Just to remind you, La 9 is 6.0, 30km/h slower, less climb rate, slightly faster turn rate with 4 NS23s but half your ammo. It doesn’t make sense for perfect balance and there are always stronger or weaker planes in their respective BR.
So what? Add that one to the list of forgotten planes too.
You are just making excuses for no reason. The game can be made better in this regard.
At that point you’re just adding all props that are 5.7 - 6.3, which is just causing compression, especially since 5.7 props don’t ever see serious jets, and the limited 6.0 stuff will at most see a deadly Kikka.
As for the 6.3s… they’re easily powerful enough to deal with the rare Kikka and obviously 262s and Su-9 if their team’s jets don’t do so.
I don’t get adding 5.7s in this list when effectively all of them are more than fine… maybe because they’re weaker than the 6.0s they want to down-BR? In which case why worry about those when the 7.3 Panther is the notable thing causing P51H5NA from being up-BR’d to its proper 6.7 - 7.0 BR.
From playing Ki-84 to Narval, I really haven’t felt threatened by anything other than 2 aircraft at once.
It sure can but I feel like major decompression (like making top tier 15.0) is the only way out not making some vehicles lower BR and some higher (yes I am talking about wyvern and stuff). Generally the balancing shouldn’t be adjusted to certain vehicles.
1 Like
For its performance the Ta-152C3 hasn’t remained low its now at 6.3 despite having the flight performance of a VB.10
Should be 5.3
Overtiered massively compared to contemporary heavy fighters like the hornet which is superior in every way and the ki-83
Overtiered high alt interceptor
A 4.7 plane stuck at 5.7 because it can switch its guns why?
Maybe actually try playing the ki-94 instead of spouting off what it does on optimal MEC controls for about 4m before the engine explodes
Okay you’re just trolling if you think the C is better than the H
3 Likes
N1K2’s are a good example of this.
5.0 - 5.3 flight performance but 6.0 Battle Rating.
A6M6 is also hilarious with 3.3 flight performance sitting at 5.0 or the Seafire Mk III being a 3.7 plane sitting at 5.0.
Most Spitfires are actually massively overtiered, I’m still wondering how the Spitfire Mk Vc with 3.7 flight performance got to be 5.0.
4 Likes
God i never want to fly that thing again it’s so bad, I’d also include every zero past the A6M3 since they have to rely on the enemy pilot being an idiot to actually work, if someone doesn’t turn fight you theres literally nothing you can do to them none of zeroes ahould be any higher than 4.7
A lot of the techtree filler spits are just plain garbage that dont make sense sitting at such high br for their performance, it still annoys me that the Seafire FR 47 is 5.7 despite it having the worst drag for a spit ingame theres also all the filler Mk V spits that sit just a bit too high as well and also italy where the C.205N2 is a higher br than the G.55 serie 0 because of guns.
3 Likes
All the single engine G.91 should have been lowered in BR when the F86 and the Mig15 got lowered to 8.3.
And the two G.91Y should be lowered too to 8.7, they for sure aren’t any better than a Mig17pf.
Also the CL13 mk4 doesn’t make sense at 8.3 considering it has the same performance of a F86A5, which sits 0.3 br lower.
4 Likes
Explain?
1 Like
You don’t mention that the La-9 achieves said top speed at 6 km high, while the Ki-94-II does so at 12 km.
At the actual altitudes that you’ll fight in this game, the La-9 is faster and will climb better (almost 80 km/h faster at sea level). The La-9 loses horsepower with altitude, but it’s only above 5km that the La-9 actually dips below the Ki-94 in power to weight.
What makes the La-9 overtiered is the fact that planes like the F2G exist. Not the Ki-94.
3 Likes
You’re running two Double Wasps instead of one, so your climbrate is ever so slightly better as well as acceleration.
Both have their own maneuverability tricks. F8 doesn’t like rudder movement, and F7 has issues with initial turning [its weight might have something to do with that].
Also @Lyn_poster I use MEC in random battles as it’s on my number pad.
Whose correct BR is 6.3.
It’s better to correct the BRs of the under-BR’d props than to incorrectly move the correctly BR’d props.
So do i in some planes but you can do the exact same on any other prop and with better results
1 Like
The double wasps of the F7Fs (both 1 and 3) are strictly worse than the F8F’s.
And the F8F weights so much less than even with the twin engines of the F7F, the F8F has far higher PWR at all altitudes (this includes the F8F-1B which weights slightly more due to 20 mm).
In other words, stop spouting meaningless junk.
The Hornet and Ki-83 have good acceleration because they both have insane PWRs (comparable or better than the F8Fs).
2 Likes
Ta-152C3 is the better H-1 since it has a better wing design for altitudes not above 5000 meters.
lol stop the jokes
5 Likes
What’s really funny about the f7f 3 is that it should have identical engine power compared to the bearcat, but the snail only fixed the bearcat’s engine last update.
The F7Fs and F8Fs all got engines changes at the same time (update 2.37).
The F7F-3’s engine is the same as the F8F’s, it simply currently runs weaker settings (whether or not this is accurate, I can’t say).
This is a graph that compares the engine performance of the F7F-3 before and after the change. Red is before, blue is after.
1 Like
That’s what I was trying to say. I tested them after the update. There should be no differences in the engines. The power curves in the appendix of both the manuals are identical. But beyond the point, comparing the f7f to the hornet or ki 83 is moot, because they have different roles. The f7f was meant to be a long range fighter bomber and night fighter. Not a high altitude interceptor. Given that, I find it more comparable to something like the brigand then the hornet.
You should bug report it then. Would be interesting to see a rocket ship F7F-3 (sadly only premium).
AlvisWisla being confidently wrong as always. Keep it up buddy, the only time you’re getting likes is on my threads because the same kind of vultures gather into the same carcass.
the f7f is not even close to the bf109 f4 climb rate wise, and the 109 f4 climbs amazingly already. But if you’s this obtuse to understand how climb rates work i’m sorry, but i am NOT going to record comparisons nor post WTRTI for you once again.
The F7F starts losing horsepower above 3500m, and it also somehow got nerfed on the high speed handling. It was FAMOUS for having great high speed authority, making it the main reason why it went to 6.7. Now that it no longer does f7f things, it went down to 6.3 because of the armament.
@Italy_Suffers dawg, it’s pointless to argue with Visla, they say that the sea vixen is bad and that it flies identically to the mig15 bis… in a post about why does the do335 have an airspawn despite it’s climbrate improvements since it got changed.
