Right, 50 cals that punch harder than 20mm and some 30mm, on a flight model that slick at 6.0 is criminal. The thing can out maneuver the yak-9UT below 1000m, an airframe MEANT for low alt dog fights. It could easily sit at 6.7 considering 6.7 rarely sees full 7.7 uptiers to begin with and is more likely to face 5.3-6.3 props and early jets considering 7.3-7.7 is almost guaranteed to be sucked into the 8.3+ Blackhole leaving the probablity of a full jet matchup, pretty slim.
Not to mention, since when have we started allowing a single aircraft to dominate everything it faces, JUST SO it doesnt struggle in a uptier? There are some aircraft and tanks that cant even carry in a full downtier, yet will never be moved to an “appropriate” BR due to the fact that it would likely be a dominating vehicle in that particular position, so its left to be a meh vehicle in a downtier and an utterly defenseless vehicle in a uptier. Yet with the P-51H-5-NA it has been left at a BR that allows it to be fully capable in every matchup it faces, its “Uptier” is its appropriate BR range. While its current downtier is akin to the technology compression you see at 9.0-9.3-10.3-10.7
If you gonna insult people and claim something is OP without considering that Vehicle Performance≠Pilot Performance. Then you’re a lost cause, Uncle J is one of the few people on this entire forum that’s incredibly well respected, and the fact that you are trying to one-up some of the folks here is. Kind of tells us that you do not enjoy other people’s opinions and believe that your own opinions are factual not opinionated nothing burgers.
The P-51 H-5-NA is excellent under well-seasoned pilots. However flies like a brick if you flew them before. This includes the A-36 which is an Attacker variant of the P-51C.
If we were going by your logic then the P-59 should be the lower cause “it’s slow” However despite it being slow well seasoned Veteran pilots have made the damn thing so efficient that they bumped its 4.7 something br to its current standpoint of around 5.7 cause it turned damn well. Under proper hands.
The FW-189 a rare Marketplace vehicle got nerfed from a 14-second turn to a 16-second turn because those who had it were extremely efficient at using it in turn fights at variable BRs.
imo the MK24 Spit is slightly superior to it in most situations
maybe not on paper but in the average gameplay
that’s why it is put at 6.7
and no neither are actually comparable to early jets because the acceleration pf a prop at higher speeds drops very rapidly while the acceleration of jets rises with speed
drag a jet into a turnfight and you’ll win, let him energy fight or Boom n zoom and you’ll loose
Then perhaps you should use the “Arcade” tag for the discussion or post it in the arcade battles section. Nowhere in your post did you indicate you were talking about it in arcade battles.
I do agree it’s very powerful if used well. However, there’s likely a reason for why it’s 6.0 in arcade and 6.7 in sim with RB being in between.
As an aside, my weirdest observation so far in the p-51H is that it’s… really weirdly survivable in RB.
You can easily turn with it and even do flat scissors with your wingtip entirely missing. It also seems to fly just fine with most of its tail gone.
Truthfully I dont think it matters either way.
Its OP in Arcade, Realistic and Supposedly Sim but I have no way of knowing that, I dont play or watch simulator matches.
That other “respected forum user” goes around the picks and prods at others posts to start attention seeking flame wars. He knew exactly what I was talking about considering his time in game, but decided to be ignorant about his own game knowledge and called me “Unhinged” because I suggested that a over preforming 6.0 prop shouldn’t be able to face 4.7 props, which is does very often. I would say 70-80% of my 4.7 matches get pulled up to 5.7 where 6.0 aircraft can be averaged into a 5.7 lineup.
That seems like an issue from the whole averaging system to me. That seems to make the 1.0 uptier mechanic even worse.
At least for ground, you only need to care about highest BR vehicle, even if your TT might end up with weird line-ups (one vehicle at 6.0, otherwise you only got 5.3 and 6.3 as choices forcing either uptiering the 5.3s or uptiering the 6.0)
It might be worth a suggestion to change the averaging system into “highest BR counts” as done for ground.
I may be wrong but I believe this was suggested before and Gaijins reasoning for doing so is it would create pockets at certain BR’s in which some nation only have very few aircraft to play at specific BR’s making balancing much harder. While other nations (The Big 3) would have multiple line ups at virtually ever BR from 1.0 to 14.0
And again, this just goes back to adjusting the entire game/techtree instead of allowing one vehicle to just suffer in a uptier like the majority of other aircraft/vehicles in War Thunder. It makes way, way more sense to put a single vehicle at a more balanced BR, then it is to attempt to rearrange the entire BR system to make a single aircraft more balanced.
The P-51H-5-NA slams in a downtier and can hold its own and be completely competent in a uptier, it would do JUST FINE at 6.7 considering its more likely to be brought to 5.7 compared to 7.7 since 7.7 is always dragged to 8.3-8.7
It’s probably the WEP vs no-WEP difference. Also rads.
Non-MEC p-51H overheats fairly quickly on WEP. MEC at 75% rads never overheats and rads don’t cause significant drag due to jet thrust/meredith effect. It can achieve a sustained climb rate of ~33 m/s at 1 km altitude on “normal” temp maps.
Main issue is this does actually cause some fairly heavy lineup problems- right now I can manage a decent-ish 8.0 lineup with the A29B/J29A/A28/Vamp/Sk60, but w/o that average its 8.3.
Unfortunately its a reality that we have to live with and I dont particularly mind- you trade # of planes for a .3 downtier on one plane, which means that you are at a disadvantage if you get shot down.