reach the bases, but if they don't, nothing stops you from going a short way from the bases to the airfield. It's all or nothing, you either get to drop most of your payload or get to drop nothing at all. And you either destroy the airfield in the first pass or get shot down/the game ends before you have a chance for a second run.
  64. If you're playing the mode to gain SL you're doing it wrong. Especially in tier 4 and 5, where it's hard to get lions in every other mode.
  65. It's probably so warbonds (and thus free premium vehicles) aren't easy to get unless you have unlocked a variety of high tier vehicles (or spend a lot of SL and GE changing tasks).
  66. Are you sure it's ammo costs that is causing you to lose lions? If it is, it might be that you have to pay for ammo for any aircraft you spawn.
  67. I like the idea. I've always thought all vehicles should be available to everyone. I can see why some people wouldn't like it (since many are rare reward given for events that involved insane amounts of grinding and the like), but with other vehicles like those that were retired from the trees there are no excuses.
  68. Because easy kill, why else?
  69. help

    Only bombers are restricted. I've seen people bringing planes like the Do 217 J/N, which have the classification of Air Defense Fighters. I don't think so. The armament isn't that heavy (just one cannon and one MG more than the Bf 109 E4 and E7). The speed isn't an issue either, you can spawn in slower planes like the Hs 129. It sounds like a bug.
  70. It does. Throttle down to 0% and press the toggle button, then you can feather the propeller to increase glide distance or try to fly on your remaining engines (if any). If you increase the throttle it will be started again, though.
  71. Defensive fire could be nerfed a little. I had a match where my Me 410 pilot was sniped five times in a row by a Ki 49. It's a bit ridiculous for a plane that is supposed to be armored to protect it against gunners in the first place.
  72. For a diving bomb run on the Stuka in RB: 1. Make sure you have a good altitude. At least 2,000m. 2. Lock into your target and fly towards it. Be sure to watch its position on your minimap. 3. Switch to cockpit view or HUD view. Third person view makes the dive more difficult. 4. When you are about to fly directly over the target, throttle down to 0%, invert the plane using the ailerons and start diving. Deploy air brakes when you are diving. 5. Guide the plane towards the target and try to keep it right on your gunsight. If you timed your dive properly you will be diving at nearly 90°. Wait until you're at 600-800m (not less or you might crash) and drop your bomb(s). 6. Pull out of the dive. Retract air brakes, throttle up and escape the battle zone. If you're using big bombs (the 1000kg and the like) and damaging yourself it helps to set a fuze delay. 1.5 seconds makes it safe enough, I think.
  73. Don't judge guns by the caliber. The Italian and Japanese 12mm MGs are much weaker than American ones, for example. MG FF cannons are also weaker than most other 20mm cannons, though the MG FF/M variant with Minengeschoß shells is actually very nice. The Fw 190 has good armament once you unlock belts for the cannons. The best are probably Air Targets or Stealth. The Do 217 is indeed a hard plane to use. It's a bomber trying to pass off as a fighter. The Ju 87 D-5 is surprisingly good due to its 20mm cannons, but the G-1 and G-2s are difficult to use even in their intended niche (killing tanks).
  74. -Don't count on outrunning anyone unless you have a particularly fast plane compared to your enemy's (like a fast monoplane against a biplane), as well as an altitude advantage. And avoid putting yourself in a position where an enemy can easily get to your six. Forcing them to overshoot is easier said than done, particularly against an opponent that's more maneuverable than you. -The M.C. 202 isn't the greatest dogfighter. It's rather fast and maneuverable, but you'll have opponents that can beat you in either. It's best to use it for boom and zoom. Also, the Breda-SAFAT machine guns shoot bullets made out of candy compared to the Browning M2s, cannons and fast-firing MGs your opponents are packing. Unless you land a lucky hit you're going to need a lot of bullets to shoot down a fighter and many more to down a bomber, -If you aim directly at the lead indicator you'll hit the center of the plane, so you have to aim ahead of it most of the times. At extremely close ranges you have to account for the parallax effect if you're using the third person view, the camera shows a slightly different aim point to the actual aiming point so your bullets pass over or under your target. You can switch to HUD or cockpit view when that happens. A third thing to consider is the convergence distance of your guns, the point where bullets meet. If your target is too close or too far from your set targeting distance the bullets may not hit at all. This only affects guns set on the wings. -The Hurricane isn't ugly.
  75. b29

    The Hokkaido map? I've only played low tier on that map, so I don't know. Considering that most late war German fighters were made to destroy bombers I can see how they can be annoying to Brit fighters. I pretty much gave up on the B-25 for that reason. US teams tend to be horrible at that BR. Pacific maps are terrible for ground pounding and bombing bases is ineffective due to your small bomb load. I believe the Japanese fighters even get air spawn on some maps. If you rush forward you'll meet a wall of interceptors and die. If you try to be sneaky your team gets slaughtered and leaves you to fight alone. Either way you're dead. I ended up spading them in AB instead. You die quickly, but you usually get to kill one or two of the stupid fighters that tailsit you.
  76. b29

    I see late B-17s, B-29s all the time, B-24s and Lincolns every now and then, when I play with my Ar 234s. It's rare to see a match ending due to airfield destruction. When it does there's usually a squad of bombers involved or the German fighters simply let the B-29s alone until it's too late. Those bombers don't always get to drop a full payload. By the time they reach the airfield there's usually a Horten or a Me 262 at their altitude already (or an Arado C-3 trying to play the fighter) and once a single bomber goes down they pretty much lose the chance of destroying the airfield. Theirs is normally a one-way trip, there's no way the bombers can survive a way back to the airfield, rearm and go for a second run before the game ends.
  77. Pretty much. Unlike a real bombsight that has to be carefully calibrated, the one in the game shows you the exact point where bombs will hit at the moment. Bombing at an angle or when banking or yawing hard doesn't affect the accuracy of the bomb, but it does make aiming harder (and might not even let you drop if you're diving or climbing too steeply, depending on which bomber you're flying). For very precise bombing you'll want your plane's trajectory to be as slow and steady and possible. And the other factors that affect your bomb spread, like Josephs_Piano said, are the altitude and your crew's Maintenance skills.
  78. Well, I'm not an expert or anything, but I think that if a big piece of metal that weighs 5.7 kg hits your plane at 500 m/s the kinetic energy itself is going to do a bit more than just releasing a small puff of smoke. Then again I might be wrong.
  79. Yeah, I'm not saying that's what you must do either, it's just what I would do. Some people have success hunting bombers as well while I personally try to avoid them. Having different strategies available is a good thing.
  80. You mean bombsight view? The bombsight view shows you the same info as in the HUD view, as well as the bomb crosshair. The little circle that lags behind your aim point when you move exists in actual aircraft HUDs. It's called the Flight Path Vector and I believe (correct me if I am wrong) the display that shows where the aircraft "thinks" you will be heading with the current airspeed and attitude. In bombsight view it's irrelevant as your sight is looking down and not to the front. Bombs normally fall towards the center of the crosshair, but at higher altitudes the spread of your bombs' trajectory becomes greater. If you're flying fast you also have to drop your bombs before the crosshair is over the target. How much depends on your altitude and the bomber you're using. When possible it's best to slow down as much as possible to reduce the effect of speed in your bombs.
  81. There's an ignore option. Use it.
  82. High caliber cannon shells do seem to have a chance of hitting and not doing any damage at all. It's easy to see in the Assault mode with targets that don't move. I've shot them with the 75mm of the Hs 129 (715g of explosive, more than 10 times the amount of the 37mm). Bombers and even fighters seem to shrug off a direct hit sometimes. The 50mm cannon of the Me 410 A-1/UA has similar results.
  83. I remember a couple of times when I hit a German destroyer with a British torpedo and didn't get a "hit" message. It was back when torpedoes had the sight that told you if the torpedoes would hit or not and I'm positive the torpedo did hit the ship. Maybe the same happened to you? It was in Norway, if I remember correctly.
  84. And this is one of the biggest problems about threads like this. They usually devolve to the same old tired arguments of how planes should be punished harshly for dying regardless of the cause of death. I see a lot of exaggeration about planes. It's like some of these people were always on the receiving end and never bothered to actually spawn a plane to see how they're not the magical one-hit tank killing machines they whine about and they just want to punish all fliers out of spite. Suicide rams are annoying, but it could be fixed with very simple changes (no damage from crashes, no hull break, fuze limits for rockets) without imposing penalties unfair to many players.
  85. Tanks in real life don't just sit inside arbitrary circles painted on the ground to "capture" zones. Comparing unrealistic gameplay mechanics (of arcade mode of all things) to real life tactics is just silly.
  86. You can fight some early jets, but things like F-84s are very problematic as they are much faster. If you have team support you might join the battle, otherwise I'd stay as far from enemy jets as possible. I did suggest targeting the bridge. It's my usual target in that map as it's easier to hit than tanks, but destroying a couple of tanks rewards a bit more SL.
  87. This one actually sounds pretty reasonable. One of the main reasons people don't spawn fighters is because they don't want to leave their tanks alone on the ground where they can become easy targets for the bomber. Maybe there should be an option to spawn an AI interceptor in case you can't or don't want to spawn in a fighter. Bombers and attackers could also choose to spawn an AI escort for those times when no one on their team is willing to help. It means more targets for SPAAs as well.
  88. Tiers 1-3 are my favorite as well with a few exceptions. For Arcade air I hate going above 3.3-3.7 as it all ultimately boils down to who climbs faster and who has more cannons and the heavy bomber spam starts. Tanks start being less fun near the 5.0-5.3 BR and become a chore at 6.0.
  89. A "solution that works" can be achieved by simply tweaking the existing mechanics a bit. Eliminating crash damage, implementing the fuze limits on the rockets I mentioned earlier and giving an actual reward for surviving instead of the meager SL reward we already have would be an effective deterrent against kamikazes. Ramming with bombers doesn't make sense unless hull break is involved. The fuze delay will take place anyway. If the tank didn't get out of the way when the plane lands on top of it, it won't get out if the bombs are dropped from 100 or 200m either. Blacklisting them doesn't mean you won't play against them in the future.
  90. You mean taking away the reward if the player succeeds in killing a tank but crashes or gets shot down? So you have one player annoyed for losing a tank and another for losing the reward. Doesn't sound like an ideal solution to me.
  91. This is also the only instance in the game where the vehicle you spawn is a bonus tool you earn, a reward, instead of having to bring your own vehicle. I did mention the hull break stuff earlier and I think it has no place in Arcade. I agree that it's a bad moment to play SPAA and light vehicles in general (which really bothers me, since most of my favorite vehicles are open top SPGs) The obvious solution would be removing the collision damage from planes, which would solve the problem of planes diving into SPAA to one-shot them without even firing their guns.
  92. Just a few notes about the points you raised: What penalties can be implemented that affect only those who suicide, as opposed to having to punish everyone who loses a plane? The game makes can't tell the difference when someone crashes intentionally or when they crash due to pilot error. It can't tell if someone crashed due to battle damage or if someone took a single 7.7mm bullet before deliberately suiciding, either. To hit anything with small bombs you need the markers and the external bomb sight, otherwise you'd need much shorter fuzes. The time limit also gives little time for target identification if markers were to be removed. Rockets are very inaccurate past a few dozen meters and require a direct hit to work. I'd say from personal experience that rocket accuracy is well below 20% for each single rocket with Wfr. Gr. 21 being closer to 50%. That's without suiciding, of course. People have suggested introducing a fuze to prevent tanks from detonating if they are launched at extremely close range to discourage kamikazes. I think that's a good idea. So what do you suggest? An arbitrary time limit before planes can be spawned? Only three enemy planes can spawn at a time. It's up to the player to prioritize threats and engage them accordingly. Having support from friendly fighters helps immensely. The game isn't very rewarding to SPAAs at the moment. Apart from the latest nerfs (gun overheating, AP belts nerf, hull break, etc), they pay is low. You become a magnet for strafers (easy kills for the armored SPAAs but the bane of unarmored ones). If your team dominates you'll barely have anything to shoot at and matches can be very boring. If the enemy team dominates they will attack from all directions, overwhelm you and kill you.
  93. Thanks. It works fine again.
  94. It remains bugged for me.
  95. Excellent changes, especially for Assault mode. The repair costs of SPAAs in AB still remain on the high side, though, especially with Hull Break from aircraft crashes on effect.
  96. Not really. It depends on several factors, like the number of vehicles available in a given BR, the number of players playing in those vehicles and the like. An example is the 6.7 BR range. It's a very popular BR with several vehicles like the Tiger II. There are less players and tanks in the 7.7 range, so 6.7 vehicles get downtiered very often. Another example is the 3.0 BR range. There are few 3.0 vehicles, so they get uptiered quite often.
  97. Would it honestly make a difference if those killing tanks from above were bots instead of humans? And would it be more fun to push a button to order an air strike on an enemy tank instead of piloting the plane yourself and getting the kill? I personally doubt it. Bots have very rigid routines, which makes them more predictable for SPAAs than player targets. I don't think it would be very fun to spawn a SPAA just to shoot down a bunch of drones flying in circles over the map, not any more than shooting the barrage balloons over Normandy.
  98. Great guide about my favorite bomber so far. Just a few things I would like to add (I'm speaking about RB, by the way): Bombing ground targets is actually very easy with a bit of practice. No reticule is needed. Choose the three 500kg bombs (no need to research the ETC 1001 bomb rack), set the bomb fuze to 1.5 s and drop the bombs at very low altitude (tree top level) when you're 200-300 m away from the target. Static targets like pillboxes are the easiest to destroy. Tanks columns and other moving targets are trickier, so you have to lead a little to compensate. Again, it only takes a bit of practice. After your first attack run, don't dawdle. Head straight back to base. It's tempting to stay and strafe a few AA guns or vehicles, but it's not worth it. The enemy will be all over you in a matter of seconds. Speed is life. Always remain at high speed, at least above 600 km/h. I always dive at the start of the battle and fly at tree top level to keep a speed over 800 km/h. This will allow you to outrun any enemy prop planes you may meet. Enemy jets are your biggest threat. Most of the times you will meet Meteors, Vampires, P-80s, F-84s and MiG-9s. You may also meet B-57s and Canberras that get gutsy and try to fight you. They're all very dangerous and should be avoided at all costs. The most dangerous is the F-84 when they stay low and rush forward towards your objectives. They can easily catch up to you even if you're flying at full speed. If you see one incoming, drop any bombs you might have and turn back towards your allies or the airfield. When they get within gun range your only option is to do evasive maneuvers to try to gain some time. The Arado is rather agile and can be a hard target when it's jinking. Don't chase bombers. The Arado is not an interceptor and it's somewhat fragile. Leave them to your more well-armed teammates. Regarding particular maps: Berlin. The big nice airport is a great thing to have as it makes landings easier. The eastern area of the map is more likely to be attacked first, so attacking the western convoy makes more sense. Watch out for rushing F-84s. Further attack runs will be harder as the main furball tends to develop right above the rest of the tank columns. There's a group of IL-2 bots flying to the northeast, they can be shot down with the cannons (Air targets belts work best), but doing it while enemy fighters remain is dangerous. Korea. I dislike this map. Ground targets are far from the base and nearer to the enemy team than to yours. The nearest set of targets is a column of medium tanks. A column of heavy tanks is further away. It's usually too far for you to target safely, so stick to the medium tanks. Alternatively you can target the bridges. Whatever you do, don't make more than one attack pass. Even if you are fast you're likely to end up with a F-84 on your tail, so quickly fly towards your allies and pray for the best. Sicily. Start by targeting the western tank column. The Matildas have a tendency to stay close to each other on the road, so if you're lucky you can get 3-5 kills in a single pass. Ignore the soft targets and head back to the base. Bastogne. Fly towards the nearest tank column you see. On the way you will see a group of three medium tanks moving slowly through a forest. They are close to each other, so you can destroy two with a single bomb, three if you're lucky. The first tank convoy I mentioned is moving through a hill, in a very hard position to bomb, so you can try to bomb the armored vehicles and AAA behind them. Norway. I avoid this one like the plague.
  99. I have a question about this. Were oil and coolant leaks really that common? In the game it seems like any shot to the engines or radiators results in this kind of damage and the engines die in a matter of minutes.
  100. If you're suggesting a system like the one on RB, it would only be opening another can of worms. Being able to spawn a plane of your choice would mean the opportunity to always spawn the best plane with the heaviest armament, because why would anyone bother using attackers with pathetic 250kg bombs when they can use fighters with rockets and heavy bombers with 1,000-2000kg bombs every single time? And what would stop people from kamikazeing or otherwise acting suicidally, as just a few kills would offset the repair costs? I imagine people spawning on a P-47, getting 2-3 easy kills with rockets, spend the rest of the match strafing light vehicles until they get shot down... only to spawn a second P-47 and repeat the same. Implement a version that restricts planes too much and nobody will bother spawning a plane since the costs can easily outweigh the benefits, which would make SPAAs even more useless. They're in a tough position now due to the latest changes, the last thing they need is to be deprived of air targets and become the ersatz tank destroyers most people seem hate.
  101. The only one I know is that we can't change our nicknames.
  102. This type of exaggeration annoys me. Planes don't get a kill 100% of the time. They only time when they have a high success rate is when the opposing team is too lazy or incompetent to spawn an interceptor or SPAA. Attackers/Bombers aren't free, spawning one takes at least two kills or a competent team to hold cap points for long. You even have to pay for the ammunition you use. Now, don't get me wrong, I do agree that ramming should not be rewarded. The Hull Break change made ramming light vehicles an effective way of killing them (and has generally been implemented very poorly, I hit a Gepard in the forward thread wheel with a HEAT shell and it was a one-hit kill via Hull Break. It's stupid). This could be fixed easily by disabling ram damage from planes, so it puzzles me why Gaijin hasn't done this. And to the usual people who keep saying "anyone who dies in a plane should lose a spawn, pay repairs, be crew-locked, banned and/or sent to a gulag", that's not going to happen.
  103. I don't think the control makes any difference.The Pfeil is a heavy fighter, a fast one made to intercept bombers. It's not meant to dogfight. It also has that bad combination of heavy armament and speed that increases its BR, so you'll be fighting late war and postwar superprops and early jets when uptiered.
  104. About a decade by now. I've always liked planes but never really cared about older ones until I played IL-2 Sturmovik for the first time. I fell in love with the Bf 109 and started reading more about it and about WWII in general. I also didn't care much about tanks until I started playing WT.
  105. My tank controls were fine a few hours ago, but suddenly they started acting strangely. Now the R1 menu doesn't work and instead opens the artillery selection screen if it's available. The button images are replaced with yellow text or large white boxes. It's identical to what happened when they updated the controls menu. I created a thread back then. The weird thing is that I can't fix the controls the same way. "Call for artillery strike" on controls remains bound to X. "Event selection menu" is bound to R1. I tried changing controls and resetting them to the default, but it still doesn't work. Does anyone know if there are any fixes or should I go straight to bug reporting?