bother you give nothing except “this guy said” yet you tell people they are lying. just stop, you are 100% coping at this point
2 Likes
Then stop crying about it, and collect your own data on it. If I’m lying it’ll be totally different, right?
Doesn’t matter if it was in purpose or accident. As I stated originally:
For the record, “multiple tons” here, actually means ~1300kg.
And I know numbers are hard, but do try to be honest.
In your “figures” you are purposefully going much faster than their level speed in order to give the Ki-44 as much ram air as you can and make up for its poor altitude performance. It’s also very convenient that you don’t have propeller efficiency nor thrust on there.
This is also a situation where P-51C was still MP-limited and could not gain any extra power with ram, while Ki-44-II could; AND at the one altitude where the Ki-44-II actually gets similar power output instead of any other where there’s a large difference. What a happy coincidence, right?
So collect your own data to prove I’m totally lying, or pipe down and get good. Maybe aim at the target instead of spraying all around them (unless you’re in a Ki-44, then your aim also becomes much better! Another happy coincidence.).
1 Like
The sad part is that unironically there are many players that believe that should be the case (unsurprisingly a majority are US main pilots).
1 Like
yea
most good players already do that
(this might also explain a lot of the other stuff you say ngl)
2 Likes
Yeah i mean,in GRB do you think before shooting someone or youre just smashing your keyboard hoping you hit the spot?All your fights are a gamble or you try to use something called BRAIN and actually try to understand the vehicles you should and shouldnt pick on?
N1K2’s could easily be 5.0.
They’ve got flight performance close to/slight worse than a Yak-9U, which is 4.7.
You guys really love comparing something to exceedingly tough vehicles to reference its relatively low BR for the performance. Compare it to C.205N2 next time or Me 410 B-6/R3. Maybe Fw190A-5? It’s 4.3.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying here.
I can compare it against a BF 109 G-6, Spitfire F Mk IX or F8F too, and the N1K2’s flight performance is roughly in line with those 4.3 - 5.0 aircraft.
At best it’s 5.3 with the current broken ahhh flight model. I think you are ignoring 70% of relatively weaker vehicles that exist in War thunder.Yak-9U is as strong as G-6 in a right hand. I asked you to compare N1K2 to actual mid aircraft like Me410B. Comparing to single aircraft type itself is not good. Let alone comparing it to popular vehicle is just not practical. F8F is just built different, it’s like a love child of 1944 configuration F4U-1a (Water injection) at 2.7 with He 100 sitting at 1.7. It is just what it is. Just don’t compare the subject vehicle to OP ass ahhhhh. I don’t hate you nor intend to mock you. I just think it is unfair to decide the proper BR by looking at a small group.
You want me to compare it against a twin-engine heavy fighter instead?
- J7M2
- Ki-84 Ko
- Spitfire F Mk. IX
- Spitfire Mk XVI
- BF 109 G-6
- BF 109 G-10
- BF 109 G-14
- FW 190 D-9
- Yak-3
- Yak-9U
- La-7
- P-51D-30
- F8F-1
- P-38K
I could go on and on. These are all aircraft at roughly BR 4.7 - 5.0 that have equivalent performance to the N1K2, and no, comparing it against aircraft of a completely different type is not valid.
I should wrap my head in a tin foil and fend off. I gotta go mold in a corner.
cant talk bout that one
i think this should be the overtiered garbage one with the mk103
literally a 3.3 fm with overheating issues
what are you even talking about
currently N1K2-J flies worse than its predecessor N1K1-J in every regard except top speed (which is still ass) and acceleration above like 450kph (which is also still ass), and that one is 5.7 - and too high, it was just decent at 5.3.
N1K2 should be 5.0 with 26 meters per second climb on deck, 640km/h top speed at altitude, 4 20mm cannons with 900 rounds because Yak-9U is 4.7
???
I shall compare it to a mid aircraft such as Yak-9U but not Me410B-6/R3 because it is a terrible vehicle specifically. Comparing N1K2 with one vehicle is pointless, let me compare it to OP vehicles, oh, Yak-9U is a balanced vehicle btw.
A-ha I got too few vehicles as samples, let me list a whole line-up of vehicles I like.
Honestly though, I know it is just a typo, but I almost thought J7W2 is an AI hallucination. Funny how you picked the P-38K, your level of comprehension amuses everyone that does not even bother to talk with you.
To the another person in the room. I’m not saying Fw190A-5, Me 410B-6, C.205N2 are balanced vehicles, I think they are over-tiered. What is the point of picking a specific vehicle to compare its performance to justify the BR. Picking Yak-9U is a wild card, vice versa.
Hey Cap, F8F at 4.7 is only achievable with the average F8F player’s cognitive function rivaling that of a myopic cesspool-dweller. 32 meters per second climb with one of the highest D/S, 670km/h at sea level, 4 late war belt M2. And people are still losing in F8F against anything.
That is the exact same schit with He100 staying at 1.7, they keep turning with biplanes for being controlled by the inexperienced players™. F4U1-A has a performance of literal 3.7. J21A-1 is at 4.3 yet it has very little against F4U-1A. The belt? It doesn’t mean shit past 4 M2 because only thing you need is a deflection shot with S key to end it all.
I’ve had enough with you guys pushing your ideal agendas, not listening to opinions and swapping the subject. Combating who??? Coming here to only disagree on something? It’s never meant to be the goal tho??? This thread baffles me with Meaningless ramblings about “JUst compAre These RaNDom ass Two VEHiclEs”. Like what??? How picky?
1 Like
Honestly though, players favor vehicles that can yield them good results. And these players have relatively less developed skills compared to players who can enjoy any vehicles simply by compensating the performance gap with skills. So, vehicles with high pick rate is almost always undertiered. It’s that simple. I’ve always felt this when BF109F-4 had slightly better performance and functional minengeschoss at 3.7 in 2017~2022. J2M2 at 3.7 was funny though, they had the exact same performance except for the high speed pitch authority, it was nerfed after the BR is raised. So it was even stronger in a sense. I remember common HE shells being slightly weaker in that era though.
Popular vehicles are always undertiered. Shit vehicle goes up because of decent players. It is a law.
So “Comparing ◯◯◯ ◯ ◯◯◯◯ (subjected vehicle) to popular vehicles” is flawed, because they are undertiered.
N1K2 is sufferable at 6.0. Its performance is pretty much 5.7 all things considered. Spitfires can’t close its radiators. Lowering pitch reduces low speed thrust. So Spits can close its radiators only if it is dedicated in a high speed flight. Almost all Japanese props for some reason can close its radiator to 20% and it never overheats. You can play Japanese props at 5% radiators with minimum prop pitch adjustment. It is fast in practice, because it does not have a functional overheat mechanism.
All props at 6.0 suffers because of higher rank vehicles such as Mk 24 and early jets. You have no card to play against them. Then what? 6.0 can be fighting against a 5.0 vehicle too. It just gets memorable how weak the aircraft is against a better opponent. The performance gap of 6.0-7.0 is just insane. F-84B is 7.0 btw, I shot it down with N1K2 recently and scored a 5 kill game and won, thanks to a competitive Hornet player as my ally. The F-84B was obviously experiencing an episode during the match. It is just what this game is about.
All 6.0 suffers. It’s not only N1K2. Though 5.7 helps. N1K2 at 5.3 is already too much.
F8F has one downside you can’t mitigate however. You are always on the same side as USA and thus with some of the worst players around.
He-100 at least has the excuse that if it is hit once by the smallest MG basically anywhere, it loses all its performance and has to RTB immediately, at a tier where everyone has a lot of very high RoF machineguns with a lot of ammo.
undertiered but also really fat
probably because they run pretty low boost
cool, I shot down a smart Ho 229 in mine (among others in one match), doesn’t make it good
Let’s compare it to F4U-4B (5.7), LF Mk9 (just moved to 6.0), and a Spitfire Mk14 (also 5.7). I’m not even including Yak-3U since it belongs at 6.3.
Top speed? Unsurprisingly 4B is faster anywhere by up to 100kph, especially at low alt. LF is faster on 80% prop pitch and radiators half open than an N1K2-J burning its engine with everything closed. Even the Mk14 with less power than LF can still outrun N1K2-J without burning its engine.
Turn performance, the big calling card for japan as a whole? Both spitfires beat it. Only 4B is really disadvantaged, but it’s not like it doesn’t have options. If it can lure N1K2-J into stall speeds it has some of the best flaps around and can stay nose-up at questionably low speeds.
Climb rate? At best it matches 4B and loses to the spitfires.
It doesn’t even win on firepower, which is the ONLY remaining reason to play it. 4B has better guns with higher rate of fire and more ammo.
I don’t have access to a Tempest Mk5 right now but you can bet it also trounces the N1K2-J in pretty much everything that isn’t a slow dogfight.
Let’s look at a plane that was very recently 5.3 instead - its own predecessor the N1K1-J!
(Instant) turn rates: identical at every speed.
N1K1-J has slightly better sustained turn rate (~3.3G vs 4G, not HUGE but not nothing either, it WILL consistently win a turn fight) thanks to maintaining a higher speed. It has better retention at almost every speed.
The N1K1-J also accelerates faster at sea level (more on that in a bit) and will climb faster. The N1K2-J overtakes it from just under 400kph but it’s playing catchup. Speed difference at low altitude is smaller than you’d think, only about 30kph and both planes are SLOW for these BRs.
I did hint above that the engines weren’t quite the same. Well, they aren’t.
The N1K1-J has the advantage all the way from 2500m up, and it’s an almost constant 100hp extra it has to play with. Bear in mind that down at sea level it already had better retention and turned just as hard, at higher altitudes it will be just straight up better.
This alone makes the N1K1-J actually worth playing at 5.3 (it really belongs at 5.0) so please do not bug report it lol. Funnily enough it’s quite a bit newer to the game than the N1K2, so who knows what gaijin was cooking.
At 6500m it’s 611kph vs 642kph. The N1K2s are still faster but 30kph is not enough to offset the climb rate and maneuvering advantages the N1K1s have.
This is a plane that was nothing special at 5.3 and usually called mediocre. It’s now 5.7 and arguably better than the N1K2-J.
1 Like
I see. N1K2 fits at 5.3 than I thought initially. I was losing it. I’d rather play F4U-4B if I’m really trying to win. Even if N1K2 is at 5.3 , it has a very little effect on the match meta. Honestly though, N1K2 should get its historical flap device and propwash compensation at low speed. Its MER is real bad at all speed.
Should, but I can only speak on what it has right now and it’s just a long list of reasons to not play it.
My review was based on the current performance, I never did base it on the what if vehicle. Although I think 5.0 is where it becomes a little too much.