Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Abetter1

Americans are unplayable

146 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

I'm struggling to get a single battle where I might have a chance to survive, I bought couple of premium planes and preimum account trying to get to the sebras, got in game today with  3 massive boosters which are effective as playing against japan (300% 200% and one more 200%) first battle in premium spit IX against ultimate UFO nation Japan (I usually quit but I gave it a chance- big mistake) spitfires can climb really well, but they can't reach the moon, so while I still climb I face all their team seal clubbing close to mars, once they engage you it's over, and it did, so first battle all gone in seconds, same for the first 300% booster. 

 

Second battle with a premium p-51-d10 at krymsk facing second ufo nation, again I face most of their team landed on the moon, nothing to do has half the team already dead, I hold J and quit.

 

Third battle in premium p-47M I face germany, finally a non ufo nation (I'm tired facing aliens) somehow a FW-d9 get on my tail and shoot me down (ok NP well done).

 

by that time all my boosters gone to waste, I'm frustrated, it's like there's no chance for the US to face their enemies, I quit the game, premium is worth nothing when you can't actually play, this game has gone to garbage.

 

236390_screenshots_20170715132411_1.jpg

Edited by Abetter1
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UFO nations? Nah. They just have very light air frames, which makes them do things that seem impossible to a heavier aircraft such as a US one. As a side note, the only time a Spit IX will have trouble against Japan is if you try to turnfight them, or get caught by a Ki-84 who has greater energy. Your Spitfire is actually not a turnfighter - it's a very maneuverable energy fighter, and should be used as such. You shouldn't turn against most Japanese planes in general (Zeros especially), but you can almost always energy fight them.

 

The thing with US is that they're all heavy, high altitude escort planes. You have to play the space game, and do it better than your enemies. For the 'Stang and T-Bolt especially, you have to side climb, you have to make sure you're higher than your enemies, then you fight them, and you never follow their maneuvers, just climb back out and dive on them again. If there's people above you, don't engage them. Fly away, get altitude, and come back at them from above. In the event you do get attacked, don't maneuver much. Generally, just pull a split S and dive away - in a sustained dive, you can outrun pretty much anything you fight, especially if you make it a shallower dive. US planes are actually very easy to fly, on an action reaction basis, they just require a lot of discipline, which a lot of the playerbase lacks.

 

As a side note, you mentioned specifically using planes that are known to be very good or even outright overpowered, so long as they're flown right. Spit requires you to realise it's not just a turnfighter, 'Stand and M-Bolt require discipline. With those things, however, those planes tend to destroy most of what they fight.

10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, I consider most of the planes you mention borderline incapable of dealing with the planes you were flying.

 

Specifically the Spit LF9 is probably the easiest plane right now to get at least above average results out of, and the P-47M just stomps any German plane it can meet into the ground 1v1. The only Russian prop that can hold its own against it is the La-9.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Abetter1 said:

How skill related to what I've posted, want to try a fight, I'll take a UFO Japan, you take whatever you like, see who wins.

Yes, my d30 will beat probably any of the Japanese plane you own.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Dude, just accept that from 1943 onward, the US had the best planes in the war. The US was simply the best at building aircraft in WW2, end of story. US pilots are probably the best in the game, just like they were in real life, but the game meta is a joke and makes US planes hard mode. That doesn't change the fact that you, and your Nazi xxxx sucking friends still suck at the game and suck at life. 

 

Because, when you say that P51D-30 and P47N are downtiered on forums, you are a Nazi something and he comes to your inbox and starts raging  :DD

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, the trolling post and spam comments have been removed for now.

 

If people decide to continue trolling and spamming then i'll switch to harsher measures.

 

So OP: try to ask for tips on how to be better and accept constructive criticism and those that want to respond to the OP: provide either tips for OP or explanations as to why you agree or do not agree with the OP.

 

:salute:

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

That's just another day in War Thunder.

 

Tomorrow you'll get like 6 victories in a row, with maybe 1 loss stuck in there. Then the cycle will turn. You can draw your own conclusions....

Edited by ForgetItHappened
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Xogo said:

UFO nations? Nah. They just have very light air frames, which makes them do things that seem impossible to a heavier aircraft such as a US one. As a side note, the only time a Spit IX will have trouble against Japan is if you try to turnfight them, or get caught by a Ki-84 who has greater energy. Your Spitfire is actually not a turnfighter - it's a very maneuverable energy fighter, and should be used as such. You shouldn't turn against most Japanese planes in general (Zeros especially), but you can almost always energy fight them.

 

The thing with US is that they're all heavy, high altitude escort planes. You have to play the space game, and do it better than your enemies. For the 'Stang and T-Bolt especially, you have to side climb, you have to make sure you're higher than your enemies, then you fight them, and you never follow their maneuvers, just climb back out and dive on them again. If there's people above you, don't engage them. Fly away, get altitude, and come back at them from above. In the event you do get attacked, don't maneuver much. Generally, just pull a split S and dive away - in a sustained dive, you can outrun pretty much anything you fight, especially if you make it a shallower dive. US planes are actually very easy to fly, on an action reaction basis, they just require a lot of discipline, which a lot of the playerbase lacks.

 

As a side note, you mentioned specifically using planes that are known to be very good or even outright overpowered, so long as they're flown right. Spit requires you to realise it's not just a turnfighter, 'Stand and M-Bolt require discipline. With those things, however, those planes tend to destroy most of what they fight.

This very well sums up the US flight line. Their weight makes them very good energy fighters at high speeds. When I side climb and notice there are enemies spotted at a higher alt I keep my distance and continue to climb until they give up their alt to dive on allies lower to the ground.

 

If you have allies higher up being engaged that's your moment to assist and terminate the bogey. As this post states you gotta build discipline and don't turn fight. 

:salute:

Edited by Hugo_Stiglitz_Jr
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American planes are incredibly unforgiving.  Generally, their only clear-cut advantage over their opponents is their top speed.  Unfortunately, in War Thunder top speed is nowhere near as powerful as it was historically.  Maneuverability and acceleration are kings thanks to mouse aim.  Until Gaijin fixes prophanging, that's how it will continue to be.

 

If you want to do well with US planes you need to find a competent wingman, and learn to use squad tactics against your opponents.  1v1 you will struggle against just about anything unless you're willing to put in the crazy amount of practice and studying to learn how to push US planes to their very limits.  Even then, there's no guarantee you'll be able to overcome anyone with half a brain cell in just about any other plane. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing you can do about it OP, you have no choice but to sharpen your skills. Although calling other nations UFOs is an overstatement right there, a lot of aircraft can be countered by a few techniques but only work so as long as the player you are fighting is incompetent or unaware of what you are going to do next.

 

If you outsmart your opponents you will do fine, US does however have aircraft that can do extremely well such as the F8F-1B Bearcat, P51D30, F82, P40E, P47, and so on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American planes are boom and zoom primary. You are suppose to side climb and attack from above. It seems like you are not flying each plane correctly.

1) The Republican Aviation Pursuit-47M Thunderbolt has no issue on out climbing the enemy team. I flown with a friend one time and he told me how to get the P-47M above the enemy team (WEP non stop, 20 min or 16 minute of fuel, and 15 degree climb) and that helped me get above the enemy team and destroy them from that point on.

2) The North American Aviation Pursuit-51 Mustang planes you need to get above the enemy team or know defensive flying if you let them dive on you.

 

15 hours ago, SovereignEagle said:

Japan and Russia UFOs?

 

You're 3 years too late for that.

Russian planes are good plane but at low alt from 3000 meters and lower but at medium alt to high alt their engines struggle as they were meant for low alt combat which was the case on the Eastern front therefore it was not necessary to have planes perform well at high alt. Problem is over time the air combat has slowly gone from high alt combat to now low alt combat. Japanese planes are not UFOs but they are good planes. Each plane in the Japanese tree has a role like the Mitsubishi J2M "Jack" is a Boom and Zoom air craft, the Kawasaki Ki-61 "Tony" and Nakajima Ki-84 "Frank" are energy fighters, and the Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar" and Mitsubishi A6M "Zero/Zeke" is a turn fighter.

Each plane has a weakness, it takes time to figure it out because the tactics used against one plane may not work against another. Hope that helps.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MasterofBlitz said:

American planes are boom and zoom primary. You are suppose to side climb and attack from above. It seems like you are not flying each plane correctly.

1) The Republican Aviation Pursuit-47M Thunderbolt has no issue on out climbing the enemy team. I flown with a friend one time and he told me how to get the P-47M above the enemy team (WEP non stop, 20 min or 16 minute of fuel, and 15 degree climb) and that helped me get above the enemy team and destroy them from that point on.

2) The North American Aviation Pursuit-51 Mustang planes you need to get above the enemy team or know defensive flying if you let them dive on you.

 

Russian planes are good plane but at low alt from 3000 meters and lower but at medium alt to high alt their engines struggle as they were meant for low alt combat which was the case on the Eastern front therefore it was not necessary to have planes perform well at high alt. Problem is over time the air combat has slowly gone from high alt combat to now low alt combat. Japanese planes are not UFOs but they are good planes. Each plane in the Japanese tree has a role like the Mitsubishi J2M "Jack" is a Boom and Zoom air craft, the Kawasaki Ki-61 "Tony" and Nakajima Ki-84 "Frank" are energy fighters, and the Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar" and Mitsubishi A6M "Zero/Zeke" is a turn fighter.

Each plane has a weakness, it takes time to figure it out because the tactics used against one plane may not work against another. Hope that helps.

It's like you're doing an essay for school so you add up meaningless information to make your text appear bigger lmao

 

All of what you really said is really either common sense for ANY plane in the game.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the lack of team roles proportionality is the main issue... We can see it sometimes playing against Soviet IL-2/Pe-2 range or German Tier I (50% to 75% of the team composed of bombers and attackers against a team with 75% to 80% of fighters)...

 

Playing Allies from BR 4.3 to BR 6.0 is awfully unbalanced compared to counterparts almost everytime... Early B-17s with no bomb load to change match results (as LR bombers), P-47s loaded to ground and pound, AD-2s, PBJs, Fireflies, Wyverns, et cetera against - sometimes - German teams with 75% interceptors getting airspawn and clubbing almost anything, they just need to kill the only 2 or 3 high alt fighter to start a clubbing fest.

 

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, PlRATE said:

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

 

Wow, that is actually something I could get behind. The P-47Ds would have to lose their attacker role, though. It's rough, but it would definitely force people to learn how to fly their damn planes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, PlRATE said:

I think the lack of team roles proportionality is the main issue... We can see it sometimes playing against Soviet IL-2/Pe-2 range or German Tier I (50% to 75% of the team composed of bombers and attackers against a team with 75% to 80% of fighters)...

 

Playing Allies from BR 4.3 to BR 6.0 is awfully unbalanced compared to counterparts almost everytime... Early B-17s with no bomb load to change match results (as LR bombers), P-47s loaded to ground and pound, AD-2s, PBJs, Fireflies, Wyverns, et cetera against - sometimes - German teams with 75% interceptors getting airspawn and clubbing almost anything, they just need to kill the only 2 or 3 high alt fighter to start a clubbing fest.

 

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

 

29 minutes ago, PainGod85 said:

 

Wow, that is actually something I could get behind. The P-47Ds would have to lose their attacker role, though. It's rough, but it would definitely force people to learn how to fly their damn planes.

Ditto that's a great idea. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PlRATE said:

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

I don't completely understand what you are proposing here. Could you please elaborate?

 

What do you mean by "team role composition based on percentages"?

What do you mean by "no rewards for players doing jobs outside of their roles"?

With regard to "destroy 25 zones to research a bomb load," how are planes supposed to destroy zones without a bomb load to begin with? How are you supposed to research bomb loads if you run out of bombs?

 

Basically, I need more clarification on what you are proposing.

 

IMO, if you want encourage players to play within their roles, you need to introduce a lot more structure to the missions. Every mission should have an attacking and a defending side. Phases to the mission can be used to encourage players to play within their roles. For example, a mission can have an air superiority phase (escorting and bombing bases), and a ground attack phase (armored cars, tanks etc now appear). To encourage the air superiority role, the attacking side will not be able to go below 4000m, or risk getting shot down by flak. After air superiority (3 or less enemy planes) is achieved, the flak's range and effectiveness can be significantly reduced for the ground attack phase.

Edited by FidgetSquad
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PlRATE said:

I think the lack of team roles proportionality is the main issue... We can see it sometimes playing against Soviet IL-2/Pe-2 range or German Tier I (50% to 75% of the team composed of bombers and attackers against a team with 75% to 80% of fighters)...

 

Playing Allies from BR 4.3 to BR 6.0 is awfully unbalanced compared to counterparts almost everytime... Early B-17s with no bomb load to change match results (as LR bombers), P-47s loaded to ground and pound, AD-2s, PBJs, Fireflies, Wyverns, et cetera against - sometimes - German teams with 75% interceptors getting airspawn and clubbing almost anything, they just need to kill the only 2 or 3 high alt fighter to start a clubbing fest.

 

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

To me this would be great if also the plane came with all its performance but you had to unlock each weapon upgrade individually. Much more enjoyable grind. If people say in the jug had to go through every other belt before they got to ground ammo the community as a whole would be much better in fighters. 

 

Edit: And in fighters all ground ordinance should be last. 

Edited by Hank_HI11
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PlRATE said:

......

For me, we should have a team role composition based on percentages and no rewards for players doing jobs out of their roles... Maybe changing module research meta: instead of RP, objectives (for example, kill 50 enemy planes to research ammo belts, destroy 25 zones to research a bombload, destroy 100 ground units to research a rocket, etc).

But, how do you destroy ground targets without the researched bomb loads?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, xBromanx said:

But, how do you destroy ground targets without the researched bomb loads?

 

One could always say tons of TNT equivalent dropped on bomb points. The game already accounts for it, so it should be possible to use the value obtained for researching modules.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Flying_Dodo said:

I cant remember becasue I dont play bombers, but I think I remember some bombers or attackers not getting bombs from the get-go.

The PBJ-1H and J don't have bombs to begin with.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0