A-1H and A-2D are still far more egregious Im my opinion. With these two typically being more “boat like” than the twin engine.
A-2D gets a 4000 lb. Bomb
Meanwhile the A-1H has so many weapon types. Now if it was any good with the Zuni rockets I’d have one hell of a stat, but 18x 500 lb bombs or taking 2x 2000 and 6x 500 lb bombs with a couple Hvars is mighty effective.
Yes granted it’s a different br. But it’s not be all end all with the yak as everyone claims. Especially when ULQ only plays one plane to test his theory (confirmation bias).
I am with you in general - and specifically for the usage in Ground RB, but i want to point out that your assessment depends strongly on the model of the 410, the chosen game mode and the circumstances of an engagement.
Hidden as imho off-topic:
In the last 4-6 months i saw a hell of excellent fighter pilots in Air RB which used primarily the 109 F-2 at 3.0 and some of them even the 410s at 2.7, 3.0 and 3.3 - with astonishingly positive results.
I watched those replays in order to analyze their tactics.
Even admitting that these successes were mainly based on superior pilot experience, the 410s are thx to the way different combat setup of Air RB not really helpless. It depends mainly on the ability of their pilots to force those Yaks to accept rather unfavorable terms for a fight and to keep the initiative.
The 410s come with a strike aircraft spawn and climb at lower BRs surprisingly well - it is possible to fly the aircraft with infinite WEP and merge with any Yak-9K with a significant altitude advantage. If the 410s are able to keep the fight above 4 km they are from my pov slightly faster and can dictate the fight to a certain degree for the first minutes.
I revisited the 3.3 410 A-1 and was actually very happy with it - so happy that i aced the plane (by playing it) as an alternative for my beloved SM 92 to fulfill daily tasks with a Rank III strike aircraft.
Whilst the SM 92 excels with outstanding high alt performance & turn fight abilities (i use HOTAS only), very good high speed handling & dive performance (rip speed 860-870 kmph TAS at higher alt) the 410s fly rather like a brick - but is able to outdive a Yak in a very shallow dive whilst using the defensive MG 131 effectively up to 2 km - the (manual) defensive gunner is responsible for about 25% of my kills.
In case of getting totally surprised, a 90 degree dive whilst playing with my air brake saved me quite often, the Yak pilots assess any 410 as free kill and underestimate their acceleration in dives and rip their wings very fast.
Unfortunately this does not work against any P-39/P-63, but you can’t have it all.
Well there is 47mm Aphe, for the 3 pdr gun, tho quite early on discontinued for the 2 pdr iirc.
And they would propably shatter (irl) from the high power vickers.
Just got a game where without even a single landing in the airport I was able to gather all the needed SP from something around 0 to 2500 by just simply flying Jak-9UT.
I might need to check them out again. Last time I played the lower BR ones my impression was that they were good for heavy fighters, but still not very potent against most single-engine fighters.
But yeah, my statements for the Me 410 in this discussion are specifically for the 50mm variant; while some of those may hold for 410s in general, the 50mm gun does cause (to my knowledge) a relatively potent drop in flight performance.
What’s really weird, is I killed a panther in the P59A, by all right an amazing fighter and great anti air capabilities. It has an APHE belt with only 37mm pen. But its fire rate is really high.
Weird though that it’s a poor ground attacker but I still manage.
In regards to planes bs tanks, I still don’t see how you can willfully ignore bombs being potent. I’ve seen a Lancaster / PE8 nuke up to 8 tanks in one drop, rearm and do it all over again…
You cannot see how a vehicle at that BR shredding perfectly fine at 6.7 is an issue. Instead it’s always some other excuse like “Enemy team bad” or “Skill issue”.
It’s being fair, not dishonest. There a difference, if you can’t accept that, then your simply being biased.
But thanks for a character attack… (remind me of the fox discussion, where nobody had a valid argument against the fox being 8.0, no it was just character attacks)
You’re ignoring every counter point you’ve been given and continue to argue despite the volume of voices telling you you’re wrong with tons of evidence.
I replied to you attacking someone else.
It’s pretty obvious you’re ignoring evidence because you do not trust his screenshot. What we can see here clearly, without the lense of ignorance, is that a 4.0 prop aircraft shredded an entire enemy team at 6.7
That’s clear and you refuse to except it. A vehicle that performs that well should not be that low.
This is irrelevant after you attacked someone else’s credibility first. If you do not want to be called out for your behavior, do not do it in the first place and claim victim.
Sure, a bomb can kill. Here’s the thing though. A Yak can one hit nearly every single tank at that BR and has damage potential several times even the P-47 Thunderbolt, which cannot defend itself and sits higher in BR.
Confirmation bias isn’t a character attack 😂 and the enemy team be less than proficient isn’t a character attack.
Oh did I now? I don’t see where I did that, only quite the opposite, being constantly called a lair and so on. I asked for evidence. That’s not a character attack there pal.
You purposely ignore counter evidence, in support of your skewed view of other vehicles, either purposely or not. (Especially when a lot if not most counter arguments are in bad faith).
I asked for the server replay to see his evidence… that’s not ignoring it.
I won’t trust someone I don’t trust…? Surprising.
you just said “Sure. A bomb can kill” can you prove, that everytime, the Yak will kill a tank with a single shot, as you so claim? The P-47 can certainly defend itself. It’s calling knowing how to play the aircraft…
This kind of comment, just discredited you in whole.
