Are nerfs in bombs good or bad?

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

This is a topic I find interesting to discuss, as it touches on the issue of balance in the game.

I recently discovered that some bombs in the game apparently received nerfs according to the community.

In your opinion, are these nerfs good or bad for the game? Do they ruin or balance the gameplay? (Note that Gaijin most likely took balance into account, given the map size, so this should be considered).

Here are some examples cited by the community so you can get an idea:

12.000 lb bombs

The 12,000 lb bomb went from a radius of approximately 114 m to 54 m. Since the area depends on r², this means the area of ​​effect dropped to approximately 22.5% of the previous figure—a reduction of about 77.5%.

FAB-5000

This is likely one of the changes you were noticing.

The FAB-5000’s radius for destroying armored vehicles went from approximately 105 m to 49 m. This reduces the area from approximately 34,600 m² to 7,540 m².

12,000 lb - Lancaster

The situation is practically the same. The Lancaster still carries the 12,000 lb H.C. Mk.I, but its current radius appears to be around 54 m, compared to the previous ~114 meters.

2

I mean, the nerf is good for the one who recieve it, bad for whoever drops it

3

I can only imagine what the FAB-9000 would be like in a match without that nerf. Lol

4

The only question that matters is historical accuracy and I reckon these large bombs shuld have a greater area of effect than they do currently.

cant find any good figures for this, but when dealing with un-exploded ordanance of the 4000lb version. they evacuated a 1.5-3km radius

But its not just the big bombs.

smaller bombs, like 1000lb dont seem to reliably kill anymore, even if landing only a few metres away from the target, which is also dumb

5

A smal nuke with a ver small blast radius

6

I agree. I think they should take into account that some of these planes only carry one of these large bombs, making it more valuable and necessary for the match in certain situations.

7

Good.

8

Wouldn’t be that crazy. Fab 9000 was a bunker buster. Most of its mass isn’t explosive like fab 5000 or Lancasters 12000

1 Like
9

I was able to see that when I tested it. Generally, now I only use the two FAB-5000s.

10

Good when seeking historical accuracy.

Bad when Gaijin just wants ways to slow down our progression.

11

All of those bombs were lobby wipers in ground battles, that was the purpose. It used to be super practical and a good way to punish people being dumb and grouping together like along the same ridge, but that’s gone now. They were also just hilarious and frankly pretty balanced because those bombers are HUGE targets for AA and fighters and very impractical to fly, but with the new bomber buffs making them supposedly unbalanced I’d say just nerf their guns range and stuff, make it so if you attack wrong you die but if you hit them from the right angle with good guns you stand a chance. Also the bomb model against tanks is SO bad right now, I can already see people mentioning how inconsistent bombs are against ground vehicles, even at close range. I frankly either want to die or not take damage, I don’t wanna sit for 40 seconds repairing, especially considering I’ve noticed heavily nerfed top tier repair times recently.