Now that the F86A’s and the MiG-15’s see 7.0BR now, playing early germany has been nothing but pain. I want to add that the Vampire F.B.5 (which is slower than the 262 in my observation) is still at 8.0. A BR in which it’s only pro’s are its dogfighting capabilities and armament.
This whole BR feels like a crapfest. I have been TEAM KILLED by an F86F in my Vampire, because I told them in chat that the F86F/F86A doesn’t deserve to get its BR lowered.
Don’t even have anything to say about the Ho-229. You need to have actual masochistic tendencies to be enjoying that thing.
And as for the fuel flow, they should just give it the ~7:30 it was capable of, or alternatively buff its climbrate which (depending on source, because performance numbers vary a LOT with this plane) is upwards of being half of what it should be.
I don’t think lowering it would be fair, as much as I’d love to fight props. I think both should be 8.0, the B-0, personally is just worse than the B-1a. I prefer 108s to 151s. But honestly, the 163 / Ki200 don’t need anything changed with them compared to other aircraft at the BR. The vampire at 8.0 is pathetic. Sabre and Fagot both should go up, and probably will soon given the upcoming decompression.
I fully agree. Vampire used to he one of my favourite aircraft to play, then they bumped it up twice in quick succession which is wild. It’s funny because they bumped the Vampire from 7.3 → 7.7, they did the same with the Su11. But then when they bumped the Vampire to 8.0, the Su-11 straight to 7.0. They claimed that player statistics were not a reliable method of balancing, and the forum post has since been lost to time since the forum update. Ironic, eh?
Yeah, I’ve likely seen the same videos and I got no answers for that man. I love the Komet with all my heart. I think it’s a little sad that its climb rate feels squandered, but I think overall the plane (the B-1a) is in a comfortable position at 8.0 given how easy it is to bait people into vertical reversals.
Honestly, I haven’t really flown the Komet in a long time. I don’t know if they changed anything with the FM but I have no idea what this issue you have with the rudder is. It could also be that I tend to force reversals and bait people slow rather that high speed fighting, when I get home I’ll try to look into it but I doubt there will be any souces on it historically. All accounts I know of point to it just being an excellent flyer at speed.
the most masochist german aircraft because of the br has to be the me262 c2b stock grind, it has 6.0 jet engines from the he162 which is mid the me262 c1a is very good at 7.3 but the c2b has no right be higher as they are very similar other than the rocket motors once you run out of fuel your dead in dogfights as the 2 bmw rocket motors are weaker than the previous c1a they just have a longer burn time and fighting mig 15bis with better flight performance is just pain hope they make it 7.7 where it belongs and if they do end up adding the me262 HG models they go after it
Shouldn’t the Me 262 be considered an Interceptor instead of a Fighter?
It’s already silly that the one that can carry bombs and is otherwise identical is considered a Strike Aircraft and gets an airspawn.
How does the ability to carry bombs make it a Strike Aircraft? There’s like no difference to a P-51 or P-47.
The whole armament of the Me 262 is set up to intercept bombers.
From the four MK 108s to the R4M rockets.
Do some research about the differences of the Sturmvogel and the Schwalbe and you find out that your claim is not correct. In order to carry bombs (Sturmvogel) the finished Schwalbe saw several internal changes to ensure that the shift of the Center of Gravity (CoG) after releasing the bombs did not create nose- or tail heavy flight conditions (imprtant for low level attack profiles) which stalled the operational use further.
Regarding your comparison with props: Apples and Oranges. The wings of props are (in most cases) attached to the fuselage exactly near the CoG - so adding payloads near the CoG (under the wings) is not really complicated.
Finally: Look up the “non-combat-ready” conditions of P-51s with the large fuel tank behind the pilot. As long as the tank was full the plane was not able to fight, that’s why the fuel in this tank had to be used first in order to balance the CoG.
Ah yes, completely different.
They took a plane and made it possible to carry bombs and now it’s a strike aircraft.
Except it isn’t. Since nothing other than carrying bombs changed about how the plane can operate.
It’s literally in the name “Jabo”. It’s a fighter bomber but the Me 262 is a fighter/interceptor by nature.
German player here, at first i thought this plane was ass because i didn’t know how to play it coming from props, so i just grinded the mig15 with the ta152. after grinding the entire german air tree i came back to the me262 to play it again… and found out it wasn’t actually my skill issue, its just a shit plane
Despite i really like your posts regarding cannons, shells and ballistics i am not sure if you have realized that there is a difference between reality and wt.
I described the differences between the Me 262 A-1a Schwalbe and the Me 262 A-2a Sturmvogel at BR 6.7. Have in mind that a large part of Me 262s that saw actual combat (estimated as ~ 300 in total) were A-2 bombers assigned to KG 54 (J) and were flown by bomber pilots.
Your description of 1 or 2 fighter variants which were converted to have 2 MK 103s, 2 MK 108s and 2 MG 151s (aka as “Jabo”) were no actual production models.
I disagree that the 262 was specifically designed as interceptor (excluding the C models with rocket boosters) as the main goal of the design was to overcome the conceptual disadvantages of props - especially regarding critical and tactical Mach numbers. The conversion into a fast bomber of a plane that was actually designed as a fighter was not really a smart idea.
As US bombers were seen as the main threat it is logical that the armament of almost all fighters was optimized to kill bombers - hence the 4 MK 108 in fighter variants.
There was a thread (2023) regarding Interceptor spawns of 262s - it boils down that gaijin spreads IC/air superiority fighter spawns mainly as balancing factor and not based on their intended role. I described this here more detailed.
Feel free to create a suggestion if you want to add an IC spawn to the 7.0 variant - a bug report for an actual interceptor (US XF5F) was denied by gaijin and the creator was asked to create a suggestion.
And I’m talking about the A-1a and the A-1a/Jabo. Not that it makes difference.
There’s already a regular A-1a with air spawn, which makes playing the one without completely pointless.
That might be true, but it doesn’t change the fact that the main focus of the Me 262 was to attack bomber formation and not to get air superiority.
All the armament, 4 low velocity 30mm cannons and R4M unguided air-to-air rockets are meant to inflict heavy damage on bombers.
How do you explain the Fw 190 A-8 being classified as Interceptor when it’s just another Fw 190 F model? There is nothing special about the A-8 that would make it more of an interceptor than the other Fw 190s or Bf 109s.
That’s the job of an interceptor. Fighters are armed to deal with fighters and fighter intended to attack bombers were often up-armored and up-gunned for the job.
Just how fighters were modified to carry bombs and carry out ground attack missions while using the airframe of a fighter.
Of course there’s also the high altitude performance that comes into play.
That’s the thing. Gaijin just makes planes interceptors when they feel like it.
The Ki-44 was as far as I know a purpose built interceptor, hence it featured insane climb rate.
But in the game even the one with the 40mm cannons isn’t classed as interceptor, when attacking bombers is the only point of carrying the Ho-301 cannons.
Aside from the side tangents occurring in this thread, is it safe to say that the general consensus here is that the Me 262 is not currently able to fulfil a role as Germany’s main fighter selection in its current BR bracket and needs to be moved down to 6.3-6.7 (pending potential changes to rocket boosters and airspawns)?
I confess that I do not have many specifics to speak on, having skipped past the Me 262s as quickly as possible, but if anyone can compare the likely performance of the 262 against props to the current performance of the He 162 in that same role, that would be a good metric to judge a BR change by.
