and its much easier to aim in war thunder than in real life, so its much easier to hit the 5-7 20mm shells
2 Likes
they definitely need to be toned down by a good amount, somewhere between the old damage model and new one should be good enough
Survivability isn’t a balance matter in this case.
Balance will be BR changes.
This is about making the structures close to real-life durability.
The current DM on dev server is not realistic at all.
6 Likes
“flying fortress” mission, solo, ai gunners only on dev
vs “flying fortress” mission, solo, ai gunners only on live
it took 3 B17s on live to survive some zeroes that immediately jam their cannons and cant aim with 7.7s, frankly I think the new bomber DM’s are fine, these planes are huge and bullets are pretty small, it would take ALOT to “cut” one of these in half. These clips of bombers tanking missiles isnt an issue with the bombers themselves, but instead an issue being exposed with the core mechanics of how damage is dealt by missiles
2 Likes
seems fine to me the fact that they can still make it back to base with this much damage: 18 Images of Heavily Damaged B-17 Bombers That Somehow Made it Home - I Love WWII Planes
1 Like
The bombers in the test are too resilient. They should have used historical data, which states that to shoot down a B-17, it took at least four to six 30mm Mk108 rounds in the same area, and between 20 and 40 20mm Mg151 rounds. With that, and based on the explosive charge, they could model the damage of the other rounds. However, they should also model the fragments of the bullets, which have low HE but thick walls, resulting in many more fragments, and larger ones, than mine rounds.Of course, the weak points would be the engines, since they are relatively easy to destroy with any AP gun, and they could also be shot down by causing fires.
important that its in the same area, if you shoot the same area now with 30mm what happens?
Tell me you haven’t tested them properly without telling me you haven’t tested them properly
To be honest, I don’t know exactly. From the videos I saw, with the 30mm they were firing all over the wing area and it didn’t break or lose lift, but the shots weren’t very concentrated either.
the wing isnt going to break lul, not unless you literaly saw it in half with M61 ap. I imagine there is definitely a loss of lift for skin damage, but obviously its a bomber flying at 5000ft, if people tested at lets say 17,000ft, im sure the adverse handling effects would be much more noticeable.
im not hugely opposed to a B17 looking like this after 2 strafing runs.
2 Likes
wouldn’t be a problem still… it would be chased down by the entire enemy team anyways. Literally fighter players will chase it no matter how hard to kill it.
I wonder what’s going to happen if I use my F-82 with its gun pods.
I make the point of the Sunderland, which will be virtually unkillable at the 2.0/2.3 bracket.
Here are some more examples of the damage model in effect:
1 Like
Here is also the protection analysis of a Tu-1 vs a bunch of SPAA
1 Like
I know a lot of people are talking about the survivability against munitions
but
You can body check fighters in bombers now
6 Likes
I understand that the wings of a heavy bomber won’t break (they’re very thick wings), but there should come a point where damage to one side would cause the aircraft to bank to the point of being unflyable. Fire damage would also cause serious harm.
shoots the same engine on a four engine bomber with a 20mm
“OMG why didn’t it die?”
shoots out every engine with the 8mm
“OMG, why is 20mm so weak?”
1 Like
Should be fine, but the wings should be getting slightly more damage; things like this has happen in real life.