The issue is, I think the Ju-288C might be one of the ONLY bombers in the game that is actually viable in ARB without instantly being fighter food. But the issue is , many will say “bombers are fine, just look at the Ju-288C”, and disregard all other bombers, especially those built for night bombing as being the same.
1 Like
Tu-2’s are also quite good, though my experiences flying the 288 in the past was getting intercepted by AD-2/4 and AM-1’s before getting to the bomb point.
Yeah, there a few other good options, like the German heavy bomber with a million turrets. but for a lot, its only the fast medium bombers that ever even get close to bases these days
I don’t play air, but I’ve seen a similar discussion to yours many times in ground as well: heavies and tank destroyers aren’t meta, ergo you shouldn’t play them.
Here’s a news flash. There is no such thing as “the meta”. What there is, is balance, or lack thereof. If you think bombers - or heavies - are not worth spawning in, you’re implicitly admitting that Gaijin needs to rebalance them and make them a competitive choice.
The only reason any vehicle is in the game, is for people to play it. Elsewise it’s a waste of 3D and sound assets. Therefore the only successful end state is one where everything is more or less worth playing depending on the match circumstances.
Also, people play for fun. You want people to play what you dictate so as to min max win chances? Hire them and pay them a full time salary. If not, then sit back and let people do what they want in their own free time.
4 Likes
You can’t just “balance” a PvE vehicle in a PvP mode. Also gunners vs normal guns is also impossible to balance, since bomber doesn’t need to ourmaneuv3r you in any way to get a shot. Bomber has ALWAYS a chance to spray you down and experience bomber users are a nightmare to fight against, they will take damage, but you will die too. Super fun indeed.
3 Likes
Yes it can, 2 x 2500 internally, On top of this, gaijin also has conveniently omitted the ETC 2000 wing racks which would look like this:
Again, gaijin has mixed and matched or nerfed the crap out of the defensive weapons as well. In this game, the aircraft is referred to as the “Ju 288 C” with no number. In reality, there were three different C variants, the C-1, C-2, & C-3. If the thing in the game were a Ju 288 C-1, then the H-Stand tail weapon is clearly incorrect, as it should be an MG 151/15 not 20. If the thing in the game were a Ju 288 C-2, then the B & C-Stand MG 131s are all incorrect as they should be MG 151/15 cannon. If the thing in the game were a Ju 288 C-3, then it should have only one C-Stand turret as the C-3 was a night bomber with reduced armament:
2 Likes
I’ve been sayin this for a while but gaijin should lower the B-29 to 6.7 and raise the JU-288 to 6.3 so that there will be an equal amount of bombers on each team. Being an American aircraft in a 6 player game with 4/6 of them being ju288s is not fun. being a German fighter at the same BR in a 6 player game where its just you and one other fighter against all American superprops is painful. If there were an equal amount of bombers on each team at least it would be a little more balanced encouraging more people to play the superprops again… Also a premium B-29 at 6.7 would help too…
3 Likes
Giving the B29 it’s 20mm tail turret could be interesting.
1 Like
You should create a post in suggestion about this, it is essential information, it must reach gaijin.
It already exists
2 Likes
I mean, also about the weaponry. That historical accuracy would be an excellent nerf for the ju 288.
It would be an improvement, not a nerf:
1 Like
Fully agree, the 151/15 should have far better ballistics and range than the much heavier M-Geschoss of the 151/20 with this insane bullet drop…not sure if ROF increases too…
I mean if a B-17 tailgunner gets hits, crits and kills up to 2.4 km (just check out Jengar’s last B-17 vid as an evidence) the Ju 288 (if flown by a “real” player using manual gunners) should benefit from that.
2 Likes
If you have played BF109f2, you won’t say mg151/15 is better… MG151/20’s damage for fighter is amazing especially when someone on your six.
1 Like
Sorry mate, maybe i was not precise enough - I wrote not better, i wrote about better ballistics and range, so they should be easier to use whilst in gunner mode.
The key of using manual gunners was always to keep the chasing fighter as long as possible inside your, but outside his gun range. So an increase of range and better ballistics (so increasing potential accuracy) should be an advantage.
I only used the 151/15 in gun pods in the IT 109 F-4 and with AP-I belts (800 meters convergence) i was quite happy with their damage output and ballistics. I used them first just as additional punch but as soon as i got used to to them mostly for engagements >600 meters; below i used the 151/20.
The “useful” range of the 151/20 (if i chase somebody in my SM 92) is rather disappointing, at least i am usually unable to hit anything (except 4 engine bombers) further away than 0.9 km due to the “adjustments” of ballistics some time ago…
Yes, I understand what you considering…
And we have another example to explain why bombers need bigger guns, on the USSR planes, B20 and 12.7mm gun are close to MG151/20 and 15’s relationship, for bombers, we will always choose B20 instead of 12.7, because of the damage.
By the way, on bombers, we usually need to consider the relative speed, when the bomber are chased by fighters , the shells from bomber will easily hit the fighters, because the fighters and shells will have a higher relative speed, so the ballistics is ok.
yes, i cant do anything in my spitfire when they are at an high altitude, decent speed, and decent armament
That post you replied to has no claim, only opinion.
So what you’re saying is you’re going to ignore all War Thunder players and only trust yourself.
Edited it since I forgot to after the correction was posted.
1 Like
If you looked a little lower you’ll realize that I accepted the correction from someone. Just I forgot to edit the original post to match that correction.
Me, on July 28th: “My bad. Thanks for the correction, Wick.”
2 Likes
@HYPNOSYS2002
Stop with the insults.
Wick & I are correct that the Ju-288 can carry 2500kg bombs.
Stop insulting us just cause a post was mistakenly unedited after a correction was presented.
I’m not infallible, no one is.
1 Like