Here is another German Pilot POW account
Exactly, Those 4-5 bullets mentioned in the text were definitely directed at the planes coming in front of the bomber, but everyone is cherry-picking words from the text, so it’s being taken out of context.
dont give in Gaijin, this is some of the best things you have done. besides there gotta be some benefits to playing bombers
5 Likes
I saw b-25 crash from a single shell in naval, idk wdym.
Also I saw many big missiles shoot down bombers.
I thought airfields are just nerfed.
truth nuke
3 Likes
People are confusing hitscan 1 tick of damager per 3 seconds airfield AA from 2012 with actual AA guns on ships and at higher tiers. Honestly lower BR airfield AA needs to be swapped for actual gun units, that 37mm ostwind in the testdrive does a pretty good job at blowing bombers apart, and thats just one, shove like 8-10 of em in there, few wirbelwinds, and a few flak busses lmao
4 Likes
they should keep it like this, but maybe make rockets/missiles do a little more, idk tbh
1 Like
Gemerald youtube channel
Hello, is me again, the one that can’t shoot down bomber with the new SAPHEI rounds
i made a bug report about the round like @RoyalWaffles suggested If someone have more info about it could help with the report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/yi4KgACl4ghx
because let’s be honest, the new round that was made for counter bombers is doing suboptimal and the detonation do low damage for the amount of he that round use
gonna post again some replay hits that were direct on engine and tail controls
1 Like
This change is… crazy. It’s one size fits all, with no respect to how survivable a given aircraft really was.
A B52 should not tank multiple missiles. The airframe is not far from being a glorified airliner.
B17s, Lancasters, etc were made to take a lot of punishment. But they could still be destroyed catastrophically if you shot through a spar or something.
Japanese bombers, they were not built to take the same amount of damage as the allied heavies…
Any mid air collisions to the fuselage should be utterly unsurvivable. Look at the amount of destruction in the tragic incident with the B17 and P63 a few years ago.
Currently the changes just feel unrealistic, and frankly not all that fun from either end after the novelty has worn off. As a proof of concept that bombers being more survivable is good, yes fine. But this is not remotely suitable for being rolled out to all bombers. The survivability needs to be more bespoke.
10 Likes
As much as i agree with you, the people defending this current state of the change are adamant this is how it should be.
It’s like trying to talk to a barn door, expecting it to see reason or give any good counter arguments instead of just moving back and forth making squeaking noises.
It does feel unrealistic as well as unbalanced. Now bombers are are just SL and RP printers with no real skill needed. Bombers can be operated one handed, with 0 situational awareness, and you’ll kill a fighter or two and most likely survive the match, unless you your IQ is close to your shoe size. Whereas with fighters you still have to work to kill fighters, just like always.
2 Likes
Skill and gameplay are one thing, but war thunder tries to be realistic… at least in terms of individual vehicles - just ignore the time travellers and so on.
In tanks we have detailed armour models and aim for weakspots.
With bombers they’ve just made them generically tanky. Where is that drive for bespoke realism? I know it would take a long time but id be ok with tanky placeholder buffs to give time to roll out more realistic bespoke damage models
3 Likes
Phenomenal. Bombers are fun to play again, and intercepting them requires some thought and persistence.
While some will say ‘overpowered’ few people are considering that many bombers were meant to fight in boxes with the support of other aircraft with dedicated fighter cover & coordination with radios. We don’t get that. Even in SB, its just not part of the architecture of the game.
Would it be more fun if it was? Sure - but that’s a change in player culture first.
War Thunder has always sought to balance realism with gameplay. Prior to this, lets face it, the lot of a bomber in life was miserable. Effectively somewhere over a third of the aircraft in the game were pure masochism to play.
Now? Now you have a good shot. Can you still bring down a bomber with a few bursts? Especially if its carrying bombs? Yeah. HVAR also are brutally good at one-shotting big ones - the FR-1 Fireball is very good at zoom climbing into a Privateer and leaving it scrap this way.
Though I’ve been playing BR9.0+ mostly, I’ll be flying the lower tiers a lot more since this REALLY makes game play fun and interesting.
That is obvious 😎
This makes it clear - you simply have not the necessary experience to understand why this strategy fails on very specific maps and simply doesn’t work vs experienced players on these very specific maps.
As soon as you play on old but revised legacy maps you can win 1 vs 7-9 with a single player or a base kill - on 2 Pacific maps you can even win with doing nothing. And this option is based on lack of experience and understanding of these specific game mechanics of your enemies and your own ability to steer their behaviour and/or predict their actions.
That’s why i mentioned specifically this match on the legacy map Malta which has a mix of asymmetric targets (like on Sicily) and you can’t win by tickets with strafing aaa or arty as on the “newer” map slop provided by gaijin.
There is nothing wrong with you when you enjoy PvP in a bomber or try to win by tickets with gunshipping ground targets - but my post you are referring to proves the opposite - even admitting that these conditions are rather rare and need experience to use these opportunities.
I am not sure why you think i would have a deviating opinion. I stated clearly that the situation is not hilarious, it is insane.
Whilst the text above disproves your general view on things with a specific case covered by hard evidence with a replay link i never claimed that you are completely wrong.
The difference i see is the general mindset when playing wt Air RB and how to deal with exploits or temporary weaknesses. So if you assess the current situation as worth to use to your advantage: Be my guest, whatever floats your boat.
If you play wt prop Air RB mainly as mix of entertainment and challenge your view on things change. That’s why i am not happy with the update as the HE damage buff de-valuates any previous efforts to make way inferior hardware playable and contribute to the team effort without having the right tools to do this.
That’s why i flew before the patch just a few selected bombers which allowed you to have a game impact whilst having a high survival rate when properly used (like the SWE B18-B) as otherwise there was no point in using bombers. But as a challenge i flew also stuff like B-17s or Do 217s for a few dozen matches in order to prove that you can make them work even in extremely hostile environments.
Using them right now kills the efforts in invested earlier - so i decided for me to skip playing bombers until they are not longer OP. The sole exception was a single match yesterday in the USSR A-20 G for a daily task (=kill 15 ground targets with a bomber) which i completed without any PvP interaction in this single match.
Hope this makes things clear - have a good one!
This is a way, but you are also hampering your planes performance, climb rate especially, doing this, giving enemy fighters an advantage in this regard. Most notably at prop tiers.
The realism argument is fragile, since no bomber was operated by a single person with perfect view of his surroundings in gunner view
2 Likes
To prove a point i took out a bone stock B-17, as someone who doesn’t play bombers outside GRB. Played the whole match with just my mouse, ended up winning. With 4 kills too. Map was Norway so the enemy even had the best possible chance to intercept me, and they tried. Recorded the whole thing too
Ridiculously easy, never had 4 kills using a fighter come that easily
3 Likes
This claim is largely based solely on a stereotypical view of Japanese aviation but it is really not main theme here.
Japanese aircraft are essentially made of paper even with the new damage model. The Ki-49 loses its tail just as easily as it did under the old damage model, and the fuel tanks of the G4M, G5N, and Ki-67 catch fire from a single 12.7mm round. A missile hit completely tears off both wings of the G8N.
Meanwhile B-17 fuel tanks don’t (or very rare) catch fire from large-caliber fire and the same applies to the B-29. The B-29 can even withstand hits from R-40 missile or other missiles.
Engines meanwhile burning similar on all that planes
1 Like
bombers were already excessively powerful in sim thanks to the gunner control being extremely arcadey
G5N does feel extremely tanky now.
1 Like
Its hull wasn’t destroyed when I flew it (unlike Ki-49 which literally lost tail like old DM) but fuel tank ignited after little hits by 12.7mm while B-17 and B-29 just don’t fire from 20-23-30mm I used and I got damaged from, and that’s literally just cooked me off
So now I can’t try that G5N again… time to try Space Marine 2…
2 Likes
I was putting out fuel fires in the G5N super easily, I think you just got a little unlucky lol
1 Like