Cool, you cannot consistently replicate this as they are flukes. We could go into a custom right now and consistently replicate what I just told you.
As usual, I didn’t say this.
1 Like
Yes, it’s very easy to replicate your inability to aim properly.
Yes, it’s not aiming properly to center mass the Xm246’s turret with a dart, I’m sure you do think that. Continue to do worse than me in game.
Maybe they switched all fuel types to Kerosine 😄
I meant that they would see no benefit to the change because they don’t have API or API-T. The bug report for incendiary has already been made and shot down to get them working correctly. They would literally have no difference in their behavior. Now… Now… If we change incendiary to behave properly and then fix belt compositions Then yeah. That would help them get out of undertiered territory because it would increase the statistics and make gaijin wanna move it out of these BR brackets.
You could also make .30 cal incendiary light fuel tanks up in 2 shots as well.
Before you ask “How does that even work?” They loaded it so hot that it would sometimes cook off. Like M23.
Depends. Is it a stall shot? Sure. Easy peasy. Is it a fast deflection shot? Well now it depends on where you hit the plane. You act like M2s some 9000rpm guns where if he even dares to pass by you he lights into flames. Every gun in the game is point-harmonized. So unless you’re within your convergence, you really aren’t hitting anything
So is getting hit by a cannon? Either the shot disables you or kills you outright especially now that Gaijin gave more rounds real shatter.
So you get the ability to cause significantly large amounts of damage in a single hit on the aircraft while with .50s you need to strike the fueltank to kill?
So what you’re saying is that everyone has super powerful armaments but it depends on if you prefer to quickly snap someone in half or light someone on fire?
Because America had good flame chances before and you’re acting as if the idea of “Let american .50 calibers be flamethrowers again.” is some foul concept that couldn’t and shouldn’t even be conceived or thought
And if the increase of weapon lethality makes them perform better statistically, then move them up? I mean. That’s kinda the whole “Change it, see what happens.”
1 Like
Mirage F1C keeping up with F-15A in a rate fight is a skill issue on your part to be quite frank.
1 Like
Less a skill issue and more that I was stock and probably entered at the wrong speed range, but still the fact he even kept up at any speed range shows the f1 is not some complete dud
That makes more sense.
I think I’ve gave you the cons of cannon armed planes at this BR like 5 times now.
I think I’ve gave you the cons of cannon armed planes at this BR like 5 times now.
USA props are much lower battle ratings than they were in the time period you keep referencing. Half the USA prop tree is currently undertiered. Yes, it would be an issue.
Gaijin doesn’t work like that.
1 Like
The Mirage F1C is similar in turn performance to the F-4W. It’s actually slightly worse when you account for flaps. It’s nowhere close to F-15A; it has around 4 degrees per second worse sustained turn rate and much worse bleed rates across the board.
1 Like
I never knew that undertiered plane could be justified by low-skilled playerbases
Clarification: I am not directly insulting US Main, they are one of the biggest three nations that have the biggest playerbase. right? The bigger the sample is, the average statistics slowly go down.
I would’ve agreed with you if you told ‘F8F-1 is a plane with a high skill bar’ instead of ‘I cannot understand why people whine about F8F-1, which is an upgraded version of a shitty plane’
Just like how you can frag some F-5 which is played by an awful player, but it doesn’t mean that F-5C is a worse dogfighter than Harriers in WT.
Man, I had enough of these nonsenses, you just keep playing the same tune back in the day when you shilled F-5…
3 Likes
I think I’ve already explained it very well.
Why do topics about one particular vehicle always spark discussion about some complete unrelated different vehicles? 😅
3 Likes
Yeah, i think you did, first you claimed the F1C´s FM wasnt bad because one random " kept up in a two circle with my F-15A the other day".
-Bazingabrain points out that it is survivorship bias.
-You say it isnt because this particular player was keeping up with you.
-FeetPics says its skill issue (it is) (It shouldn’t even be possible even being stock).
-You say it is not skill issue, but maybe its because you played bad.
So it was indeed survivorship bias all along
2 Likes
You’re free to think what you wish.
So I’m going to repeat it again:
You’re choosing guns that do large amounts of damage over a general area on the aircraft having the capacity to snap someone in a single shot.
Or you get guns that you need to hit the pilot or fuel tanks and kill them via fire but you have high volume of fire.
At that point, it starts to become a matter of preference.
You’re acting as if these guns are like swedish 13mm where every single hit is an HE shell that would just nuke the aircraft when in reality you STILL NEED TO HIT THE FUEL TANK!
You literally said.
I’m basically saying “If they’re dominating then they need to go up.” Like what the hell do you want? That’s why I said it depends.
Like for the D-28. If .50s were fixed, it could go back up to 5.0 and it would have performance to support it. But if you have like the D-22 where it’s an ass aircraft where literally Bf-109s and Yaks can be as fast if not faster than it in shallow yo-yos even while in a shallow dive . You’re going to need measure the aircraft out to where it can still perform.
All the other aircraft at lower BRs 3.3 to 1.0 is a black hole because new players are going to suck in them and there won’t be a large enough pool of decent players to offset that. U.S. planes are already hard to play because the game’s whole match setup is completely antithetical to how you play U.S. planes. You can see the same thing with the He-100. When you have a bunch of newbies corral at low altitudes, you barely need to climb in something like the F4U-1A and you can just dominate. Is that to say, this is the way it should be? No. Fix the guns. Reevaluate the performance of the aircraft and move them up as needed.
The rest of the planes the U.S. has that are undertiered is due to the fact that their armament absolutely sucks balls or they’re wonky. So like, how do you fix it? Make their guns even worse and justify FURTHER shoving them down?
I also already agreed with @KillaKiwi on the accuracy of the .50s.
.50s are almost one-to-one historically accurate in terms of mean radius with the gun accuracy mod turned off.
So if you wanna nerf that to that standard. By all means. Do.
We’re all brain damaged and have hangups on the smallest details. Something something word that starts with an ‘A’
You know what, carry on. If you want to continue dying pathetic and avoidable deaths to a mid plane, then who am I to tell you to stop?
Dude, the AV-8C is literally worse in a dogfight than the F-5. I’m not gonna pretend an AV-8C somehow beats any other plane in a dogfight just because it’s good at dodging.
Sir… You’ve done enough… Let us not bias this poor old plane further…
Your claim hasn’t changed much…
“Dying to F-5 while playing in Harrier is a skill issue, because I had no problem with gunning F-5 down”
(While ignoring the FM difference between Harrier and F-5)
“Buffing AV-8B(NA) will be no problem because nobody cares SHAR and Bucc”
And now…
“Keep continuing dying pathetic on mid plane, F8F-1 is an upgraded version of shitty F6F-5, which is in a lot higher BR. It even flies worse than Yak-7B!”
Welp…
Your take since then has a goal.
1- Biasing the USA
I appreciate your logical consistency.
What is your next step, mate…?
Arguing about the “meaning of the word ‘is’ is”…?
3 Likes
Okay AlvisWisla Jr.
1 Like