😂👍
Idk what these gaijin guys are doing - either one of them is a hidden fan of this bomber or they just want to show that there is no Russian bias (“Look at Italy”) and they don’t care about props in general and bombers in particular 😂
I mean the new WM-23 for Italy is a perfect example - the flight model regarding stall control is way too much - as soon as you meet a decent pilot you have to work way too hard to kill them 😉
Yes and no. From my pov the recent exchanges just show that a lot of players have not realized that comparisons between irl and wt makes no sense.
Even in its most realistic settings (SB which is a niche product for a few enthusiasts) gaijin just offers their own version of realism which might be suited to satisfy their goals.
So discussion like seen here simply forget that AB and RB modes are optimized to satisfy the masses of (minors/kids) players which want to play a vehicle based shooter. You can’t convince little Timmy to spend $20-100 (until he might uninstall) if you don’t reduce the skill threshold to get kills and keep him attached.
These damage discussion neglects also the totally unrealistic accuracy, 3rd person view and way too great combat distances (offensive ~1.7-1.8 km, defensive ~ 2.5 km). Bombers face way to accurate enemy fire with way too large damage output whilst gaijin has nerfed the defensive capabilities with artificial bullet spread and often artificially nerfed belts.
Have a good one!
yeah this thing is borderline unbeatable in decent hands
i do wonder where its flight performance comes from - i mean its a one off prototype without much documentation…
Lore accurate P-47 right here
Lore accurate IL-2:
Even though I find the number for the P-39 odd. I think they shot th P-39 with 20mm Mineshells but two hits still seems rather low.
But the kill criteria is unknown and 20mm fragmenation can easily damage oil or water tanks, leading to the planes destruction after a few minutes.
In that regard the IL-2 is much more survivable, since shell fragments can’t damage vital systems unless it’s a direct hit.
APHE cough cough, sorry, what?
we cant forget Ye olde Pub
sadly I can only find drawings :(
Oh that looks totally normal. With planes designated as follows: Bomber, literally any object that gets a little too close to the plane just breaks it apart. Its realistic /s
Because the big bombs on pe-8 and lancaster and such were a bit too strong (especially on some of the classic claustrophoby simulator maps with one lane, 3 caps less than 100 m apart, hell yeah european province) in classic gaijin fashion they went the full circle. Any shell no matter if its he, hvap, aphe just has to break the giant, slow and unmaneuverable bomber in two. Not that flying around in air rb with a plane thats about 200 kph slower than anything it can see is fun in itself, youre also contributing nothing to the outcome of the match.
But that clearly wasnt enough. The bomb radius also had to be brought down to ridicolous amounts where now 3000 kg bombs that somehow never land where the bombsight points at in the tu-14 literally have to direct impact a tank to get one kill.
So you can clearly see how they needed to double down, again, to make a vehicle class literally unplayable and unfun.
Meanwhile YAK-9t with 30 rounds of ap-t and yak 9U with 29 rounds of 47 mm aphe on laser accurate aphe on a fighter that can easily oneshot 7.0 heavies like the T29
Im surely no fan of everything just exploding when a 100 kg bomb drops somewhere in a 20 m radius around it. But there needs to be at least some balance of the capability of these cas tools so you dont miss 90% of 3000 kg bombs (and waste all the sp for nothing) and if these are really too strong just take them out of ground rb.
also add artificial gun spread because I suppose a groups of idiots couldn’t think another way to kill a bomber that isn’t standing directly behind it for +5 seconds
The PB4Y-2… I’m currently flying it for the sake of spading the tree… its too slow to reach a target, too heavy to climb and is made of of premium grade petroleum soaked explodium…
It’s completely unusable… as soon as someone fires a BB gun in your general vicinity you spontaneously disassemble.
All aircraft need a realistic toughness buff. With the current sheer state of the game literally 2x Shvak rounds (arguably the weakest cannon in reality during WW2) will chop “tough” aircraft’s tails clean off. If that sounds like bull I have videos showing me doing literally just that.
Damage needs turning down a notch across the board.
Both are likely “AI”.
No one says “hi hi hi” while sounding like they are having a stroke.
This is a better example of B-17s all making it home despite the extremely severe and near-impossible chance of such.
No - #1 is a quality channel.
#2 is ai (you see the small symbol below the title) but without major mistakes - at least based on my own knowledge of the aerial warfare in ww2.
If you add RAF BC losses (at least 8,300) to USAAF heavy bomber losses (similar number) in the ETO it should be clear that flying a bomber was no walk in the park - and all this propaganda BS tries to distract from the fact that old men sent young men to die.
Same with the P-51 myth “The fighter that won the war” - absolute nonsense, their 5,000 A2A kills were “bought” with 2,500 plane losses - and P-47s (3k kills) & P-38s (1,8k kills) got barely a 1:1 kill/loss rate in the ETO. For comparison: The Germans lost more than 3,000 109s just in take-off accidents…
As earlier written - irl (incl survivor-ship bias) and wt are not connected.
Hmmmm, I see.
Hell yea! Their finally Getting some attention!!
For me they acted as usual - way too much and ruining the remaining credibility of Air RB as a more serious mode than Air AB.
As soon as you realize that gaijin mainly modified the resistance vs HE shells you might agree that they try to sell increasing the damage HP vs HE as scientifically based research for this “upgrade”.
I mean i am happy for real enthusiasts that they can now reach a base (in case they got not dragged in a prolonged turret fight with another bomber) but i see mainly fighter players in bombers trying to rack up more or less free kills about this excessive HE damage resistance.
If you have witnessed a Bv 238 casually flying low and slow killing your entire af aaa like in a drive-by shooting whilst his plane was just slightly yellow after 2 passes no sane player can assess this as even remotely realistic.
The more i think about it, the more i think that gaijin used the announced upgrade as cheapest solution for a problem they created by themselves and used the opportunity to spice up prop Air RB whilst further making RB more like a single spawn arcade shooter.
If i would wear a tin foil hat i would even claim that they used the 6 months of a totally broken damage model of the almost “unkillable” Cant Z 1007 to collect data in order to predict player reactions - and, ofc, potential premium sales.
A short reminder:
The only thing they changed is that bombers after the update crash without wings and tails fall off just in case of crashes…
I vote a yes, but I believe that frontline bombers and other attack aircraft affected by the bomber damage model deserve to be slightly nerfed and have new damage models. All though I do not have that much experience on the world of damage models. The thing im mostly worried about is that Gaijin will give the bombers their previous damage models which could lend them useless again, as I believe this is a critical problem for gaijin to fix, and they won’t invest in time to make new damage models.
I doubt it. That will make the backlash even worse.
Totally agree. When I see how B-25 eats dozens of 37mm “air target” shells that were shot directly into its engines/wings, I think Gaijins smoked a little weed…
