wdym ? if you mean the guns get less accurate while you hold fire, fighters get it. You simply spray less in fighters than in bombers.
That quote only highlights that the B-17 was more resilient than a He 111, not that it was resistant per se to “large explosive yields from relative proximity”.
1 Like
interesting, however 12.7s are currently the best anti bomber weapons due to fire and velocity capacity, while 30, 45, and 50mm do basically nothing.
if you think I don’t know what I’m doing I’m free for a 1v1 tonight and tomorrow
I like they made them not a meme but they’re literally so overturned it’s hilarious
1 Like
Straight up lying, why? Most people who are opposing the current state of the damage models agree that the pre-patch durability was laughable, and that is indeed NOT what they want.
This is the general consensus;
And from reading posts from people opposing the current state, as well as myself, this is actually what you see most;
It’s too far in the other direction, but I think the current meta that shows up is pretty promising and WAY more technical now since Bombers now actually have an extra role.
Bombers are not just used for bombing but I find that there is a benefit to having bombers behave offensively on your team as they can absorb damage and be generally large tanky, and can harass your enemies.
They’re basically a support unit as trying to pick a fight with a bomber is long and arduous and if you’re in the middle of a fight, a bomber can basically be a moving turret platform to help you. It’s weird how easily and capably they synergize with normal fighters
If you’re in a fighter, you have a bomber properly behaving aggressively, you can find yourself in trouble if you need to engage a fighter and the bomber can keep close.
On the otherhand, if you’re just bombers fighting fighters. You’ve more or less lost as you’re going to have fighters just destroy ground targets faster than you unless you can force the engagement, but Fighters have the edge on just—going away and moving onto the next target.
You’re support, but you need fighters to win.
For instance. On the closing segments of a match. I had an Fw-190 and Bf-109 wanting me bad. But I was talking with a B-25 to wait till I engage them. I got them into a turning engagement, and the bomber, due to so many fields of fire, could properly cut into the enemy’s turn by using their gunners. This made it where the Fw-190 had to peel off, same with the Bf-109, and they struggled to contend us because the B-25 was a hard target to kill and having someone just shove bullets in your face no matter what was annoying. I had more energy at the end of the engagement as I gathered it back quicker. We split so the bomber can catch the eye of the Fw-190, and I went for the Bf-109 to finish him off. Fw-190 realistically should’ve focused on me with his Bf-109 friend, killed me, and then ignored the B-25 to go ground pound and the B-25 couldn’t really do anything in return besides be picked apart like a bunch of hyena’s biting at a large wildebeest.
This was the most technical I have ever played in War Thunder as there was more elements than just fighter vs fighter combat.
Now of course, at later tiers you can just be destroyed by a crap load of cannons, but the BRs of 3.3-.4.7 are really unique in that regard
1 Like
We’re comparing the difference of an HE round directly smacking the interior of a wing and detonating it, causing over pressure, meanwhile, you have high explosives smacking the outside edges of a wing.
Realistically it all depends on exactly where it was hit.
By no means is this a defense of the current state of bombers. As currently, incendiary needs a complete overhaul which would be one of the partial fixes.
Blowing a plane’s wing off was a catastrophic even. For aircraft lost from structure damage generally made the aircraft uncontrollable due to damaged controls, cables, electrical and so on.
In-game this isn’t represented, and realistically. What people eventually did was move to incendiary to light the target on fire.
Currently fuel tank fires in-general are not common to achieve and engine fires are usually what occurs, and for fighters, most engine fires come from an engine kill, so you would’ve went down anyway.
The “Wee Willie” reference, was just to show that a B-17s wing isn’t as structurally indestructible as he appears to claim.
And in the video i posted, shooting a B-17 in-game, i was using AP. Don’t know if you meant that when saying
I just meant that as a generality.
An 88 going off 5 feet from the fuselage is different compared to an 88 literally going off in the wing root.
Both catastrophic, but only one is possibly survivable.
I’m talking about the actual balance of the guns, not whether you or I can shoot down a bomber.
I Fully agree with your point. The point is that it feels like they went too far in the other direction. 30, 45 and 50mm can feel like they’re doing basically nothing, while 12.7s can be more effective just because of the amount of fire you can put out.
That’s what I’m criticizing. I’m not asking for the bomber changes to be reverted, I’m saying the current way different calibers interact with bombers seems kinda backwards.
I’m not saying bombers should go back to getting instantly shredded by 7.62s or 12.7s. I actually think it’s good that they’re more survivable now.
So I don’t really see what a 1v1 would prove here.
This is what actually should happen when you shoot a missile to a bomber
1 Like
As others have already said, bombers went from being more fragile than many fighters to being nearly impossible to kill.
Now, there are a couple practical problems with the current meta, considering this is a game and “realism” (someone insists that 50 x 30 mm grenades we’re not enough to kill a B17 - historically it took 3 or 4) must be subordinated to gameplay and balance:
- I’ve seen teams with 10 heavy bombers. Destroying all bases in a matter of a couple minutes (there’s no point in climbing to the stratosphere, being reachable doesn’t mean much now), bombing tactical ground targets and capping bases, flying in circle around an airport to cripple enemy fighters 1 km away.
And it’s simply not a fun way to play. - big guns are almost useless.
- “aim for engines”. Yep. A bomber can happily kill 3 bases with all engines on fire, now.
So, there’s a problem, and I hope Gainin will fix it soon. Not because I want to go back to bombers sawed in 2 halves with a short burst of MGs, but because putting 5 AIM9 into a bloody IL28 shouldn’t be necessary to down it.
Just lobbed 3x Aim-7C’s into a Canberra:
^ This cannot continue…
2 Likes
Imo while yes they are too strong, quite alot of people have been doing the same wrong thing for years and years and now they have to use their smooth out brain they cant, and go for the same spot for 10 minutes and when they finnaly die to the bomber they go back here and complain again.
While its far easier for them to just to tone down the bombers damage model it might break the damage models to the same/similar state they were before pretty much killing bomber gameplay once again.
It all depends on how much gaijin decides to nerf them because i doubt they are gonna leave them as it is since so many people are having trouble with them.
They shall endure the bomber’s main pain! They must wait for 5 years. Bombers’ main have been holding this pain for years and fighter main can’t even hold it in for 1 month!!!
1 Like
This wasn’t a necessary addition from you.
Not necessary to go for that long, since bomber pilots are unable to do the smallest thing to avoid being shot down so easily - maneuver slightly instead of flying in a straight line
i really dont get your point on those videos, and ill keep my word on that, people that complain about the resistance on bombers after sitting on their 6 and beaming any type of caliber on the literal worst spot possible is not the brightest mind
You said people go for the same spot for 10 minutes, i showed you that bomber pilots make that unnecessary by flying in a straight line, making pilot sniping extremely easy.
But I’ll still keep “complaining”, as you put it. Since they seem unrealistically durable overall.
And the overall amount of the bombers i see flying in a straight line, when fighters are approaching them, has skyrocketed since the update. I would guess it’s because they have noticed how ridiculously strong their bombers are, and are abusing that, thinking they are invincible.
But hey im curious, what would the absolute best spots to shoot at in your opinion?
Yeah right, that’s why the Allies in Europe were ready to stop daylight bombing because of the tremendous losses…It wasn’t until the P-47’s with drop tanks appeared along with the P-51’s that the bomber losses became “acceptable” to allied commanders who didn’t have to fly…Bombing raids were escorted by anywhere from 800-1200 fighters and still bombers were shot down…This update is a joke, the very few bombers I fly did not receive the all powerful sky battleship armor so I have still have to climb to 20,000+ feet to be relatively safe from fighters, meanwhile all the bomber pilots are flying at ground level in their invulnerable bombers and have taken most of the bases and GT’s out…If I am lucky they choose to become fighter aces in their He-111’s B-29’s etc so game over cause GT’s are ignored by the planes designed to kill them…Historically this change to bombers is not remotely accurate or wanted…
1 Like
yes i agree they should not fall in 4 pieces like before, but right now they are immnune to fire and its absurd, i have an video where they burn and just didnt die, i think its absurd… also on low tier aircraft big bombers tend to be unkilable, so its not great…