All too often I see people smashing into that wall. I thought I was going to do the same thing because I took that run at a dumb angle but the AM-1 handles so nicely. If only I didn’t loop over I might’ve been able to snag a frag on the BTR as well after this.
1 Like
Im more surprised that the cranes hitbox coresponds to its model
God I’d love to see you in the air to show you how to use american planes.
Even the best Warthunder players don’t perform in U.S. planes better than Russian, German, or especially British planes. There may be a couple of U.S. planes that are on par with other nations (namely F4U-4B, P-63A-5, and P-51C-10), however U.S. props really tend to be mid-subpar on average, and certainly not undertiered as you for some reason seem to think.
These guys do pretty amazing with US props. Idaho with Hellcat and p-38 especially
https://www.youtube.com/@IdahoBookworm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXzlwLo7ta0
https://www.youtube.com/@TeaRexChannel
Mustang Ia/P51 is also awesome.
I’ve never seen som1 do better with American planes than with any other nation’s planes. The only exception, if you wanna count it, is people who have played America almost exclusively for hundreds or thousands of hours.
I’m actually tryna get the British cannonstang through warbonds. It’s kinda funny, but also kinda sad how the British cannonstang is objectively better than the American one.
A vehicle needing more effort to learn does not mean it’s bad. If anything, It makes it more fun.
Spitfire Lf Mk IX needs far more effort to use effectively than Ki-84, yet it’s equal in capability if not superior.
G.55 Sotto 0 needs more effort to use than japanese zeros, but it’s more fun as a consequence.
Hellcat I concede needs “rewiring” the brain to pick up and fly as it requires a distinct mindset from most other fighters, but that honestly applies to every aircraft. My ability to fly effectively drops significantly when I’m hopping between BRs and planes (picking up bf109G14 after not using it for weeks = I spend more time fighting the torque than the mustangs everywhere) whereas if I spam the same plane every time I fly (and thus learn the limits and not accidentally spin myself to death by pulling too hard) I get blue stat shark player rating or nice leaderboard scores.
Would not say objectively. Mustang Mk Ia has slightly better performance at higher altitudes, but it comes out somewhat slower than the american P-51 at lower altitudes. In terms of handling at the altitudes I fly them, I experienced minimal difference that would affect how I’d use either (other than using Mustang Ia because better economics, but that’s premium stuff). Both are fast, both turn fairly OK if you’re going downhill and use flaps right and keep your speed high.
Yeah, but most American props just simply aren’t good.
From what I heard, the P-51 stalls at speeds where the Mustang Mk.IA doesn’t. pretty sure som1 even did a video on it.
I could test. Wonder if that’s an instructor-induced issue.
Mustangs behave weird af with mouse aim, this much i concede. Flopping dead fish.
My dude are you high? A Wellington can see Zeros and I-16s. I know its fairly nimble for a bomber and that might catch some fighters by surprise on the first turn but it cannot sustain a turn fight, especially not with the 4k bomb.
When I was using the German wellington to grind lowtier Germany, I’d often dogfight P-36s and P-400s. Outturning them wasnt the hard part, it was actually shooting them down. I’m still waiting for Gajin to do something with bomber turret view.
Also, when I played I-16, it didn’t turn very well. Idk if I was just spoiled from playing Yak-7B or what.
my man which I-16 were you playing?
1 Like
This was too unfair to the Allies in World War II. The Allies could not use the Air Force against the powerful German Army.
While we’re discussing the cost of CAS armaments, can someone give me a good reason why the Hellfire missiles on the G-LYNX cost a flat amount regardless of whether you take 4 or 8 of them?
One would think 4 missiles would cost less than 8 missiles. It doesn’t have to be half price, but it should be less.
Honestly a good question. I find this rather odd.
Isn’t that the case for every plane ?
You pay for the type of weapon you bring not the amount ?
If that’s the case it’s no less illogical.
Twice as many missile for the same price? It means if you fall even 3 SP short of that loadout your only alternative is to take the worse TOW missiles. 4 Hellfires is better than 8 TOWs.
Same goes for other ordinance on other aircraft. The SP cost should consider both the type and quantity of the weapon.
It is because of how the sp system works. It checks what type of weapon you have and assigns the the sp cost of the highest sp weapon you have. This made sense when it was made.
Now, with custom loadouts, it makes zero sense.
Doesnt matter if you carry 8 gbu, 1 gbu, or 2gbu and 12 rockets. They will get the gbu sp cost.
This is why we need itemized loadout costs. Assign a sp cost per bomb, rocket, ect.
It could also have the effect of making full loadouts more costly while encouraging more unique loadouts rather than “how much can i put on this thing before the wings snap?”
3 Likes
It only affect the top tier planes and not the lower tiers.
It does not state that anywhere in the original official post. Where did you find this information? Because, unless you have a source for that statement, it is false.