I don’t love the Ki-84. I don’t even like it much anymore. It has too little ammo and the instructor setup is mediocre. The only things I like about it are the speed and the marketplace trainer paintjob for the Ko model.
Just as easily as we can find “Zero OP pls nerf” threads. It means nothing.
The difference is that there was a total mismatch between these planes’ flight performance and firepower, caused entirely by ShVAK being almost unusable in the past. Now with a cannon that actually does damage (instead of emptying a dozen shells into their cockpit, engine, and fuel tanks, and nothing happening) the Yak-3 immediately moved up to 4.7. More will follow.
Critically, it’s not that the ShVAK needs to be THE STRONGEST cannon out there. It just has to be usable enough to not drag an entire tech tree down, and not allow enemies to simply ignore you as you unload dozens of shells into them for no meaningful damage whatsoever.
Trying to be authentic. By looking at the current matchmaker, gameplay balance, BR’s, it’s very clear that Gaijin isn’t very worried about that. War Thunder is in a very comfortable spot between realism and game.
When it comes to the guns, they haven’t consulted anybody prior to deprecating the old formula for HE. Infact they didn’t announce when they buffed guns in the old hitpower system either before swapping to realshatter, so the players had nothing to do with it to begin with lol. It was their decision and the majority was against it, so I don’t see how’s that the player’s fault.
The player just wanted to be rewarded for their kill and asked for improvements, many don’t even know what realshatter is. Gaijin simply improved the guns using the code that they intentionally migrated to, using its parameters and limitations.
The skill issue argument goes both ways. You can argue that players don’t want to think much and finish the dogfight in a single burst cuz they can’t handle a longer dogfight, and I will argue that they want to commit a million mistakes infront of my guns and not be punished for it.
Not necessarily, have you seen the Fw190 Klimb afterburner report that pretty much destroyed the cooling of the whole Fw190A line?
“I thought they were cheating” and “Something tells me that this shouldn’t be the case” combined with an in-game screenshot were the sources.
Spoiler
I mean we have to use what’s in our favor in order to address something, adapt to Gaijin’s standards.
I don’t agree with all of them but it is what it is.
Right and they will hit you with a big fat “Not a Bug Report” and close the thread.
Nobody is being stopped from doing this. It’s completely out of our control.
Yes I can? I’m not completely against historical accuracy? I just don’t share the same standards as you do >_>
Flying through other players guns is a skill issue though isn’t it? Why is your interpretation of historically accurate damage more accurate when it’s based on survivorship bias; i.e just looking at the sample of planes that returned with very severe damage. I can post clips of FW-190s losing their wings to relatively short burst of .50 caliber from P-51…yet people here think it should take a sustained 40-50 second burst.
Oh you mean like they nerfed the Re.2005 that doesn’t have it’s documented top speed of 720kph IAS at around 7000m? The plane is “documented” by Italian researchers to be the fastest propeller driven airplane of World War II. It should be easily able to run down things like the Sea Fury, Wyvern, etc. It’s also a 1943 airplane so it should basically be untouchable if it was “historically accurate.”
How does it set a dangerous precedent? Damage right now is in line with where it has been in other Gaijin games. The only difference is now there aren’t 40-50% of guns that are effectively useless in the game due to bugged damage.
Nobody is advocating for normalizing flight performance and making airplane performance identical. This is just a slippery slope fallacy.
If M2 .50 cal can dip wing off of FW-190…why would the Italian .50 cal not be able to do the same to a P-47?
The advantage of more guns is that you can get more kills in a flight and afford to be less conservative with your ammo. The advantage of more guns isn’t gone just because having 4+ cannons is no longer the minimum requirement to have an anti-fighter armament if you aren’t using MG.151.
One of those Gameplay decisions that alter reality.
Since a pilot in real life can only sustain so much Gs, faster planes would have a clear advantage, as long as they stay fast, since a Zero wouldn’t be able to just pull 10G like it’s nothing.
It’s the same deal with ground vehicles and APHE and the complete opposite APCR.
In reality penetration is a key element to take a tank out of action but since the game makes tanks more survivable, suddenly penetration isn’t that important compared to high damage.
In addition APHE is artificial made even stronger, similar to how aircraft HE shells are made much stronger.
So now you have planes that can go fast but can only run away or try to energy trap while the other planes can turn harder than humanity possible and only need to land one or two hits to destroy an enemy.
Which makes engaging good turning planes incredibly risky since they have a much higher chance to actually kill you than in reality.
“Authentic” and we have a land-based IJN fighter, teamed up with the USAAF and USN, in an air battle over the Rhine, fighting Germany, Sweden, and Italy… And there’s jets from the 1950s flying around…
And for some reason the USN is also on the enemy side as non-player vehicles…
How old is WT? Player stats have to catch up to the changes and all, so 2 years is not unbelievably slow. Shaking up the meta every once in a while is not a bad thing.
Yak-3U will move to 6.0 right about when the A6M5 Ko goes to 6.0 too ))))))
Not what I said. But the game has not been historical or “authentic” in a long time, so arguing for that is pointless. That match was pretty fun as well, I was the last one standing and won the match for my team. Regardless of what you guys want to claim, having four cannons makes life so much easier.
We still have a BR system, you know.
EDIT: also, it’s HIGHLY likely gaijin will break cannons again sometime in the future lmao
Over 2 years, actually more like closer to 3, is long as hell.
It’s a game, planes are played thousands of times each month, also there’s player feedback.
Yak-3 has been curbstomping the opponents since day 1. Meanwhile J2M2 went from 4.3 to 5.0 pretty quickly. Ki-44-II used to be something like 3.0, went to 3.7. C.205 S0 also travelled up, up, up (also 3.0 to 3.7 I think?).
All the while Yak-3 stayed in the same spot and 4.0 Yak-3 was added.
And somehow after so much time we end up with Yak-3 still at 4.3 (just the pay2win type instead) and I’m supposed to consider this an “immediate change”.
Comedy gold.
But hey, Ki-61b is now a menace at 3.3, so I guess all is fine in the land of real sh*tter.
For every Yak-3 you see doing well, there’s five dying in the first head-on; it’s also a plane recommended all the time to new players. Player feedback is polluted with topics such as “we need AIM-9X NOW because the R-73, like, exists and it may sometimes get kills!!! russian bias!!!”.
Big nation vs small nation. See above. Also I believe Type 99-2s have been doing good damage for longer. The only time they have been “bad” in a long time was when a weird bug somewhat recently made it so any shots fired from a chase position did next to no damage.
Consider that aircraft such as J7W have never moved down. Compared to that, it was extremely fast.
3.7. The only 3.3 model has just two HMGs, less armor, and an extra fuel tank in the fuselage.
Not really.
Shvak was doing good pre-real shatter for quite some time. Then both were doing nothing for some time. I think there might have been a moment where Type 99 mk2 was much better, but it was a long time ago. Directly pre-real shatter 1.0 Shvak was much better due to better belts and doing like 75% of M-geschoss damage.
Hike of J2M2 upwards started after real sh*tter.
Also Japan is plenty popular in Air RB. It may not be Soviet-big, but it’s a plenty big WW2 ARB nation. Wanna see small, look at Israel, Italy, Sweden and Chinuh (they have a lot of good stuff, but it’s not super popular on EU server).
At least with all-airspawn on every 2nd map, J7W1 at least gets some energy and speed to work with. But it’s played so little of course it’s not going anywhere because Gaijin’s way of balancing is weak as shit.
The most played russian prop outside of GRB is the Yak-3P, with 109k games last month (9K, UT, and T are much higher).
For japan it’s… the J7W with 82k, followed by Ki-43-III Otsu at 51k. I suspect J7W is being used in GRB however since its ground kills are twice that of air ones, and the air kill stats themselves are atrocious. Despite Ki-43-III losing 400hp years ago and being played so often (by japan standards at least) it has not moved down at all.
And sorted by stats it’s very one-sided. A plane as sad as the N1K1-J is trading blows with the (premium) Yak-3 VK107; same with A6M5 Ko/Otsu and Yak-3U, all of which are now the same BR.
While popular, it’s by no means equal.
Ironically, Italy isn’t doing so bad. Re2005VDM has 60k games last month.
Player stats are not real-time, every plane has a lot of ‘baggage’. J2M2 had been doing a little too well for a long time as well.
And it’s that a cannon issue or simply more proof than the current stadistic balance system is backfirin? (Balanced by SL income, not by K/d or performance)
I could say the same about Italian planes to justify the Breda SAFAT to be buffed into a oneshotter.
bringing over the fact that a lot of Japanes props are overtiered won’t help to justify the almost pathetic simulation of different rounds, cases and fillers.
Well, it has not moved down because it still flies like a goddamn UFO and the guns are now hammers of god.
People spam it in ground RB because it can carry bombs and win every dogfight.
I very rarely see it in Air RB.
It’s Italy’s best plane by far. I’d argue it’s their ONLY truely good prop plane for Air RB (C.205 S0 is meh, but still decent, G.55 S0 is mid to OK).
It was only recently moved up.
It can drop bombs twice and carry a big one.
Basically nothing comes close, Re.2005 Serie 0 is a piece of shit in comparison, G.56 is worse too.
It’s essentialy SM92 with almost Mk IX LF maneuvrability, speed and climb.
So of course people are spamming it.
Are you suggesting Gaijin employees are incompetent and can’t analyse data using date cutoff feature? I certainly would NEVER suggest such a thing!!!
What issue? Planes like the C205 serie 1, which is 3.7 and armed with just two Breda-SAFATs and a pair of .30cals, would not justify turning them into peashooters. And the italian guns aren’t even that good, nor otherwise mounted on incredible platforms.
Other than rank 1 and 2 planes they’re always mounted alongside MG151s with good ammo counts.
The guns have always been good. Many years ago I remember a match late at night with friends, I was down to my last 4 shells in that plane, and an XP-50 in front of me that HAD to be taken out now that he was finally at low altitude. I made sure to get as close as possible behind him, waited for the perfect moment, and fired them into his right engine - his right wing failed catastrophically and the engine on that side was on fire. A scene straight out of a movie.
As for the FM, it doesn’t matter how well it turns if it’s so slow you are turning in place. And the loss of engine power means that climb rate is subpar, and any sustained maneuvering requires sacrificing a lot of altitude.
Maybe someday the stats will catch up, but it is nothing like it used to be. It’s pretty much a biplane now.
It’s pretty recent, so a little unfair to single it out. But it is very popular.
Probably trying to avoid another CL-13 Mk4 situation.
Sim BRs are a clownshow. Very few of them make sense. How is a P-51D-5 the same BR as an LF Mk9 and a Ki-84 Ko?
I’m willing to bet you weren’t too happy about that, as were many of the fans of the aircraft. I’m also willing to bet many provided documentation to revert that change. Artificially nerfing (or buffing) aircraft is and always will be a terrible thing to do.
It means a lot. Because if people are not willing to learn how to realistically counter an aircraft Gaijin absolutely will artificially nerf it in some way once people scream enough. A select few would rather have the dopamine rush of killing something instead of learning/adapting. Case in point our current gun damage system, or the YouTubers screaming about the APHE change begging their viewers to change the direction of the vote… Gaijin already said APHE wasn’t performing historically but they gave in. Give it time the Zero will get nerfed as well if people keep whining.
But with the current state of the game the Shvak arguably is the strongest cannon out there. A cannon famous for being weak and a characteristic of a lot of Russian aircraft is completely ignored for “gameplay”. Ignoring the fact that the current damage system is actually making gameplay far less diverse and having Russian cannons etc behaving properly would actually put a realistic/historical leash on the “OP Russians”.
This isn’t to say Shvak’s can’t kill things, they killed things back when they were “weak” and as mentioned you can find plenty of posts online during this time period of people screaming Russian bias.
“Gun tax” as it used to be called is a completely stupid way of balancing aircraft anyways. We’ve been complaining about this for years. As well as some aircraft have too low of a B.R due to a lack of firepower we also have aircraft sitting way too high considering their actual performance.
Yes I believe it got nerfed a while back. I’m sure robbing it of some of its manoeuvrability instead of learning how to combat them really helped gameplay. See my point?
But you are and always were punished for it. If you carelessly fly in front of someone’s guns you’re either going down or you’re crippled to such an extent that you’re either crashing or dead in the second burst. As I’ve mentioned before the Yak’s etc were always considered “OP” even when Shvak’s behaved more realistically. We had no problems shooting people down back then so it isn’t an issue now.
What it’ll do however is make certain “OP” aircraft (due to ridiculous firepower and a generous FM) more realistic but also more balanced. No more getting one-tap eviscerated by a Yak-3U etc and no more .50cal Breda’s annihilating bombers in a single pass.
You’ve basically just proven my point, you’re fine with unrealistic changes (current gun damage) right until it doesn’t benefit you (190A overheat) at which point all of the documentation comes out. Yet when we rightfully say “gun damage is nonsensical, ruining gameplay” the answer is “Nah”.
Exactly this. If something is changed that you favour you’ll go out of your way to correct it with all of the documentation you can find. Heck I’d do the same with you even if it was an aircraft etc that I didn’t like.
This is why being fine with weapons being borked across the board is unintuitive. They aren’t behaving realistically at all and it breaks game balance along with making vehicles completely redundant.
No they’d probably ask for historical documentation which of course I couldn’t provide. However if I made some posts on the forum and maybe a few YouTube videos I’ve no doubt they could be pressured into adjusting the FM’s as they have caved in before. Look at the 109’s overpowered elevator, the 190’s underpowered elevator, the Spitfire Mk IX having more torque than a K-4 on WEP, the APHE debacle it goes on and on.
All of these changes were due to community pressure which diluted the game further just for that dopamine hit. Because learning is hard. It’s the exact same situation with the completely stupid gun damage at the moment which is ruining game balance and the realism that WT still claims it has.
No what you’re doing is “rules for thee, not for me”. You’ve just highlighted that above.
You’re fine with gun damage making certain vehicles OP and an entire style of gameplay useless (bombers/heavy fighters) yet when a 190A gets nerfed in regards to overheating you’re up in arms trying to get it fixed… despite the aircraft being changed for “balanced gameplay” purposes apparently.
Except no one is saying that. Flying in front of someone’s guns is always a skill issue and you will always take damage. Saying that a bomber’s tail shouldn’t fall off in literally two Shvak hits (as I’ve proven) isn’t “survivorship bias!” it’s common sense. From a realistic perspective it’s completely and utterly stupid, from a gameplay perspective it’s the same.
None of us have had an issue with a 190’s wing exploding due to ammo cookoff etc or with a sustained burst hitting the wing especially at convergence. But that’s not what is happening is it? Breda’s in game can saw P-47 wings clean off not to mention bombers as well. Then you have the instant tail separation issue it just goes on and on.
You’re taking our very fair and well presented argument with evidence and you’re dishonestly twisting it to the absolute extremes.
So to confirm you’d be all for artificially nerfing aircraft for “balance?” Also at what point have I asked for historical matchmaker on this thread? Historical performance and the B.R system are two completely different things. If the VDM was capable of 447mph it’d no doubt have a 6.0br where it’d fight considerably more equal aircraft. 447mph is absolutely not the fastest aircraft of WW2…
On top of this the information put forward in regards to the VDM was sketchy at best. It’s for this reason that I’m against prototypes or paper aircraft in this game, as they never made front line service, we have no real idea how they actually flew and thus you’ll never know any of its performance deficiencies. It’ll be the best thing ever… much like many of the stupid Russian prototypes in game. Once again a step away from realism that hurt the game.
It isn’t a fallacy as it’s already happening. Damage is one part of it, the recent flight model “updates” are another where many of the negatives of each aircraft have been brushed aside due to Gaijin caving to players that refused to learn how to fly/fight them. The APHE lack of change due to YouTuber tantrums is another piece of this. Now we have people rightfully screaming about the Yak-9K being OP etc… you made a rod for your own backs.
You basically just said “damage is the same” then in your very next sentence “damage isn’t the same”. Gun damage is the worst it has ever been at the moment. It has devolved the game into a one-click adventure game completely removing a lot of the realism/skill required previously along with balance.
Gaijin also knows this, in one of their recent Q&A’s they admitted something was wrong especially where bombers were concerned and they’re looking into changing it soon.
You can find it here:
You mean 6x .50cals vs 2x historically weak Breda’s… in a less than half a second burst. Come on mate you know you’re being ridiculous now.
It never was the minimum requirement. I’m quite confident I killed people even before guns went full on stupid like they are now. Like I said Russian aircraft back in the day were considered “OP” despite having “weak Shvak’s”. Before Breda’s even had their HE .50’s modelled I still killed people by causing extensive damage or starting fires and yes… with extended bursts/multiple passes wings could still detach. Even with my notoriously terrible aim in a game mode without instructor.
Wrong.
Won’t bother reading the rest, because it starts with a manipulation. Ho-5 were largely ineffective. Only Real Sh*tter made them actually kill people fast. Before that for a very long time they were considered the weakest 20mms and for a damn good reason. Maybe, just maybe there was a short stint of effectiveness, but I don’t think even in the “Shvak 75% of M-geschoss era” Ho-5 got to the same level
Edit: checked the rest and you did not bother actually reading my comment I guess, because I mentioned how and where exactly Ki-43 is used and you wrote some random rant about it being slow and turning in place anyway.
