Fast forward to 2025 and the B17 is masochistic joke that shatters like a bottle thrown at a brick wall when hit by a single 20mm. An unplayable piece of worthless trash whose gunners are incapable of landing a single hit, and then do no damage. Congrats on rewriting history Snail, the 8th USAAF just lost WW2 on the western front.
1 Like
It’s so sad. A lot of cool planes are almost unplayable in terms of getting fun out of the game. I strive to spade all planes, but with all my love for playing on the bomber, with some I am not ready to do this, even if I am given a permanent 500% RP booster for them.
In reference to what you replied too. It is never just 1 20mm round. And I don’t think people realise how extremely fragile bombers were (Wellington Geodetic/geodesic design not taken into account for weight reasons and not standard).
Warthunder added bombers and made sure that the cap was only 4 (originally more were allowed at first). 4 was never enough in real life to defend themselves against 1 or 2 fighters if hit.
People complain that from their perspective “I was hit once and my tail was cut off”. In the replays you will note 2-6rounds actually hit their tail and the overpressure by those explosive rounds cut the tail off. Is this unrealistic? Short and Long answer No.
There is alot of evidence showing bombers that had 1 strafe against them, a couple of rounds hit their tail, overpressured the compartment enough and dynamic forces tore the entire tail clean off like ingame.
The only difference is that the destroyable segment numbers on bombers are abit few in number when they should be similar sizes to fighters. We understand that this would increase file sizes per bomber damage state models so the health being pooled together into larger sections makes sense.
But hopefully someday we get to see much more intricate damage model segments so that damage is shown to be more fluid in where it breaks. For most bomber players seeing a wing break off 9/10 in the same place or the tail will ofcourse give the wrong impression that there is something wrong with the model.
When in reality a section of the wing or tail near that segment damage model point was overstressed with damage registered and the closest segment breaking point is where the game registers the loss.
If you want a reference image on how just a few 30mm rounds will overpressure a tail clean off and how multiple more 20’s on a normal fighter attack against a bomber could. Here is 1 example recorded of a B-24 reportedly losing it’s entire tail to an Me-262 attack run:
Reference for image: B24 Liberator Information
1 Like
You are writing about 20, 30 mm guns, but exactly the same thing happens with 7.62. Moreover, in the game it may be displayed as a slightly damaged wing edge, but the bomber loses normal controllability.
The second point: defensive weapons. AI gunners do not shoot normally even being aces, although in NAB similar AI shoot accurately at the target from several miles. Obviously, this is done intentionally, otherwise noobs who bought vehicle packs for themselves will suffer. The Snail needs to give them the opportunity to kill someone.
And finally, nothing prevents Snail from making normal targets for different types of vehicles, thoughtful map design. Something more interesting than a tangle of 30 planes in the center. The problem with bombers is that they are essentially forced to either fly into the general pile or get about 0 points per match. Everything is so “talentedly” designed.
2 Likes
If you are flying a bomber directly towards a target…your not flying bombers correctly. I lose points if I fly directly to a base since I die before getting there. Whilst side flying in arcs away from the mothball, allows me to release my payload and be able to land to get all 100% of the reward for bombing by rearming.
In 2025 some people believe all enemy planes are equipped with 4x 30mm cannons.
1 Like
In what world do people think that?
today I observed in naval arcade that bombs which where hit in-flight are shown in the killfeed - so it seems that they are handled like independent objects after(?) dropped from the plane and targetted by the ai. I never observed this before, don’t know if its new after the aimbot update or even in one of the last patches. nevertheless this behaviour is a additional nerf to planes!
i hope that leak about bomber rework is true
1 Like
That has to be false, 7.62mm might as well be thumbtacks poking your bomber, they are only usable at low tier…
Even at low tier it’s painful.
I engaged a Il-2 in my c 202 (sim).
It took me like 5 or so looping/yoyo passes to finally get its right engine to start burning and I got a decent aim when it comes to planes flying in a straight line.
Do tell what leak ?
I play AAB. All aircraft types have an air spawn point. No one takes off from an airfield. The only difference is the spawn altitude, but even at low BRs it is clearly not enough to get most bombers to a relatively safe altitude in a reasonable amount of time.
While you are side climbing in AAB, others will already dive to bases and ground, and you will get nothing. Except for hits from K/D rat, camping for bombers in skies, because it’s safest target.
Yes, kamikaze tactics have their risks, the bomber can be intercepted and shot down before you get to the base or a fat group of ground vehicles. But if you slip through, you can get much more RP and SL than a side climber who flew to destroyed bases and got zero.
I’ve tried different tactics on different bombers with different BRs, from reserves to 6.0, and played enough battles on bombers to express my opinion.
I noticed this a sometime ago when flying the IL-2. Several times I blew up my own bombs, dropping them on ground targets and firing at neighboring ones.
This is really a skill issue, now I don’t shoot near falling bombs, but switch to neighboring targets. Or I maneuver after dropping, so as not to hit my own bombs with shots.
1 Like
my remark about bombs in the killfeed related to bombs hit by the enemy so my bomb run often resulted in no hit at all
I understand, I just added to your comment.
Of course, this game mechanic looks more realistic than if the bomb was an intangible object that could not be interacted with in any way while it was flying towards its target. But I also understand the frustration of trying to side climb, successfully drop, possibly evade fighter attacks, and end up with nothing.
1 Like
fully agree that bomby maybe hit and maybe explode by a certain probability- my critics is that this happens now much too often (ai actively target bombs) - esp. in naval matches
1 Like
I was going to try NAB and already took a couple of boats, but then the snail “improved” the aiming, and the latest patch also ruined shooting from behind islands. After reading the forum, I’d better not touch it until the situation changes. Some of my friends who used to actively play NAB either stopped or switched to NRB. And they don’t advise me to start.
In your world.
I never suggested that. I was making a point that it never is just 1 single 20mm or 30mm. And from my experience it takes alot of 50cal rounds and below before my tail gets critically damaged.
There is 1 aspect to the physics model that is entirely overblown and unrealistic and it’s for all aircraft including bombers. Form/parasite drag multipliers dependent on damage produced is far in excess to irl. Irl a bomber like a Lancaster or B-24 could lose 2-3 engines and aslong as you trim right even with bad damage to the fuselages you could still fly the airframe back to base with enough height and management of the engine.
Meanwhile ingame you get a yellow/red wing with 1 engine dead and suddely you have equivilant of parachutes attached to the wing at any speed.
For now the only issues seem to be drag coefficient multipliers being too high for most damage states and not enough segments for realistic damage shared across the body rather than the amount we see currently that seems to follow a similar number limitation to samage segments as a fighter does.
I don’t think any of these ranges should be a realistic engagement range for either bombers or fighters.
Flexible mounted guns are inherently more inaccurate than rigid mounted guns.
So fighters will generally out range bombers but bombers also take a lot more punishment,
which would make it difficult to deal lethal damage over range, considering accuracy and aiming errors.
Of course airplane damage is all over the place and makes no sense in the slightest.
Engaging bombers should either mean spending a lot of ammunition and time or risking being damaged and subsequently being an easy target for other fighters.