IMO, the thing is, most Russian and Japanese planes are beginner-friendly. The I-15/16/185 have all really good maneuverability, and the ShKas have the fastest ROF in any WW2 machine gun. Japanese, you have 12.7mm and GOD maneuverability. Germans require a bit more skills tho.
I mean it’s not just ROF or manoeuvrability cause like certain German planes are really nice as well like 190 at 3.0, or 109B at 1.7. But IDK why they just get worse from there.
1 Like
Answer:
YaK-9K with god accuracy 45mm canon
YaK-3 with a UFO engine and proxy fuse shells that rip your wing no matter if it hit or not
Stupid event Japanese (and US) SB2Cs with cannons and GP.
Everything outclimbing you (Ki-44) when altitude is your only advantage.
Tbf fixing MG 151s would do a lot for German props. Just being able to actually dismantle things without having to constantly outplay and outperform others would be great. Other than that I think most 190s and 109s are well adjusted for things they fight, aside from maybe the mid-tier 190s (could go down 0.3 BR each).
No offense, but the fact that you might be unable to use certain aircraft properly does not mean that your observations and experiences are valid for others too. Certain US aircraft severely outperform German contemporary counterparts whilst being at lower BRs.
But:
Technically seen i would argue that you are actually correct from the perspective of the average user of US props. Their lack of climb rate does not fit into the wt meta - and their players are kids looking for instant gratification without investing time in learning anything.
So the combination of non-meta and rookie pilots drag US planes way too low as gaijin tries to equalize these 2 factors with lowering BRs. If we consider that in this thread mainly (often highly) experienced pilots expressed their concerns about overtiered GER (plus Italy) prop fighters and added concerns about way too low (some US) and generally too low (USSR with ShVak) fighters the problem is clear:
If you fly vs a experienced US pilot (same experience / skill like you) the performance gap caused by too low BRs vs US planes is simply too large. You have to wait for mistakes otherwise you are neutralized at best.
Some years ago German prop matches were flooded with good pilots - smart enough to swarm certain op vehicles like LF Mk IXs or similar threats. These days the BRs of "enemy"aircraft are way lower whilst experienced GER prop players are very rare (at least between 3.3 and 5.7).
I can’t remember having lost a single 1 vs 1 vs a 109 or 190 in the P-47 D-28 - same as with the Hellcat. And not because i suffer from Alzheimer or they were rookies - the GER pilots are handicapped by way too high BRs in the same manner as USSR players benefit from (way) too low BRs.
I mean their highest 109 is the K-4 at BR 5.7 - you beat them with the 4.7 P-47 D-28 on equal energy states. U turn better and you are faster, their main strength (energy fighting and stall fighting) does not really work if you can prophang behind & below them.
This is nonsense from 2 perspectives:
- Burst mass & damage output are only relevant if you are able to hit a target.
- Somehow the US was aware of the lower damage output and bundled multiple 0.50 cals together.
So the inability of the USAAF to develop a 20 mm cannon (or to make their own version of the HS 404 work) is not really gaijins fault. If you consider that actual combat ranges were far lower irl and the point of a cannon was to deliver maximum damage in the usually very small firing windows you might agree that 1 cannon or 6-8 0.50 cals is actually not really an issue.
As stated in another thread:
The AN/M2 0.50 cal is a great weapon in Air RB.
I have flown in the last 6 months mainly the UK P-47 and the US P-47 D-28 and the Hellcat:
- On average i need just 2 hits on a fighter and max 4-6 on a bomber
- AP-IT works great, especially at long ranges, easy to aim
The only drawback i see is a rather high inconsistency (imho dynamically adjusted RNG) of the damage output - so sometimes you score 4-5 hits and nothing happens - usually in those matches where you need to kill the enemy or you lose by tickets.
1 Like
M20 tracer is goated for .50s
1 Like
Always fascinating to read a solo guy’s reply yay
Complaints on 50cal of today should be replied with 2 words Skill Issue. Dew it-
1 Like
I’ve been playing Germany and then went back to play P51 and P47, then realised they do more damage than MG151.
Said nobody, ever.
Some. Some of them are OP, 3.0 one and D12 are both really good, the others are mid or bad.
D12 is not “really good”. It’s not even the best of the 3 D variants
3? There’s only D9 and D12. Unless accounting C which is also a premium. This is just my view cause I feel like turning slightly faster makes no difference since u are not very manoeuvrable any way, and then energy wise it is better. And also when u do get an opportunity 30mm guns are more likely to get the kill than the 20mm.
There is D9…D12…D13
Where?
I have never seen it. Lol. NVM. IDK about that one then. Also I would still rather have a 30mm over 20mm.
D9 is the best of the 3 and it’s because of engine settings.
What I said was based soley off my experience playing Germany. Fw-190 and Bf-109 can out climb, and in the case of the Bf-109, outturn pretty much every American plane.
Taken the amount of players whining about .50cals and American planes being OP, whilst also somehow claiming planes like the Fw-190 are bad, I’m fairly certain that 90% of the users in this thread are inexperienced Germany main.
I think it’s best for interceptor and boom and zoom, but in any sort of fighter fight, where 190s get realistically 1 chance I just think MG151 don’t do enough, like I could maybe get 1 round on target and maybe a few 13 mm but it’s not enough. Boom and zoom though, pretty nice.
Later ones struggle with that quite a bit, and the american planes are almost like all 190s where they are great energy fighters. Issue is 109s can’t use full power all the time or else u burn the engine. Massive kettle basically.