the B66B is the most unfair plane to fly you have to compete with SU7 and F104s for bases on top of that the magic Tail gun radar isnt in and your probably never gonna see it even if it had it you wouldnt outrange the missile which if fired to close you cant dodge it it doesnt have flares or chaff so your dead in every way
13 Likes
Legit a better Vautour, and both are better Buccaneer S1s which is better than B-57 which is better than IL-28 which is significantly better than Arado…
Decompressing 9.3 is the solution to buff all 8.7s and 9.0s, including B-66, rather than moving all 7.0s - 9.0s down.
Yak-28 and Su-7 are superior to B-66 and need to be put back up in BR where they belong.
Edit:
B-66’s top speed is around mach 0.95.
Other subsonics with similar top speeds are AV-8, LIM-5P…
Almost all subsonic jets have top speeds of less than mach 0.92 around this BR.
High-intensity missiles such as AIM-9E, Red Top, and R-3Rs from supersonic platforms such as Mig-21S, F-100D, and Lightening are threats to all 8.7s and 9.0s in the game, which includes B-66.
This is why decompression is necessary.
6 Likes
Sounds fair but nonsense.
-
Both Vautour and B-66 are worse than Yak-28B or Su-7 Series in same BR in efficiency.
-
As long as it doesn’t have ‘Bomber air spawn’
Your ‘Better’ claims are only alive and kicking at the blueprint level. B-57/Canberra and IL-28 will be objectively better than either Vautour or B-66 in a real match if we consider both ‘Spawnpoint differnce’ and BR difference(which will make a difference in opponents)
10 Likes
Yes, I am aware that Su-7B and Yak-28 are under-BR’d.
My survival rate in Yak-28 was entirely when it was 9.3, and I had flares uninstalled the entire time because flares added like 3000+ SL to the repair cost for no reason.
So I ran a great bomber at 9.3 back before it could single-bomb bases like it can today without using flares and getting intercepted by at the time F-5Cs not too often.
So when it moved down after losing its flares, that is the source of my bad mood in regards to what I see as a wrongful reduction in BR.
Forcing head-ons, using kinematic defeat methods, and so on IF an enemy spotted me and IF they were closing distance kept me alive more times than not.
1 Like
b-66 is hell to play im just seeing them get blown out of the sjky bye matra SARH missils
3 Likes
They will die to an Aim-9B 100% of the time, let alone stuff like R-3Rs or Aim-9Gs. It’s pathetic how little Gaijin cares about bombers.
The B-66 could genuinely be 8.3 without an airspawn and not be too good.
5 Likes
ok i didnt expect it to be THIS bad fm wise
is radar even present? i remember seeing it on dev
2 Likes
radar was completely removed
1 Like
Your bombless papersheet data proves B-66 is superior because these are bombers, and they need bombs to do their job.
You need real-world testing such as the following:
One has 550kph of rocket assist and the other doesn’t; and both have bomb loads in-practice.
Which makes that B-66’s higher top speed that bit faster.
1 minute 38 seconds to 1000kph. 3 minutes 22 seconds to the island.
Vautour is…
1 minute 50 seconds to 1000kph. 3 minutes 50 seconds to the island. While carrying far less fuel and only 1 base of bombs instead of 2.
After all, bombers require bombs to do their job. Statshark doesn’t model drag of externally mounted bombs at this time.
With the fact Vautour is slower, it’ll have to bring 12 or more minutes of fuel for the threat of B-66s in order to have enough fuel to loiter for a base respawn.
The B-66 gets that fuel load within its minimum amount.
1 Like
Your ‘papersheet test’ can’t prove that where B-66 or Vatuour should be.
Because, in paper, yes. Maybe Vautour is worse than B-66.
But in-game match, it becomes pointless.
If we exclude the air-spawn thing for nothing but just arguing’s sake.
(even though the air-spawn of Canberra/IL-28 gives a heavy advantage to them compared to Vautour or B-66)
It just won’t matter when everyone will spam missiles at you when you play them in 9.0BR.
AIM-7C or R.511 in high alt (F3H or Vatuour IIN Interceptor)
AIM-9B/E or Red Top in low alt (Supersonic interceptors like F-104 or Lightning, or fighters like F-100D)
Oh, we should never ever think about a full-uptier match, which B-66 or Vautour will face a 10.0BR jet like Mirage IIIC or F-4C, because it will be pointless. (they can’t stand a chance against R.550 Magic/R-530/AIM-7D)
Sir, what will be your next claim?
“Sideclimb as hard as you can to maintain a survival rate. That is how I did well, unlike you idiots do”?
Point 1. It will make it even slower to bomb the base, which will damage your average reward and efficiency compared to Yak-28B or Su-7 in the same BR
(No, not the underBRed term this time. Even if Yak-28B and Su-7 are underBRed one, it doesn’t matter in-game because they SHARE the same BR with Vautour and B-66 in 9.0BR NOW)
Point 2. There are examples of Tu-4 sisters or IL-28 sisters which get killed by AIM-7C of F3H-2. Even though they maintain a high altitude. Unlike Vautour or B-66, they have an air-spawn advantage.
Yeah, Tu-4 also loiters for a base respawn because B-57/Canberra or F-84F(Rank 5 USAF exclusive one) takes the base faster, then all they get is a free R.511 SARH missile from the interceptor version of Vautour.
TLDR:
1- Your data was pointless because it couldn’t reflect a real match
2- and even if your data was correct and reflecting the real match, B-66 and Vautour will be just slaughtered.
3 Likes
Legitimately every single aircraft you mentioned is awful in air RB, save for maybe the IL-28 which is just regular levels of bad.
4 Likes
What a joke.
I made more RP per hour when I played the Yak-28 than I did in some premium bombers [Ju-288 specifically].
It was ridiculously easy to use.
And I offer my advice to anyone and everyone. We’re all the same meat and neurons, we’re all capable of decent tactics.
Also I’m unsure how Pvt Wade’s papersheet data has anything to do with my post.
- unverifiable 2. nobody cares
2 Likes
i find it kinda funny that as a 9.0 bomber, getting a downtier is actually somehow a bad thing because saab105 canberra etc will get the bases first because they have airspawn
3 Likes
Buccaneer S1s which is better than B-57 which is better than IL-28
How do you think the Buc S1 is better then the B-57 and IL-28, it dosnt get a air spawn, has no protective weaponry unless you take rocket pods, and is 8.7 instead of 8.3 and 8.0.
1 Like
He completely ignores air-spawn and just compares papersheet stats.
That is why he believes that Bucc S.1 is better than B-57/Canberra
and why he believes that Vautour is better than Bucc S.1
Also, that is why he believes that B-66B is better than Vautour and a perfectly fine 9.0BR jet.
:/
3 Likes
None of them get protective weaponry.
Buccaneer S1s are faster than B-57s which themselves are hilariously faster than IL-28s.
@Stockholm_Blend
Pvt_Wade’s ignoring of air spawns and using papersheet stats is not me. Stop applying his arguments onto me.
Their words are not my words, so stop inventing fan-fiction about others and be kind to others instead.
1- He is talking about Bucc S.1. It doesn’t have any kind of A2A weaponry.
2- If you think about countermeasures, B-57B got their chaff very, veeerry recently.
YES, IN PAPER SHEET OR TEST FLIGHT, in the pointless cleanroom.
Bucc S.1 is obviously faster than either B-57A/B or IL-28.
But the plane’s speed, which nearly every other person is talking about, is ‘speed when they reach base fast and bomb them’.
IN A REAL MATCH, with those damn supersonic interceptors and airspawned bombers.
And, in that ‘speed’,
Buccaneer S.1 are slower than IL-28s, which themselves are hilariously slower than B-57s.
Of course, B-66 or Vautour are slower than them too.
(I told you about those Yak-28B or Su-7 problems before, so… should I need to remind you again?)
I don’t think he is ignoring air spawn.
Your test data from the cleanroom is no better than his papersheet stat.
I think I CRUSHED your theory on the last claim.
No sir, I am applying your argument onto you.
Your words are your words.
First of all, I am trying to be as kind as I can.
Secondly, with all due respect, that last section sounds like a classic case of projection to me