The in-game N1K fms are so bad in pitch from what I can tell, so I have made a tool to modify the elevator’s max deflection angle based on the speed, so that the joystick mapping can be stretched at lower speed to allow for a more precise control. I’m yet to test this in a RB match, as this could be perceived as a form of cheating. This is definitely not what you described as a control adjustment device, but it can absolutely adjust the control mapping at varying speed.
I don’t know why ki-43-iii is at 4.0 when A6M5 is at 5.0.
Ki-100 sitting at 4.0 while the Ki-61-ii that can’t actually fly in 625km/h ( 612km/h in-game, only 22km/h faster at the same altitude) is suffering at 4.7. I really don’t see the logic other than muh statistics.
1 Like
Ki-61-II is completely overtiered. Ki-100 is just fine now at 4.0, being lighter but also slower.
The only possible justification really is player statistics.
1 Like
The Ki-43 III could probably go as high as 4.7 and be okay, though itll suffer a lot at alt. 4.3 would be a safe medium, Its really just trading some general speed for even more insane turning performance over the A6M5. There definitely isnt 1.0 worth of extra performance between it and the A6M5. If you compare it to the A6M3s the difference is even smaller. Speaking of A6M3s the Mod22 Ko is idiotic at 5.0. that plane is 4.3 material.
Every single one of the Ki-61s could and probably should go down by 0.3 in br, they are all really sub par. But of course hilariously one of them is going up in BR with these changes too.
2 Likes
The only justification in general is player stats.
As long as people keep trying to turn with the thing, itll still win. This wont change even if they put it at 6.7.
I dont understand why “dont turn with a Spitfire” was easy enough for people to learn that those all stay at fair BRs, but “dont turn with a Zero” is apparently an impossible enough task that we are in this situation.
not for long apparently
the IIas are going up despite not even being that good and the F Mk IX is going up even though it’s fine at 4.3
and not all of them have fair BRs…
Ehh, its energy retention is REALLY bad and the Type 99-2s feel much better to use.
I like it, I think it could be just fine at 4.7 as it is now.
It’s very simple actually, spitfire won the war while Zero lost the war. Therefore Zero must be bad.
1 Like
I did notice the F Mk IX was going to 4.7. so its gone up enough to still be 1.3 below a plane with at best equal performance to it :D
I didnt notice the IIas, but hilarious they are going up too tbh.
Other things I didnt origionally notice: the A6M3 and the Mod 22 both going up, just as unnessecarily as the A6M5s. Because stupid
Yeah agree on both points. It also runs out of puff quickly in a climb and its rudder stiffens up a lot in a dive. Turning is its entire identity
Its been a while since Ive played it in ARB to be honest, I use it for GRB due to its turning ability and the 2x 250kg bombs it gets
1 Like
Possibly but I’ve always hated playing the U, but the VK has been so much easier but the U feels like a brick. Maybe its because its prettier
If I was the benevolent dictator of War Thunder; none of the Zeroes would be above 4.7 and I think even that is pushing it
oh well
Yeah ki-43-iii would be alright at 4.7.
Ki-61-ii and ki-100 are 4.3 material. Though there are better 4.0 vehicles, comparing to the best of the br branket is not fair. So for average 4.3 ki-61-ii is comparable imo.
A6M3 mod22s in general are worse than A6M3. Mod 22 ko is worse than A6M5 in a lot of ways. I thin the only saving grace is the guns.
Ideal BR based on my personal preferences (hopium edition)"
J1N1 2.7
A6M2 3.3
A6M3 4.0
A6M3 mod 22 3.7
A6M3 mod 22 ko 4.3
A6M5 5.0
A6M5 ko 5.0
A6M5 otsu 5.3
A6M5 hei 5 0
A6M6 5.0
A7M1 5.0
A7M2 5.7
N1K1-Ja 5.3 (might be 5.0 in air to air capability)
N1K2-J 5.7
N1K2-Ja 5 7
J2M2 5.3
J2M3 5.7
J2M5 5.7
J2M5 type 5 5.3
J7W1 5.7
D4Y1 2.3
D4Y2 2.3
D4Y3 3.3
B7A2 4.0 (without airspawn it’d be 3.7)
B7A2 homare 23 4.3
Ki-27 2.3
Ki-43-i 2.7 (2.0 if ko)
Ki-43-ii 2.7
Ki-43-iii ko(China) 3.3
Ki-43-iii otsu 4.3 or 4.7
ki-44-i 2.7
Ki-44-ii otsu 3.3
Ki-44-ii hei 4.3 or 4.0 (likely 4.3)
Ki-61-i ko 3.7
Ki-61-i otsu 3.7
Ki-61-i hei 4.0
Ki-61-i tei 3.7(without airspawn it is 3.3 worthy)
Ki-61-ii 4.3
Ki-100 4.3
Ki-100-ii 4.3
Ki-84 ko 5.7 (honestly)
Ki-84 otsu 5.7
Ki-84 hei 6.0
Ki-45 ko 3.3
Ki-45 otsu 3.0
Ki-45 hei 3.3
Ki-45 tei 3.0
Ki-45 hei/tei(China) 3.3
//The speed for non-tei variants are wrong
Ki-102 otsu 3.3
Ki-96 4.3 or 4.7
Ki-108 kai 4.0
//very maneuverable with good aoa range
Ki-83 6.0
Something like this.
I have a LOT of objections.
This is exactly what I’m trying to say. Under no circumstances am I saying that turnfighting an A6M of any description with any monoplane should be a great idea. What I’m saying is that the current inaccuracies make it harder for new players (most of prop BR matches) to learn to fight Zeros in the way that you’re supposed to fight them.
As for the conversation since, I agree that in current state they are hilariously overtiered, and US teams (and others, honestly) being trash. I think that means A6M2 being ~3.3 and the late A6M5s being ~4.3-4.7, with the rest obviously in between, while the F8F and F4U-4 go back up to almost superprop BRs where they belong.
2 Likes
Have you seen the graph I made that outlines what I think is a fair, but significant adjustment to its maneuverability?
I’m interested in hearing the details.
I’m eager to hear your exeperiences with them.
Sorry, I thought that was something else. Give me a minute.
J1N is quite evil right now being 2.0 and seeing reserve planes, but 2.7 is a little much. It’s not THAT good, would be fine at 2.3 right where Yak-2 KABB is - and that one has much better guns.
I would rate these two the same at 4.0. The Model 32 rolls better but loses more speed in turns. They are good counterparts.
A6M3 22 Ko is not that much worse than A6M5s, it loses less speed in turns which matters a lot while A6M5 is faster.
A6M5 Otsu should also be 5.0, the 13.2mm Type 3 is nowhere as good as it once was.
By far the worst of the late Zeros and should be no higher than 4.7
All would be fine at 5.3. N1K1-J has significantly better climb rate and handling, as it is lighter. N1K2-Js are also just not what they used to be.
I don’t see any of these as 5.7 worthy. I don’t like J2M2 at 5.0 as well.
This one is missing a pair of 20mm cannons.
Not as bad as it was like 2 years ago (got a huge weight decrease, like -800kg) but it’s still really bad. I don’t think it would be out of place as low as 5.0.
In pure air to air capability, 3.0/2.7. Two 7.7s with not that much ammo is quite poor. The engine is great but it overheats a lot.
I have a personal beef with this plane and they should both get attacker airspawns instead to stop useless spaceclimber larpers from going to 9km and staying there all match while watching you die
Has no real advantages over Ki-43-II in-game and overheats a lot more. Water injection is limited, don’t remember if it blocks WEP or just overheats even more.
The firepower and nose authority are unironically too bad to be higher, even though it is VERY evil in the right hands. You’ll see the aiming reticle just flop around while trying to follow someone.
4.0 at most, it’s bad at altitude like a Yak but has much worse energy retention. You still get the japan effect of everyone running from you but without the amazing turn.
It’s fine at 3.3. Good, not exceptional.
Just get rid of the airspawn and have it be a cannon bus for good.
Both are fine at 4.0. Also good but not good enough to be higher.
Fair on the Ko. Hei could also be 5.7, the 30mm is not much of an advantage with how rare bombers are, and how lackluster the Ho-155 is.
All too high. The J1N flies better than the Ki-45s and none of these have particularly good armaments. 2.3.
Both of these are overweight and suck.
It’s kinda good, but 4.3? The nose authority and rudder are terrible.
I don’t like it. That aside it’s probably fair, being a Hornet sidegrade.
1 Like
What I dont understand is why the Yak-3s arent also moving. They can maybe argue that the strongest aircraft of 5.7 needed to move up and that maybe the zeros were part of that. But to totally ignore the strongest aircraft at 5.7 and leave it at 5.7, whilst moving everyone else up to 6.0…
Gotta love being false flagged for suggesting soviet aircraft get held to the same standard as everyone else
1 Like
Yak-3s are in a major nation, have massive playerbases, and are routinely praised as some of the best fighters at their BRs. You will see HORDES of 3Us at 5.7 and very very few of them actually know what they’re doing.
It is worth asking you for detailed explanations.
I agree on A6M3 mod22 being comparable to A6M3. It is just my personal preference that favors roll rate.
A6M5 is just much easier to control than A6M3 mod 22, it’s more on ergnomics rather than pure performance comparison.
Both A6M5 hei and A6M6 are 4.3 performance-wise. I set it at 5.0 because “I can do alright with it” which is not a good indiciation of how balanced it is.
Ko and Otsu have higher VNE, Ko/otsu is lighter than og A6M5 slightly. I thought a straight upgrade that is A6M5 otsu sitting at the same br feels weird. I see it is not worth 0.3 br.
In-game N1K1-Ja is significantly lighter than N1K2, the fm is a copy-paste so the historical “better ergnomics” is nowhere to be seen. Other than the 800 rounds of 20mm rounds, I see how on-par they are.
I think J2M2 is worth 5.3 for its performance. Though 5.0 works. J2M5 on the other hands, it has a top speed of 640km/h. It is pretty good at higher altitude. so at least J2M5 is 5.7. Though if N1K2 is at 5.3, it’d be weird for a comparable J2M5 to be at a higher br.
D4Y3 is a bomber, it is absolutely fine at 3.3 even for a pure dogfight. The turret is just that good when manually operated mid-fight.
Ki-43-iii is significantly better than ki-43-ii in top speed, the high alt performance is not even comparable. Ki-43-iii ko and otsu share the same top speed even though ki-43-otsu should be worse in flight performance. Even the weight increase is not there. Both ki-43-iii variants reach 578km/h at 6000~7000m.
At ground level, Ki-43-iii climbs at a staggering 24m/s.
Ki-61-i ko is 150kg lighter than otsu, though the slightly increased minimal fuel weight. The retractable tail wheel gives it a slight edge in aerodynamics.
Ki-61-ii has better cooling, it has an unique pitch setting where you can extract the same thrust from 80~85% at low to medium altitude. It is probably the only and last upgrade from Ki-61-i
Both ki-102 and ki-108 can operate at very high aoa around 17~18, they have really good turn performance so long as you bind a key.
Though the Ki-102’s turret coverage sucks absolute ass.
J1N1 is extremely slow though, it was intended to be a turn fighter. At 2.7 it would face more monoplanes than biplanes.
Ki-45 has insane speed for its br, and the 19m/s climb rate is nice. I think it is heavily underrated. Maybe 0.3 less for all variants from what I set initially.
Ki-96 is practically a slow ki-84 with slightly more sluggish control.
1 Like