Its gets higher br now
it was.
however everyone figured out they can sit at 10.0 to sealclub them again.
I was getting 5 kill matches consistently but now its a miracle to get two before eating a magic 1
no, in arcade its now 9.0, in realitic its stays the same
I’ve noticed some B-52’s/TU-95’s will take off from the airfield and then go around the edge of the map at low altitude, usually through mountains. And they’re the ones that live longer.
Back to the Sea Vixen I go.
1 Like
You can get 5.5km side aspect hits on the B52 and TU95 with red tops, when they are throwing out flares. Its wild honestly
It seems that they still have some insane ir signature which makes missiles (even 9b) ignore flares sometimes. As if their engines are based on harrier ones.
Yes they are big strong engines made to let those giants fly. But if they are so hot they that even flares are useless even vs 9b then why would US and USSR military even bother installing flare dispencers?
Something must be done about this because currently everything with 9b can delete bombers from safe range. Even from side aspect.
2 Likes
things like red top have very tiger seekers so the flares are literally not even seen by the missile a lot of the time. it is a problem when 9B and the soviet/chinese clones are able to perform similar.
all four of harriers nossles acting like hot engines really does screw it over, the front two are cold exhausts too, no combustion happened that far forward. high IR signature planes are horrible to fly no matter
2 Likes
Its not that, the Harriers have a lot of thrust that increases as air speed decreases, so when you jink or turn, you gain more thrust which in turn makes you hotter. Most aircraft lose thrust as air speed decreases which makes flaring easier.
The Harriers arent actually that unreasoanble to flare a missile when cruising at top speed, but when you slow down, even by a 100-150 kts… it becomes almost impossible to flare.
Me and Matrix tested this, at top speed, an R-60M fired at 3km in rear-aspect was instantly defeated by the first flare. At 420kts (not an unreasonable speed ot end up at after a few defensive maneuvers) 8x flares werent enough to defeat an R-60M fired at 3km in rear-aspect.
1 Like
tell that to the poor sods i was lobbing red tops at while using the lightning for the past two weeks. was having AV8-A/matador players getting smacked side aspect when flaring at an appropriate rate
the lightning is such a cool aircraft
I know it’s been over for a little while now, but I have some opinions. Only played one game, was a very cool concept, loved the big maps and play style, however, the lack of a ground aspect kinda sucked and is why I only played one game. I had absolutely no idea what I was doing. I have about a thousand hours on record, and like 997 of those hours were spent on ground. I would love to see something similar (maybe not with nukes, but the large maps and general play style) for ground. Arma or Battlefield style matches are my favorite type (evolving battlefield, coordinating with teammates to attack objectives), and I think it would be a fairly liked mode overall. They had convoys, top of the line SAM systems, didn’t they even have MLRS? Yet none of it was controllable by player? Could have done the ground aspect with rewards being the MLRS (M270 and TOS was it?). We all know these systems wouldn’t be TT anyways. Overall though, amazing change of pace, might actually consider learning planes for the next time it returns.
1 Like
Are you saying nah don’t buff them because you can use 2 fab 5000s?
So, in order to “buff” a single “9,000” type bomb for the Tu-95, it would have to be a different bomb. The FAB-9000 that it currently has is historically accurate. Its “weakness” is not an issue with the bomb itself, it is due to how “small” its explosive mass is in comparison. Because it is a “bunker buster”, not an “High Explosive” bomb (whatever the correct term is for “normal” bombs). This FAB-9000 has a thick casing, which leaves less room for explosive filler.
The other “option” would be for Gaijin to undo/revert the changes they made to the destructive radius of armored vehicles a while ago. But that would affect all bombs not just the FAB-9000.
I am not arguing against the Tu-95 getting a better single “block buster” bomb, but you/we would need to advocate for a DIFFERENT bomb. Trying to change its current FAB-9000 is a dead end; it will NOT be changed. Again, because its stats are correct.
3 Likes
It could get the thin-walled FAB-9000 GP bomb with like 8000kg of TNT equivalent, but I’m PRETTY sure that gaijin gave us the FAB-9000 bunker buster on purpose(as a balancing decision)
5 Likes
Or changing how bases fundamentally work
1 Like
I believe most bombs shouldn’t have been halved on their kill radius, yeah some were definitely out of proportion but gameplay wise it makes them worse than just using atgms. In the TheCodMineMan video titled “CARPET BOMBING THE ENTIRE MAP WITH A B-52 HORDE” In the clip they carpet bombed the map with 8 B52s and killed 0 enemies. For having the biggest bomb payload the b52 failed to preform.
I’m not saying to be unrealistic and change the fab 9000 to a 200m kill radius just cause its big. I’m just saying that bombs in general shouldn’t have been as nerfed as they were, and it especially effected bombers cause of their size, spawn cost, and vulnerability.
3 Likes
Over half was too much of a nerf! maybe work it down slowly from 105m to 90, slowly step it. Un-nerf the big bombs let us have some fun lol.
Tbh I rarely got killed by a fab 5000 or 12k. If I did I was never that annoyed happy to be part of the meme kill feed lol.
1 Like
I mean it’s still 4 tons of TNT, but I read somewhere that that bomb was discontinued due to its blast radius not compensating for it’s inaccuracy in high altitude bombing, it stated that during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan soldiers ~225m away would be disabled with sever concussion, ruptured ear drums etc. but the lethal radius was only ~57m, and that’s for foot soldiers, not tanks.
As I have mentioned before, blast radius increases at the cubed root of the increase in explosive mass, ie. to double the blast radius you need to cube the amount of explosive.
To double the blast of 500kgs of TNT requires 2000kg, to double 2000kg of TNT requires 8000kg and so on.
This is due to the expansion of the blast wave rapidly increasing its surface area, meaning that there is far lower pressure at any given point.
Think of it like blowing up a balloon, how much dose it expand with the 1st breath compared to the 2nd, 3rd and so on?
3 Likes
if the Fab-9000 is a bunker buster, shouldn’t it be classified as an armour piercing bomb and have the kinetic penetration stats to go with it? Right now it’s classified as a regular tnt bomb, meaning all that weight does nothing. I’m not sure what testing results it had, if any, but if in game it were able to pierce through the deck of an aircraft carrier and one shot it with a direct hit from high altitude then that would be enough to justify the bomb, in my opinion.
3 Likes