We need something to teach people how to fly these im tired of peeps just saying they are bad because of lack of skill
What we actually need is a system that checks a player’s k/d before he talks about skill issues.
2 Likes
109s in RB are legitimately handicapped compared to their true performance. RB versus SB 109 is night and day.
Instructor limits turns to about 12.0 deg AoA (with F4).
In reality, critical AoA assuming coordinated flight goes up to 17.2 deg.
That’s an enormous gap. The leading edge slats don’t even deploy unless flying uncoordinated and one wing exceeds 13 deg AoA temporarily.
This doesn’t ONLY affect instantaneous turn either. It affects sustained level turns as well. This matters even in vertical energy fights.
There’s a post somewhere of someone checking Realistic vs Mouse Aim turn performances, I cant remember where.
4 Likes
K/d ratio isnt a good system if the person is skilled but just messes around in matches
Yea i know the 109 can turn better i play sim a good bit im just saying in termed to th3 OG post that most german players arnt very skilled overall
Yeah but same could be said about many other nations, Germany’s bad performance at this BR is mainly a plane issue, and it doesn’t help that this issue starts at 4.0, how are people expected to be ‘skilled’ at 4.0.
1 Like
Nah.
I’ve been in the top 50 best kills per battle for months.
Risking it is how you have to play to get results. No decent player is getting trapped if you don’t butter the bread.
That’s the thing. Best reversals are those where you dodge shots by centimeters. Best energy traps are these where enemy has realistic chance to nick you.
And people will spam shots from 1000+m away. You want them to get the max reward of a kill if they get lucky.
Why do I energy trap people? Cause I can hit them a lot, in a consistent manner, due to MG151/20 being kinda horrible. But I’m actually fine with how they work - I score a few hits vs non Soviet plane - kill. Score 1 or 2 - well, such is life.
But single shot kills? Now that’s not just RANDOM, that’s actively encouraging spraying. And that’s also encouraging extremely cautious approach. You can’t “push through” minor mistakes, as you are dead.
Which also makes the learning process a joke, as less experienced players can’t tell if they got bad luck or just screwed it up. So they will be using more cowardly tactics and avoid engaging. Or just leave Air Rb altogether. Humans make mistakes. Humans get lucky. Your idea is a bit like “OK, whoever gets 1st shot on target wins”, and getting 1 shot on target is a lot less demanding than being able to score consistently.
In my opinion 1 shot should end the fight as rarely as possible. Yeah, we have to keep the “random factor” of 1-shotting because random factor is a part of fun. But that’s it.
IRL 30mm was way better at killing fighters than 20mm was.
Just like that. You needed a lot less shots on target. But 20mm was deemed “good enough”, and it had low weight, low recoil and you could fit it in a relatively small fighter wing/fuselage. 20mm was not chosen because it was “best at killing fighters”. It was just “the best fighter killing weapon we could equip without seriously affecting performance and/or redesigning our planes”.
Quad 20mm was the late war standard for a damn good reason - because 2 were not enough in general. Germans went for high velocity 1200 ROF (or maybe higher) 20mm revolver cannons to increase the killing power, which means they were not satisfied with what they had at hand.
IMO rewarding consistent gunnery, good positioning, smart planning is a lot more important than giving COD kiddies their dopamine shot because one of 180 shells they fired in a head-on actually landed.
Or rewarding a bad player with a kill because 1 shell out of 180 shell spray landed when he was performing UFO stall below someone with a decent plan.
Because we want people to actually engage, smartly maneuver, and if needed - smartly use their firepower and plane toughness advantage in a head on. Fw 190 should steamroll A6M5 and Yak-3 in such scenario.
And look at my account, see my numbers of battles and results with Fw 190 F8/D9/Ta-152H (destroyed them a bit by playing Ground RB). What do you think? Have I discovered how to dodge in a head on? :P
But dodging got a lot less effective as people spam a ton, because they know they need 1 hit to end it. So they commit fully. And Fw 190 is not THAT good at dodging. It can roll very fast, but if you commit to the dodge, it doesn’t move out of the way that fast. So…
…you full commit more often too, just in case.
3 Likes
In a chase with the current ballistic of all guns, it’s extremely hard to land a shot at 1km+ from pure luck. Look at this post from @KillaKiwi it takes more than 2 seconds for a 20mm shell to travel 1000m. with 2 whole second you can relatively easily dodge someone trying to spray.
I don’t want a single shot single kill, I was mainly referring to a burst when I said a single hit, since usually in headons and spanshot you land more than a few hits.
I disagree. There is nothing more frustrating that hitting the same enemy for 5 second straight, seeing 20+ puff only for him to not care in the slightest.
Guess what those round did the the bandit? From a hispano mind you. Yep, yellow rudder tail and slight yellow left wing root.
You can see 2 more puff a bit after
And lastly 3 more hits, one of which set a fuel fire.
On this occasion it didn’t matter since the yak3 was stalling out and I had all the time and ammo, but now imagine the same situation:
As you say, You are the victim of those “best energy trap”, still, you have decent aim and manage to put 5 round in the yak-3. But does it really matter? He’ll just get yellow damage and finish you off. Does it seem fair? He played risky, you played risky, you hit multiple shot, and still you die. And it’s a yak3, the damn thing is ultra light, as a inline water cooled and is made of plywood.
Any HE hit on the wing should blast the aileron control, compromise the handling by a lot, might even compromise the fuel lines. Probably blast a spar or two making the wing a lot more fragile.
It would not implode him out of the air but it’s absurd that the only consequence is -15kph top speed and -1 deg/s turnrate.
Meh, I fail to understand which minor mistake would result in you getting shot at.
Well, it’s 100% true, but is the alternative better? Should the lvl 23 in a zero resist 5 BnZ pass so that he can learn? Why would you, who played the game, learned like everyone else, have to sometimes loose because a yak3 decided to eat 25 bullets while committing all the mistakes in the world?
I disagree on this one. As I said, I believe it was due to the increase in size and armor of the coming aircrafts. 2-20mm or 4 .50 might be good enough against a zero or 109, but against much tougher jets or strategic bomber it’s anemic. German were not satisfied because they had to down B-17 while being harassed by P-51s, it’s why the 2-mk108 is the default armament of every Luft-46 paper/prototype plane.
Again, German estimate were 20-25 20mm hit for a B-17. Imagine now a plane much smaller, much lighter, higher density of critical components and a single engine instead of 4. Anymore more than 5 singular hits should make 100% it’s not combat worthy.
Before the series of nerf to the 151, the 190 did steamroll the yak and other when they full commit headon.I don’t get how you reach the conclusion of “But dodging got a lot less effective as people spam a ton, because they know they need 1 hit to end it”. The average IQ of Air RB has always be horrible (I was part of it at some point). They will always take the easy route of 100% commit on the first guy you see.
You should know it with your experience no? When to player with deadly guns trade a headon, the one that doesn’t dodge eat the 50 bullets you fired from 1.5km away.
-
With deadly gun:
- 2 full commit: 2 die
- 1 full commit 1 dodge, the guy who full commit dies such that the guy who dodged doesn’t need to pull a insane snap roll to dodge someone from 300m.
- 2 dodge: Nothing
-
Without deadly gun:
- 2 full commit : 2 die
- 1 full commit. They guy who full commit just eat the round and pester the guy who dodged. Killing him if he has a decent aim.
- 2 dodge: Nothing.
The situation where the gun are deadlier clearly push people to play smarter since “I’ll tank it bro” doesn’t work. To stay alive, you both have to dodge.
I disagree with this: People spam not because they only need 1 hit to end it, They do it because they know their is a random change they get no damage in the engagement.
We agree on that. This is why, when you had good positioning, smarting planning, and consistent gunnery you should not have to gamble to get the kill.
1 Like
You already don’t have to if you can consistently aim for the enemy engine and/or cockpit.
Shots to the cockpit always kill.
Shots to the engine, while not an immediate kill, will lead to an eventual grave.
1 Like
Fair point,
Allow me to reword myself: When I say “dead” I mean pacified, out of the fight, ect.
The problem that i have in this game is the numerous occasions in which you shoot a plane, usually a zero, spitfire or other light figthers. And they keep fighting like nothing happened.
I don’t want laser gun that remove the very atoms of people I hit, I want a lightly armored target loose most of it’s fighting capabilities when hit by 2+ round in the same part.
I’ve had games when I completely exploded the wing of zeros (multiples black part according to the replay) only for them to win a turn fight against a spitfire later.
Planes being able to survive is fine (and I would probably 100% want it if gaijin fixed the airfield AA), what’s not fine is being able to stay in the fight while getting shot by more than enough round to down a bomber IRL.
Those are Mineshells. A 30mm will most likely kill a fighter in a single shot but you need 4-5 20mm Mineshells to deal the same structural damage. And that’s to wings. A 30mm will easily blow even a medium bombers tail appart but 20mm lack the explosive amount for that.
Regular explosive shells deal hardly any structual damage in comparison and rely on damaging internal systems like pilot, oil- and fueltanks.
AP either deals hardly any damage or causes serious damage to pilot and engine.
HEF either deals hadrly any damage but most likely causes damage to internal components that will bring down a plane eventually.
Mineshells target structure, so they are most likely to cause some damage and cause flight performance issues but require a good number of hits to bring a plane down.
Incendiary is like AP but most lethal against fuel tanks, so ideal vs. bombers, while AP is better against single engined fighters.
If a pilot isn’t killed, or the engine, which isn’t very likely even with 20mm AP, than only Mineshells are going to cause some immediate destruction of the airplane.
Otherwise you will end up with a burning plane or a plane that will have a cooked engine after 5 minutes.
Fuel fires were pretty much the biggest plane killer in WW2, but in WT .50cals outperform 20mm cannons in that regard. So now every cannon just blows wings and tails off instead.
1 Like
Were engine/cockpit?
This is joke btw.
Honestly, apart from the absurdly precise aim that needs, I’m not sure it’s even possible with the spread of the current guns.
I don’t have data, but i’m quite sure the random spread is higher than the size of the engine/cockpit.
Is the fact that I cannot compute the pseudo-random spread gaijin will give to my shells a skill issue?
Always? Bro is fine tho? Just aspirin and he’s good as new
Think that comes down to instructor.
Here’s one very short burst at a spitfire. Watch what happens to it
What happened? The spitfire lost its rudder. It immediately spun out because it couldn’t compensate for the engine’s effects on flight (this is outright ignored in Air RB with mouse aim. Even those who fly with Realistic + autotrim don’t experience this) and was also turning (which added even more yaw on top). Lots of yaw while turning = spin.
You’re using incendiary tracer. AP rounds, as part of that very same burst, will go through and kill.
Here’s an outtake of me bullying hellcats with my G-14. Moment I get a clear shot, it’s dead.
2 doses of aspirin now.
in4b: Yes APHE will 1 kill (due to the fragment not the shell). But it’s not part of the air-belt. Only ground target.
edit: Stealth too and default. But is this gambling about the correct shell fine? It’s 1/5 round. Considering your HEI round would
I’ve linked a clip when you posted this.
A clip? Where I posted what? I don’t undestand sorry
It’s a general issue with the game, how shells deal damage to components.
For Gaijin, pilots are just some internal components, like engines or fuel tank.
There is no logic how much damage should be lethal to a pilot compared to the damage value of whatever round has.
Years ago I reported how 14.5mm explosive rounds wouldn’t insta kill ground crews with direct hits but a mod shut down the report with some non sense reasoning.
A .30cal should already be lethal to crews in most cases, as it’s most likely going to put them out of action, while a .30cal explosive round should already be overkill.
1 Like
Also now for specials - 20mm HE into the cockpit of a bomber. No killfeed for this but you get the fancy sound you get for kill confirm.
Both of these are pilot kills. The tail stays on, killfeed confirms the kill.
I didn’t say you could not pilot kill. Its just that the precision needed is absurd.
I even doubt that the spread is not more than the size of the pilot at 300m+, making said shot gambling. If you add that you have round in your belt that pilot are resistant (not immune) too, it’s a joke.
The problem about using historical accuracy for those thing is mainly that gaijin doesn’t really care. They adjust those just whenever they feel like it. Best example is reload time in tanks. Or even better, the fact that APHE explode in a sphere instead of a cone.
So, IMO, the best way to go about this would be to simulate/emulator the various part that make an war-bird fly. Such that every hit counts. Making hits more “survivable”, such that a damaged aircraft can limp back to the airfield, but not continue to fight with minor effect.
1 very simple change that could help tremendously is this, It should also help to make clear what I want.
The VNE and the max G an airframe can sustain is severely reduced when taking damage, with some sort of proportion. Ideally, a black part should rip when pulling 3G or getting above 75% of the VNE. And the controlability at low speed is reduced (Number are 100% subject to tweaking).
1 Like
These I’m fully in support of.
Honestly, I’d prefer if directly sawing off wings was made much, much less likely. Instead, severe wing damage should cause it to detach when/if the pilot pulls too hard or dives too fast. It would line up better with expectations.
2 Likes