plus on deep strike test event there is procedural facility destruction too, they should replace current base bomb with that instead
1 Like
mosquitos have fighter/interceptor models so no thanks
Yep, bases made out buildings with different resistance levels for different buildings would be very interesting.
Especially if the type of bases were different as well and random.
1 Like
Still based upon a bomber.
If they were being fair. Should have been included .
But not even the bomber variant got a new damage model
it’s also made of wood, so again, no thanks
I don’t want invincible planes with four cannons running around, TIS MA, Tu-1, and A-26s are already bad enough
Exactly, already others, unfair one was excluded
That’s no good excuse, the others should be removed instead
Omfg I hate the changes already. Its not at all as they said that low calibers do less damage than high calibers. They are lit more effective. Tried shooting B-29 with Me 163. Did 4 dive attacks at it wasting all its shells until one bomber went down.
Then tried to shoot bomber with Ryusei B7A2 the B-17 I was shooting ate 200 20mm shells - absolutely nothing happend to it. Meanwhile one incenary 12 mm hit my ryusei wing - started fire and in 2 sec my wing was offf wtf.
Then Me 262 narwal with 50 mm shells with nearly half a kg of TNT and sent like 10 of those in lincoln and B 29 and did absolutely nothing
Then tried playing bombers - so i also have plot armor
And one kill i got was enemy that burned for like 8 min. And other was pilot hit. Meanwhile all the hits on my plane did absolutely nothing too ig.
Atp kamikaze is best option since my shells do no damage
2 Likes
Ryusei has not been affected by bomber buff
1 Like
Feels more like bomber nerf in his case. my wing lit burned off in less than 2 sec from single 12 mm hit. I dont remember that being the case. And few years ago Ryusei were completly stable even without wing. Now they just insta die without wing.
While bombers i was hitting were burning for 10 min while the planes were burning fireballs. And putting the fire out frequently
I wish this buff were based on airframe volume rather than implemented so arbitrarily.
Potez 630 got the survivability buff, but P-61 was left out, despite being way larger and heavier.
It wouldn’t have been a bad idea if twin-engine fighters got the buff too; they are already struggling.
4 Likes
P-61 is not a bomber while Potez is, it’s that simple
WT in 2014 had more realistic damage air models and guns atp
Im leaving im ground main from now on. ):C
It shouldn’t have been such a binary choice (you’re in, you’re not); it should’ve had more nuance
P-61’s have been LONG overdue a damage model adjustment.
Currently(in AB mode) it takes 3x - 4x, even 5x more time/effort
and shots to kill a P-47 than it does to splatter any P-61.
It just doesn’t make any sense. I am sure there are many more examples
similar to this, but this has been a glaring “misadventure” for many years now.
P-61s should a “survivability” somewhere between the P-47 & A-26
p.s. and it should not even be called a fighter, the P-61’s need & deserve
attacker designations.
Yeah but you don’t get it this bomber buff is realistic and bombers survive hits from 75mm HE shells all the time in real life.
2 Likes
realism and deathmatch dont go well
Should have also been way less of a buff and yet here we are lol
every match devolves into bombers gunshipping other bombers because everything else dies eventualy
1 Like
Fighters fight fighters.
Bombers fight bombers.
This segregation is somehow the realization of that idea of “bombers don’t belong in the game.”
Anyway, bomber dogfighting is a lot of fun
source? I highly doupt that its realistic that EVERY bomber casually tanks multiple 75mm hits.
I tried myself doday with the 300+g HE shell of the new Jap plane… even a b-25 eats 3+ hits + 2 other fighters shredding on it with 20mm and i dont even talk about pe-8 and other bigger bombers.
1 Like