Yeah that’s definitely an issue. Every Russian aircraft I’ve played with can turn on a dime and get up to speed in a ridiculous amount of time.
My US aircraft are I guess all just flying cardboard boxes. Their handling sucks and they can’t turn without bleeding all their speed. The only other plane in the RU tree I know that does it is the 21.
Wait till you see the average p51h player. I wish I recorded that one occasion where I won a dogfight on a do 335 against one, that was funny.
Meanwhile the spitfire mark 24 at 7.0 faces 7.7 su11 cancers every game, and it’s not pleasant to say the least
Ah, fighting SU-11s as a Kikka is already painful, so I wager in a prop it’s even worse…
People calling JP planes UFOs have clearly never seen that thing, it manages to out-maneuver/speed a huge chunk of planes at its BR while also being a decent strike aircraft…
On the latter comment, that’s more so the laypeople grasp what is getting put down.
There are a comical number of UFO-Russian aircraft in the game, I’ve had the BV-155 pull some legit insane things that are likely pure fantasy as well, basically flip around and gun down a P-38L while both of us are doing 350mph+
There are many other balanced 7.0br planes that suffer from 7.7br jets that are undertiered (La 200, and Meteor f Mk 4), and undertiered 7.3br planes (Su-11, mig 9L, F2H, Sea Meteor), and undertiered 7.0br jets (F-80A, F84B, F89B, F89D, Kikka). This is a problem of the BR range having many undertiered jets (also notice how many of them are US jets).
So we let an entire BR range suffer just so one aircraft is viable?? This is the more foolish notion. Using this same logic, I guess the Me 262 C2B should be 7.3br, or the Hunter F1 should be 8.7 or 8.3br, or the Cl14 Mk 4 at 8.0br, and so on.
Yes, there are some US planes that suffer from this, mainly the P-51s and F8Fs. But how do you explain planes like the P-39N and F4U-1A at 2.7br when they don’t suffer from these problems, or how about the P-59A at 5.7br, or the F2G at 6.0br, or the numerous jets like the F-80A, F84B, F89s, F2H that are undertiered, or the F5E at 10.7br, or how about the F-15A at 12.3br. Mind you that the Japanese F4U-1A (the same model) got moved up to 3.0br due to good players while the US F4U-1A stays 2.7br.
The Japanese vs US F4U-1A br deconstructs your entire argument.
Meanwhile you ignored how it practically has the best acceleration, good manuverability, the best climb rate of any prop, and decent energy retention.
Literally this video explains it best:
Not really, unlike the Me 262, the p-51H has more advantages compared to the me 262, which are better climb rate, better acceleration, better manuverability, better guns (except for the A1/U1 variant), and better low speed performance. Meanwhile the Me 262 has better high speed performance, higher top speed (though very rare to achieve it), better energy retention, and better roll rate.
Also no one wants the aircraft to be “useless”, they want it to be balanced, as if you watched the video I posted in a different reply, literally Defyn mentions the P-51H verus props is practically overpowered, there is no way for you to lose against a prop unless the pilot makes major mistakes. The p-51H outperforms props in at least 1 category, majority of the time two categories, and often three categories, which are top speed, acceleration and manuverability. This plane at 6.7br or 7.0br (the same br as the spitfire mk 24) will be far from underpowered, if anything it will actually require skill to use instead of being braindead easy.
Also note that the Spitfire mk 24 should not be 7.0br, it should be 6.7br, just like the p-51H since the Spitfire mk 24 is the P-51H’s only equal.
Edit: Spelling
The P-39N has low alt performance worthy of 4.0+. The XP-50 is just bullshit lol.
The BR difference between the corsairs isn’t massive, but it’s there I guess.
It’s pretty funny that the Ta 152 C is now 6.3, same as the Ki84 Hei and P-51H. One of these is not like the others!
Said it before, you ignored it. Problem isn’t 6.3-5.3 the problem is 7.0-8.0, which is the subject of this thread. Which is don’t move something so high in BR that it is functionally useless to play, there are a -great- many examples of this.
As for why it is Sitting at 6.3 right now? If I was a betting man, I suspect it has to do with the AU-2, AD-2, AD-4, AH-(whatever) spam that occurs at 5.7-6.0 leading to them being outnumbered against Early Jets/late Props. This is by in large one of the reasons many of the US props have some interesting BRs…that and Gaijin doesn’t seem to look at GB RB and Air RB separately.
Before I forget started, I do agree the Spitfire 24 should be moved down, I suspect the latest round of damage changes has once again screwed everything else up.
Also, while I get you feel Defyn in a subject matter expert, listening to someone that only talking about the positive aspects of an aircraft while also failing to show any of the failings of them (not that it’s in the P-51H video specifically, but by in large he does this) is not a subject matter expert that I put a ton of stock into.
Easy, take someone that has less than 10 hours of flight experience in this game and flight games as a whole and throw them in a match against Spitfires and Zeros in those aircraft. Let me know how that turns out. You really need to keep things in context of what I was saying, which is, many USN/USAAF aircraft are not dogfights and their merits do not play well into a new players when compared to the field of Zeros, Ki-61, Ki-43/44, and Spitfires, X Soviet aircraft here.
Germany gets a similar BR handout in Ground forces for similar reasons.
Also by in large, there’s no point in whining, discussing or pointing at Premium vehicles having overly good BRs and you really should know that by now.
Jets have BR compression which is what the post you are replying to was talking about and is literally the problem, again, context is more important.
Finally: The IJN F4U-1A fights against US aircraft, that’s why it is a higher BR. The fact that it like other vehicles are what people use to seal-club is a side-note.
As for my argument, nawh it’s pretty solid. You pull a handful of odd strings out acting like every US player knows which aircraft is good starting out and spams them, then you add in more premium vehicles that rarely get BR adjustments. Point stands, US BRs are due to most aircraft at lower/medium BRs are not good for new players as their merits are not something people start with opposed to things like Many of the Soviet, Japanese and British aircraft that more or less someone with similar experience can just go “I turn”.
TLDR: Premium Vehicles aren’t worth discussing, the US doesn’t generally have good dogfighters in the Rank 1-3 window so the pilots tend to not be as good until later, and BR compression is a very well known issue.
never had a problem fighting the p51h even in the f4u7 which is an absolute brick of an aircraft and should lose almost no matter what after the flight model nerf still think the problem with props is over tiered aircraft they did a ton of flight model changes like to Italian props they didn’t do any meaningful br changes to make up for the pretty severe fm hit or another example the so 8000 narval that aircraft quite literally does nothing well or even decent yet its a 5.7
The P-36s are right there dude.
So go push to lower the spitfire, not push the P-51 into an unenjoyable mess.
You made imho a valid point here - not regarding the 5.3 - 6.3 range, but in general as 1.0 spread is often too much to handle.
I mean the whole thread is dealing with something similar to “challenge vs mission impossible” - you have fun playing PvP if your opponent and you need skill to fight each other. This fun gets lost when skill becomes less important if the used hardware creates advantages you can’t compensate with skill.
Regarding the uptier problems of the P-51 H-5 in case of a theoretical uptier to 7.0: I couldnt care less. I mean we talk about a plane of which ~500 units were built - and not used in any combats - whilst the jet opponents at BRs 7.0 (= Me 262) - 8.0 were actual technological milestones, at least the majority of them like Meteors or Vampires.
In addition - the few pilots of the Mk 24 Spits are able to compete at 7.0 as they are on average far more experienced - as almost all pilots of “non-Big 3” nations.
So sacrificing a totally irrelevant aircraft (for aviation history) like the P-51 H-5 just by giving it a fair BR setting of 7.0 seems more than adequate.
Also here there are some valid points embedded.
From a holistic pov i do agree - if the lower BR planes are undertiered the player progresses too fast and is rather unfit for combat outside point and click in headons.
I appreciate you efforts to save the reputation of US plane players, but imho your arguments come from an experienced player, not representative for the average US player.
I fought several hundred matches with the 5.0 Italian P-47 D-30 with 85% full uptiers paired with 4 Ju 288s - and it was often a massacre. So i would guess i left 35-40% of my matches (rtb and j out with 0 points) as my whole team was dead before i was even at 4 or 5 km alt.
But the other matches were amazing if you were able to kill the one or two UK players of the enemy team - the US players were unable to use their advantages, and stuff like F2Gs even allowed them to get away with multiple basic mistakes in a row - and this is imho the core message of this thread:
If the performance gaps are too large to compensate them with skill - there is no point in looking for excuses why certain BRs are too low.
P51H5NA can’t die to Su-11s in air RB unless the P51 pilot is unaware and in a furball at the same time.
P51H5NA is the most maneuverable aircraft at its speed class and BR.
P-51H outcompetes the MK 24 while the 24 fights jets with Hispano MK 2’s that spark 60% of it’s rounds. American babies get 50 cal laser beams that do as much damage as 30mms, yet have this bullshit at 6.3. Fight a P-51 on the deck? Lose because he has more power to weight. Fight a P-51H at 6km? He outturns you with combat flaps, fails to kill you, and runs away going 2x the speed of a MK 24, then climbs above you. Gaijin balancing around player stats is a fucking lie and the mk 24 is a perfect example of that. Rating from eight years ago when the plane was meta and hasn’t changed since.
There’s really nothing fair about the BR, the historical importance of an aircraft is completely unimportant in a video game. And I would say that it being the perfected model of the -51 and likely the best Prop fighter ever built, I’d say it has more grounds than…the variety of 1-offs and never finished/equipped Proto-Jets that float around BR 6.7-7.0.
Also, take a lookie look at the BR 8.0 line up. But also some of the ‘but it beats the cake out of all other props’ discussions, admittedly even at BR 7.0 you won’t be escaping the P-51H…and the F2G is literally right there, making another aircraft generally useless or highly top/down BR specific isn’t a good idea regardless of what vehicle we are talking about.
Basically the US Heavy tank experience in a nutshell.
The rudder loves to all but lock up with the non -51D-20/30 and i’m pretty sure the 47Ds have the same feature, and the -47/F4U elevator gets very heavy in the 375+mph range(don’t remember exactly where it is outside in that area). Should have been more specific, but also, yes it’s easy for people to want to do more than they should.
Basically the US fighter experience from BR 2.0-7.0 until the last year or so to my understanding (don’t fly RB as much as I used to) and one of the causes why the BRs were lowered as hard as they are.
It is the problem child here. As while you can say that the Ki-84-Model-builttwice has ‘no’ chance against a P-51H, it still stands MORE of a chance than a F-14A does against a Su-27 and friends.
sure, make the p51h even more OP than it already is.
Clue: historically it was made specifically to face jets. The Spitfire Mk24 was not, it was made to attack the ground and shoot down German rocket bombs.
the f4u-7 is not a brick of an aircraft, it’s literally an f2g with cannons as the latest changes to corsairs indicate; from 2590 horsepower to 2890 horsepower, just 50 less HP than the f2g and With far better guns plus something funny: high altitude performance. If you can deal with the p51h is because most pilots are god damn horrible. I’ve out fought them on j5n1 and that japanese interceptor is a helpless pos most of the time it goes below 600kmh.
This is my average experience with the f2g: https://youtu.be/yEp2-EApCLc?si=-qTXG9XZK-pak3zj
i also have no issues dealing with yak3us on it unless I get myself into a situation I can’t escape from. The corsair is like: what if we picked the 109 K4 and gave it more energy generation/retention and better turn and stall control and paired it with the 190’s high speed handling and roll rate? The F2G can beat the p51H in a dogfight (and so can the corsair 4b/7 if you force it below 300 ias. Why? Mix of p51h losing thrust at slow speed and laminar flow wings with quite high loading.
Im not sure if you are familiar with aircraft history or not - but seriously: The P-51 H-5 was a complete new aircraft and just shared the shape with the D variants.
The plane was similar to a naturally aspirated engine F1 car in 1983 - a fine piece of technology but totally helpless vs turbo-charged F1 cars. It doesn’t matter if you think that this was the best prop fighter ever built - as in irl scenarios it did not have a chance vs a 262.
So placing it vs real WW 2 props just because their average pilots are unable to play it correctly is an important factor in a video game - as the performance advantage allows them kills vs better pilots - and not because they are skilled.
We have a lot of absolute useless aircraft in all nations - but is at least in prop BR more than obvious that we see mainly US planes overperforming. The P-39s were used until the end of the war by the USSR - because their performance below 4 km was good enough to face 109s and 190s.
It’s not about escaping - nobody is scared about an P-51 H-5 or an F2G - because their pilots are usually limited to point and click in headons. The discussion is about the too low BR placing it vs stuff like 109 G-10/14 which were seen as obsolete as the future belonged to jet powered aircraft.
That UK pilots can keep their Mk 24 Spit at 7.0 and the few Re 2005 pilots managed to increase their BR from 5.3 to 6.0 should be enough evidence that your points regarding adequate BR simply distract from the very low skill floor of US pilots.
The performance advantage of the P-51 H-5 (and the F2G) allows them to make multiple mistakes in a row - and get away with it whist their opponents could not afford the slightest mistake - again it’s about balance.
Either by accident or on purpose - my example with ~300 matches in 85% full uptiers in 6 vs 6 matches was aimed to demonstrate the low quality of US pilots - if the are unable to gain a 100% WR vs 2 (usually 5.0 German/Italian fighters) and 4 bombers whilst flying 5-6 fighters they are just incompetent.
The only serious opponents were UK pilots in LF Mk IXs and the usual US tryhards looking for easy kills in order to push stats. So if i left the match in 35-40% of my battles as my other 5 team mates died to US/UK fighters and still have a 50% WR and a 5:1 K/D you simply have to play more Air RB to get a feeling what is going on in this mode.
I’m very well aware of WW2 aircraft and the P-51 in specific. Thank you, also, I do not remotely care about the historical X of an aircraft when it comes to Warthunder, and neither should you to be completely honest. The P51H was likely the best Prop fighter built by anyone during WW2, the lack of need prevented it from seeing combat. Being “Well Blank” whatever excuse you want to fill really doesn’t matter, if it was a British, Soviet, Japanese or German aircraft it would have seen combat.
Which makes whatever historical argument basically null and void giving you have 1-2 off prototypes that ‘might’ have seen the skies when the P-47s and P-51s came to visit the airfield in the game.
insert HO-229 being literal fantasy as it is in game
To make this blunt. If German pilots had to suffer half of what the US pilots did during the 190D-13 year, you know the year that Gaijin blocked you seeing what the other team had in Realistic, and the year that they added the early-leaving penalty due to the German team ditching the second an allied Jet team was seen, but them farming completely outmatched Allied props until then was just fine
Yeah, that year? Then add in the 4+ years of CL-13 bull.
The German pilots deserve to suffer, badly for the rest of this games run time for that level of nonsense that they enacted.
And they will deserve it. To be honest, they deserve to suffer maybe then they’ll get the memo of what it feels like to deal with an outright superior opponent that you have no real chance to defeat that is the same BR and that remains like that for literally years.
Jets can make many mistakes, just don’t go below 450mph and it won’t matter but you won’t hear that, just like the bunch of german pilots that just farmed literally everyone, and everything in 190D-13s, then Jed out the second they got sucked up into a F-86A match.
Turn about is fair play and the US hasn’t had the 6+ years of suffering returned in kind. It isn’t fair, but this game, just like life isn’t fair.
Lmao - my very first thought:
The slightly longer version:
If i read things like this:
…it is quite disappointing to see that your entire motivation to defend the current BR setting of the H-5 is more or less based on a personal vendetta.
Despite some of your previous posts were comprehensible - it is now obvious that they were just straw man arguments.
Try next time to be as clear as in this post. That will save a lot of time.
Edit: Troll attack with flagging