Free Rp?
i use bombers. While I prefer fighters. I’ve been using the Ki-21 Hei as my secondary bomber.
Tf you mean “free rp” and “i’m mad” !?
What’s more amusing is that mods will likely get involved and mute the person and/or simply delete their messages and whatever other magic they don’t talk about. Then folks can get back on topic and forget about it.
1 Like
Ahead and vt damage should be modded, I have seen multiple reports of vt missiles and large calibre vt shells detonating less than meters from a bomber without taking it down, whereas a direct hit would always do the job. I suspect this has to do with the previous nerf on overpressurization.
1 Like
MG151s on German aircraft still lack realShatter, so they’re doing “nerfed” damage to bombers compared to other cannon aircraft currently as well.
This is untrue. They have been changed to use real shatter since 9 months ago, with the 2.52 (Line of Contact) dev server.
Oh good.
Did verify this as well.
Been a while since I downloaded the datamine from github, & didn’t hear the news.
Matches in 4.7-6.0 now consist of bombers nearby 50%. Often… no, VERY OFTEN match ends up by a standoff between the survived bombers when at the same time all the fighters are on the ground.
That’s not historically correct, and, more importantly, inaccurate in terms of realism.
I do talk about Air Realistic Battles…
Bombers now feeling like an arcade-style intrusion into RB.
I personally use some bombers to fight the fighters. That’s fun, but NOT REALISTIC.
Gaijins, make RB great again!
Aiming to engine does NOTHING with 37mm cannon of Yak-9T. 5-6 air belt shells straight into an engine and… PBJ or B-25 goes further as it doesn’t get any damage.
Sorry, but Air RB needs to be renamed to Air FB.
Funny battles… or even Funky…
Some arguments, please!
Otherwise, some bomber pilot laughs are just deriving-their-small-and-foul-smelling profit.
G6M1->Heavy Escort Fighter. A G4M specifically modified and designed as a fighter to escort bombers. In a heavy-duty role.
1 Like
When Bombers start to hunt fighters from start of the match, you know this patch is broke.
3 Likes
I think the main problem here at large is that IRL war is heavily bomber based while War Thunder is mainly Fighter based.
IRL you use bombers to attack strategic point like factories, ammo depots and civilian infrastructure while fighters shoot down the bombers, and other fighters shoot down the fighters trying to shoot down the bombers.
In War Thunder you have fighters going after fighters to win a round while bombers are there too I guess doing their own thing until they get shot down, if not earlier in the match… until now.
The only way, in my opinion, to balance this is if bombers get a more pronounced role in a match via targets that have a higher influence so more player play bombers and there is a greater incentive to go in groups and cover each other or by making them more survivable (which they should have been the entire time bc ts was NOT realistic nor fun to play).
Now the way they implemented it now is certainly an approach with many flaws but first and foremost its a big change that everyone needs to adapt too. As a bomber main who is playing fighters rn, due to me grinding France, I personally have no problem shooting down bombers bc I know the inns and outs of those things bc I play them a lot. Other player simply don’t have the experience and knowledge on how they work or what you need to do against them.
Simply put its IS a skill issue of the highest degree.
If you want to beat one, simply shoot at the engines or if you are in a head on, shoot the cockpit.
This is NOT hard (if you have skill) which I would know bc I have been doing that since the update dropped, in fact I killed a bomber via head-on-cockpit-kill less than 10 minutes ago of me writing this, in sim I might add.
BUT I do agree that the survivability against certain guns is ridicules. Guns over 30mm should absolutely do massive damage and the fact they don’t is really weird. I myself have been playing the TISMA and dumping half my magazine into a Ju-88 (bless his soul) without ripping him in two is really iffy. and then missiles not absolutely wrecking bombers is also not something that should be.
But lets be real, how often do we use missiles and guns over 30mm against bomber? not that often. BUT when we do it should absolutely rip and tear those thing apart.
So what’s the summary, what’s the conclusion?
Gaijin should definitely increase the damage of guns over 30mm and then (in my opinion) it would be perfect.
And then fighter mains can learn and adapt some skillz
The only known footage of a successful bomber interception by an Me 163 rocket fighter on August 24th 1944
Both are taken from Reddit.
I think this proves the argument, and while 30mm’s should be buffed. The difference isn’t going to impact bombers as much as you want to envision.
oh wow i didnt even know about the first one. thanks for providing that
The second clip does not show 30mm damage. This specific clip shown is extremely well known and is AI enhanced, on top of having sounds added after the fact. Evidence from the clip itself (together with known facts about the BF 110 G-2) show that, even if the specific plane had 30mm cannons equipped, it was not firing them.
2 Likes
Here’s the footage in Black and white: the original footage.
You can very clearly tell it fires its 20mm cannons first, then fires 30mm rounds in a concentrated burst.
This one lasts about a minute fifty-four seconds but gives you a better idea what is a 20mm and what a 30 mm is.
“AI Enhanced” does not matter. That is purely graphical.
Also, yes, this is the same video, but it clearly gives you more of a better picture. So argue away. Also.
20mm’s are in the gunpod.
This is not true, you’re just stating something but the evidence proves otherwise, as proven by the Bf 110 G-2 itself.
For starters not every Bf 110 G-2 has 30mm cannons, the MK 108s are actually part of the /R3 modification, default Bf 110 G-2s have 4 MG 17s instead.
Second, the gun camera of the Bf 110 G-2 sits physically below the MK 108s or MG 17s, which you can even see in the photographs you posted. At no point in the video do we see tracers coming from above, as would be the case if the MK 108s were firing, every single tracer round comes from below the gun camera’s view.
Third, simply compare the flash of the explosions with the video you posted of the Me 163.
So it being AI enhanced does in fact matter. It makes the entire clip blurrier and harder to discern, when the original clip is much clearer on tracer position and can therefore disprove the idea of MK 108s being fired.
3 Likes
I am going to cut my losses, knowing that if I continue trying to argue, you will find every “But” you can think of.
My thoughts exactly when this exact discussion about this exact clip has happened about 8 times in the past month.
There’s no “but” here. This is just you trying to save face. I’ve pointed out clearly and neatly why the footage does not show MK 108 fire while your only argument was literally just “nuh uh the clip shows MK 108s”, but you just can’t accept it.
Even if we assume that the Bf 110 G-2 in this clip has MK 108s (again, by default they don’t), we don’t see a single tracer round coming from where the MK 108s are located in relation to the gun camera.
Edit: even the idea that 20mm are only in the gun pod is straight up incorrect. By default those two holes on the floor of the fuselage are also MG 151s, with 350 and 400 rounds each. These guns are only removed when mounting the 37mm gun pod, which you can also prove through examination of the video that it hasn’t been done.
2 Likes
Oh yeah by the way.
This image shows MG 151s instead of MK 108s on the top portion of the nose.
So I guess thank you for showing that not all Bf 110 G-2s have MK 108s. I would’ve posted the actual documentation but that isn’t necessary thanks to you.
1 Like