Bringing the B-29 down only solves the issue of it fighting jets that it (mostly) would not have been fighting against, it does nothing to solve the game-design issue of formations not existing in game. To fix that issue, the armament of a single B-29 needs to be buffed, as the only other solution would be to implement control over multiple aircraft at a time (which is a much, much more difficult thing to do that copy-pasting some MG models and buffing their damage).
Therefore something should be done to fix it (if Gaijin isn’t going to change the way Air matches work fundamentally), i.e. implementing hp damage modifiers.
Yes, I am aware that the game does not represent true to life combat scenarios for every vehicle. That doesn’t change the current state of things. I am in full agreeance that long range bombers are in a piss poor state and need to go down in BR at almost every level. Spading the German and US frontline/long range bombers has been a terrible time overall.
I don’t know why you think I would care to look into what you want to say when I am instantly greeted by this bullshit:
Have some respect for others and attack the IDEAS not the people. When people instantly go in for insults like that, I almost always ignore what they say and respond with sarcasm because it’s just unneeded trash that destroys discussion. I don’t respond to you initially by saying stuff like “you’re just a hater and should quit because cope” because it isn’t appropriate. I don’t want to insult you, I want to discuss ideas. Discussion is how you broaden your knowledge, and that is why I come here. It’s different if I constantly said “Gaijin is right, you’re dumb, they know everything, and the game is flawless” at every counterpoint, but I don’t recall EVER doing that because I think Gaijin has screwed the pooch on a lot of things too.
The fact that anyone replies to someone with insults immediately is part of the reason this community is so shit most of the time and why so many threads get derailed by pissing contests instead of actually discussing possible improvements or issues.
I agree, but I see the slower props that it would face as targets that can be defended against. In the case of the SAAB 105G, it can get into position outside of your gun range and then missile you from outside of your gun range. A Ta-152 can’t do that as easily because it can’t dictate the conditions of the fight as easily because it needs an altitude/speed advantage to be able to avoid gunfire which requires more effort in climbing and more dedication to the intercept.
That is why I keep mentioning the upcoming BR split. Hopefully it fixes some of these issues when ground battle performance is somewhat separated from air battle performance.
The issue is that the firepower advantage of the B-29 and bombers in general in game does not match the firepower bomber formations had. Irl, depending on the theater, there were ~2.5:1-17:1 (for the Bangkok Bang Sue raid and Berlin raid respectively). Obviously, giving bombers 17 times the firepower of what they have now is overkill, but doubling it would at least make up for most of the game-design issue.
True, but still the B-29 would be at a disadvantage due to game-design due to the lack of firepower.
The problem is that BR can’t fix everything, and if anything would actually create compression issues. To put the B-29 at a BR where its armament would be realistic (when compensating for the lack of formations in game), which is maximum 3.0 or so, the planes would just straight up not be able to catch it. When balancing the B-29 based on its air speed, then it would be around 5.0-6.0, where its armament is woeful compared to irl.
These planes already had a central fire control computer… So they were able to calculate ballistics (wind and gravity), parallax (displacement between the gun and the sight and distance + relative speed of the attacking plane…)
If they could model this into these machines, considering that in the game these machines are solo riders, it would be interesting…
Well, of course, night battles and the restriction of the display of markers …
But this is nonsense, so you have to enjoy these machines as a peculiarity … somehow manage to fly above the base or not, that’s the point …
If nothing changes, playing AirRB with heavy bombers is useless, because there are no more airfields to destroy and most likely the enemy bases will be destroyed before you can do so by any attack aircraft.
well, if you anticipate friendlies killing bases before you do, but you continue to straight line it to a single base, thats bad decision making on your part.
And obv you know better.
Yes,this is next problem …
I am some time ago I was looking for how the maps of air battles in Korea or Vietnam looked like … the active combat area was about 50 x 50 km … here in the game, again for other reasons, the entire game map is about 55 km*55 km …
This is how I would imagine the game map, stars - targets, for large bombers, the center of the map for attack aircraft (this would have to be tested, of course) …
I thought it was good that the attack planes and fighter-bombers were knocked out by air defense during the attack on the big bases some time ago. They are supposed to attack bunkers, AAA, combat vehicles, bridges, trains etc…
I have bought both big machines that this topic is about, but I don’t feel like playing them because I shot a lot of them myself…
And on these small maps, I would not be afraid to solve the launches of heavy bombers using JATO-RATO launch systems…
Either for the basic version of the machine, or an explorable modification…
shame for you bro.
Keep flying direct at a base into the entire enemy team knowing full well that friendlies will kill the base before you and even if they dont, the most you will do is kill 1 base due to your approach vector. :)
Maybe request that gaijin allow you to fly into the enemy team with no repercussions, whilst your at it, request they allow me to dogfight and get 8 kills while tabbed out or making the worst decisions possible.
This is what fascinates me about the entire GRB and ARB BR rebalancing situation. There are a LOT of bombers in the 4.3 – 6.0 range for which their BRs do not make sense in ARB.
I was under the impression—and I’m not alone—that balancing these planes for ARB was what was going to happen when introducing separate BRs for ground and air.
The fact we have something like the Tu-2 sitting at 5.3/5.7 while the Wyvern is 4.3 is insanity.
I bet you do.
Reminds me of that one time i flew a biplane into a 16 man team of jet fighters then got upset i died and complained on the forums and complained its unfair that i was not able to do such things and succeed.
No but seriously though, if i cant spawn, point my nose at a base and simply do nothing apart from press the spacebar when i arrive whilst flying directly into 16 players, it must be broken :)
You could literally tab out and watch youtube and achieve the same results as that strategy.
In fact, i’m actually gonna take my wellington out for a spin, gonna fly direct into the enemy team, see you in a few minutes and i will complain the wellington is also useless.
I get the impression that they are doing a high tier decompression and so just initially focused on the same ranks being decompressed. Im guessing they’ll do below over the coming updates.
(its the only way the changes to GRB BRs make any sense to me)
Im not sure what its like in GRB, but my experience in ARB is that the Wyvern just needs to loose air spawn. At least id rather it got that change first, and adjust it accordinling afterwards
I dont know. I’ve got it, but basically only use it for NRB and the odd GSB match.
I can see airspawn + 1200 Hispano rounds though being good for getting bombers and other slow stirke aircraft. But I really doubt it would genuinely threaten a half decent player in a proper fighter
I also have, its very strong yet i rarely see them do well.
It’s just strange for me to see so many having an issue with the aircraft.
But it is very deadly, just rarely used in such a way.
