The Ki-43, Ki-44 Ki-61 aircraft need to be investigated. Imo they way over preform at just about every altitude, especially at altitudes above 5000m

Something about these aircraft just do not seem right. They are much too agile and wayyyyyy too fast above 5000m and keep energy and accelerate beyond belief below 4000m comparable to late Yak series.

If these aircraft are truly not over preforming, then I think they all need to be reconsidered for a BR change. Especially the Ki-44-I, Ki-44-II Hei and the Ki-61-I Ko/Otsu these aircraft in particular just don’t sit right with me, and are much more powerful and agile than what they should be.

These aircraft, if played by a user who knows how to exploit them, are just able unbeatable, especially with how accurate and powerful the Ho-103’s are. They climb just as well if not better than Bf-109s and P-47s along with being much more nimble at the same altitudes.

  • Ki-43’s are broken.
  • Ki-44’s are broken.
  • Ki-61’s are broken.
  • All of the above.
  • None of these.
0 voters

What game mode are we talking about?

I do not ask this in an accusatory way, but simply because of your past posts - I have to ask.

My experience using Ki-43 otsu with realistic flight models has been “P-51C can run circles around them if they got the altitude advantage and don’t waste it/over-commit and you cannot even really disengage as they’ll just catch you.”

Hmmm, I post here a rather unexpected theory.
Ki-44 ii is broken as Hei type’s weight is incorrect by 160kg and 180kg for otsu.
The weight in game is 2099kg, it’s literally the empty weight of this vehicle. Even slightly lighter than the available historical data.
Let alone add weapons, guns, mags, and ammo. It weights 160kg for 4 Ho-103, 180kg for Otsu. You would be surprised by how lightweight those gyro rocket launchers are. The slight weight difference for the spec sheet really tells the weight listed are of mass without the weapons. We don’t have Ko variant in game for whatever the reason, I really want it though.
Just set max fuel or something like that and you get a similar weight condition, 188kg more than 30%(min) fuel. Testing in-game didn’t show a decrease in performance in any meaningful ways though, since it’s pretty light weight anyway. Kinsei 62 is one bright gem of an engine, the weight-power is that of Homare except it’s not that powerful. The water methanol injection really allows it to go crazy.
Deadass. It’s fucking crazy that it has gotten 3/4 ma-102 in the belts, it’s chewing aircraft like a gum.
I’m quoting this in repeat fr but separate ma-102 early and ma-102 late, give ma-102 only to ma-102 late obviously. Problem solved? no. Just make it so that the same vehicle can change weapons like on ki-43-i ko hei. Ki-43-i literally swaps two 7.7mm for Ho-103 with ma-102, that’s like 1941 standard to 1944. The power output is increased dramatically, at same BR. Like WTF…? Yeah. Nobody cares, the BR of 2.7 stands for the fully kitted ki-43-i in Hei custom. Nobody except new players would try using ki-43-i ko for the same BR as Ki-43-i hei? Solution? Just change the BR of the same vehicle depending on the customization. Players won’t be able to swap guns while participating in the match anyway.
By that logic, ki-43-i ko to ki-43-i otsu, to ki-43-i hei, to ki-43-i hei late. Doesn’t it sound interesting.
Ki-43-ko at 2.3, ki-43 otsu at 2.3 for having weapons of different velocity, no access to ma-102. Ki-43 hei at 2.7, ki-43 hei late at 3.0. What about it.
Also, lower the ma-102 contents of the belt, on god. Real life composition is 1 一式徹甲曳光弾, 1 マ-102 1 マ-103. It’s AP-T/IAI/HEI in repeat. The current ma-102 is represented as HEI, whatever. Ma-103 has mechanical fuse and it is of Japanese origin, indigenous fuse. Post-1944 belt should use イ式 (Italian style) HE instead. And a higher composition of AP at that.
Also, fire rate for Ho-203 and Ho-5 is wrong. The fire rate is 750rpm, 950rpm is from an American report, it’s accurate. It’s cringe. Ho-203 fire 2 rounds per second. The report is probably mistaking Ho-204 for Ho-203, they operate under a completely different principle. It’s a good thing Ki-45’s type 94 tank cannon is getting replaced with Type 98 in the next coming update. But my guess is that they simply swapped Type 94 with Type 98 in the ongoing war. I wish they simply add an option to swap type 94 with type 98 as an armament upgrade, it would be more logical. I don’t know, but a lot of medium state that Ki-45 is equipped with a type 94 anti-tank gun. The report saying one example is found to be equipped with type 98 is trust worthy, so it must be true.
So I’d say, some aspects about the Japanese guns in general is inconsistent with historical figures.
Ma-102 is post 1944 armament, very powerful. Should be separated as Ho-103 early and Ho-103 late for fixed installation. Turret variant called Ho-104 should be treated as having ma-102 anyway, for it being hard to change BR depending on it. Actually, I think ho-104 should be separated as Ho-104 early and Ho-104 late myself. The BR of the same vehicle should be variable depending on the armament swap. Same thing for the early war American prop, why not give them chance to have mid-war belts for increase in the BR. Pure incendiary should be more powerful for igniting fuel leaks, which isn’t implemented in this game at all.
Ki-44-ii hei is 160kg lighter than what it should be. It’s better get fixed.
Ki-43-i is pretty capable, not only nimble but the listed top speed is for low alt. Planes go faster for the same horsepower when flying through the thin air, if not for the inefficient propellers. Ki-43-iii at 3.0 BR isn’t even slow at all. It goes 570kph because TAIC somehow managed to get the estimated values from the gathered resources surrounding the aircraft type. Actual top speed at 6000m is 550kph. Not 576kph. Also, Ki-43-ii in this game is 534kph at max, the catalog is listing the speed slightly higher than what it is. The 534kph speed is accurate, though the record is 536kph, I don’t care.
Ki-43-ii in the US tree is Ki-43-ii late, the exhaust valves are stacked and vectored backward. It gives a slight rocket boost. The FM is the same for both Ki-43-iis, US one should be ever so slightly faster. You might think fiddling with those numbers won’t change a thing of one or two. But no, it absolutely matters. Ki-43-iii is 50kph faster at all altitude compared to ki-43-ii, even at the lower end of the altitude.
It absolutely outperforms hurricanes and such. As they should.
What’s wrong. Performance of the vehicles? Only relative to the BR right? Just change the BR then, Gaijin won’t do that though. Referring statistics is so terrible. I don’t care if Yak-1b is at 2.0 or 2.3, I don’t care, just, even if it means they get scolded for how they treat soviet vehicles, they should use their knowledge to change the BR or even use a vote system in the forum, only open to the people with 100 level account. So that their opinion (and the nationality) would be reflected in the BR.
Does it make a good BR rate system? No. Is it better than the current system? Maybe.
Ho-103 used to be the worst 50 cals, now they perform reaaaaaallly good.
My take
Ki-27 with the current 800hp engine 2.3
Ki-43-i ko 2.3 ki-43-i otsu 2.3 ki-43-i hei 2.7 ki-43-i hei late 3.0
// You can just get infront of people intentionally and let them follow you, doesn’t even have to follow people in a straight line.

Ki-43-ii 2.7 ki-43-ii late 3.0
// Not really a simple upgrade, the engine upgrade compensates the increase in its weight (200kg). It’s got shorter wings(also the lift per wing area is 9% higher on ki-43-i for whatever the reason). The climb rate is almost identical(22mps at ground, quickly lowered to 18mps as you climb) but the low speed climb is better on ki-43-i(efficiently climbs at 230 IAS, even at 220 IAS. ki-43-ii won’t do well below 240 IAS). Ki-43-ii excels at higher altitude but the speed increase at low altitude is marginal. The mag size doesn’t matter. The overall heavy construction allows it to dive faster. The upgrades cancel each other to make this aircraft equivalent in terms of raw combat efficiency.

Ki-43-iii ko 3.7 maybe move it to 4.0 with ma-102.
// A6M2 is at 3.7, yeah A6M2 has the terrible roll rate, it’s overtiered. Not a suited vehicle to compare to, ki-43-iii ko is definitely worth 3.7 imo. It’s one of the plane I abuse real hard in air RB, I know the plane. You know? Ki-43-iii ko is a 1944 plane, so Ho-103 late as default. Think of A6M5 ko doing absolutely fine at 5.3, yeah they have mark 2 cannons, but as long as the current belt for ho-103 goes.
It’s just sooooooooooooo fast especially when radiators are set below 20%.

Ki-43-iii otsu 4.3
// fucking hell, it goes 650kph without a problem, I can just pull hard at that speed. Same speed as Ki-43-iii ko, comes with 20mm.

Ki-44-i 2.7 / Not that bad, not bad at all. It’s just not problematic, 2.7.

Ki-44-ii otsu 3.7 not worth taking it to 4.0 with late belts.
// I don’t care about the funny gimmic cannons, you can consistently hit the targets as long as you dive against large bombers from above. But it’s situational. I don’t know, just give it Ho-103 late as default and ignore the weapon swap.

Ki-44-ii hei 3.7 ki-44-ii hei late 4.7
// Yeah you heard me right, 4.7 for ma-102. As long as the belt contains 3 ma-102 in 4 rounds cycle, it’s 4.7 material. I swear to my own beliefs. Boom and zoom fighter-interceptor with 4 guns. The instantaneous firepower matters more than Ki-61 otsu, Ki-61 otsu can just stick to enemy’s ass like A6Ms.

Ki-61-ko 3.3 to 3.7 with late belt
// Kinda dubious but 2210kg empty weight from historical documents, 2377kg in-game with armaments included. It’s the highest performing Ki-61 even including ki-61-ii. As long as you forget about the firepower, it has better aerodynamics and power-to-weight ratio than any other ki-61 variants.

Ki-61-otsu 3.7 to 4.0 with late belt
// It’s just fine at current 3.7, 2530kg in-game mass without fuel. Even without ma-102, it does keep up with the evading enemy. Ki-61 can track people down and keep them inside the line of the fire for a prolonged period of time.

Ki-61-hei 4.7
// I never had an issue playing this vehicle, I don’t know. Mauser cannons nowadays aren’t worth it imo, but this just does fine for me. It has nearly the identical weight as Otsu anyway. Some sources say there are examples of hei modified from the previous models. Most Ki-61-hei is probably made anew in factories, since their wings are reinforced for those built in factories.

Ki-61-tei 3.7
// It’s a terrible piece of shit. They ran out of Mauser stock, so they switched to nose mounted Ho-5. The nose is extended, the engine movement fucked up the CoG alongside the fragmentation-proofing panel for the 20mm accidentally exploding in the barrels. It’s just bad. Even with the air-spawn, it’s so terrible. 2827kg for the same 1150hp. Seriously. 500kg heavier than Otsu/Hei and worse aerodynamics just for two 20mms.

Ki-61-ii 4.3
// Definitely not 4.7, not bad either. 3162kg. The engine revs up to 1600hp for instantaneous boost. You can lower prop pitch to 85% settings at low alt and it won’t have a penalty. No speed increase unless you close radiators to atleast 30%. 20% radiators with 90% prop pitch is recommended.

Ki-100 4.3 or 4.7
// It just does fine at higher BR. Literally better than Ki-61-ii. If you want to dive, you use Ki-61-i instead of ki-61-ii for the identical frame anyway. Horsepower doesn’t lower the deceleration rate for diving faster than the top speed, they do but not significant enough to pose any meanings. With insta-kill 20mm, Ho-103 doesn’t matter.

Ki-84 ko 5.3
// 1800hp in real life anyway. Not because the prototype had Homare 11, but because Homare 21 is derated to the same power settings as Homare 11. They are designed for high quality 100 Octane fuel with Imported Lubrication oil. Not sustainable in the wartime.

Ki-84 otsu 5.7

Ki-84 hei 6.0
// 30mm isn’t pushing it to 6.3 imo.

A6M2 mod 11 3.3
//The lift efficiency per area is 9% lower than all other zeroes for no reason. Possibly related with the wing tip twist(which is present for mod 11 in real life). But A6M2 mod 11 surely had the same wings.

A6M2 3.3
//The garbage roll rate makes it right at 3.3 imo. Think of this thing like a really fast biplane. Dying to this thing in 150kph faster plane is definitely the player’s fault.

A6M3 3.7
//Doesn’t hold the energy very well. Very stable otherwise. Shitty high alt performance even though the 2 speed supercharger. A really good turn fighter, still very slow. 1990kg.

A6M3 mod 22 3.7
// Uses the same flight model for both ko and OG. Ko variant should be atleast 46kg heavier for the guns alone. Type 99 mark 1 is 23kg, magazine weights around 18kg for 60 rounds drum if I remember correctly. Type 99 mark 2 is an entirely different system, it weighs 47kg. The servo tabs in this game are not doing great, maybe worse than in real life. Slightly changed values for aileron effectiveness. Worst zero in my opinion.

A6M3 mod 22 ko 4.3
// Type 99 mark 2 is just so much more practical in the combat, worth the BR increase. Dunno which one the mass is based on.

A6M5 4.7
// It’s overrated. We have f8f at 4.7, and a lot of other fast fighters. As long as we use statistics for adjusting planes, we should care about bad spammers. So if this thing stays 5.0 for opponent’s repeated mistakes, then this thing should stay at higher BR for that.

A6M5 ko 5.0
// Higher VNE for thicker outer skin, though the control force required or/and the pilot’s pulling strength are obviously overperforming at higher speed. Maybe underperforming at lowest possible speed due to the lack of propwash-tail interaction in this game, A6Ms in general.

A6M5 otsu 5.3
//It’s at the same BR as A7M2. Maybe it’s not as sluggish as A7M2.

A7M2 5.7
// it’s one of the fastest Japanese prop at the deck. Sure, it won’t get much faster for gaining altitude. But the deck speed is just tremendous. Maybe slightly sufferable at 5.7, as long as not bleeding energy like crazy. Climb rate past 2000m is simply mediocre but too many other advantages over opponents.

N1K1-Ja 5.3
//Lighter than real life, lighter than N1K2. Crazy climb rate. Slightly slower than N1K2 but real life example had 200 less horsepower for the same reason as Ki-84.

N1K2-J 5.7
//Actually on-point mass at 3125kg in game, 2650 + 200 + 225 = 3075. I don’t know about the plates and extinguishers. Wrong loadouts, it doesn’t have bomb-rated hardpoints.

N1K2-Ja 5.7
//Using the same Flightmodel as N1K-2J. Irl strengthened wing spars for putting 250kg bombs, meant for multi-role. Reduced rudder size for better effectiveness at all speed, especially at higher speed. Should be slightly heavier than the preceder, this one is the only N1K2 that should come with the ability to equip heavy bombs in War thunder.

J2M2 5.3
//Not using TAIC estimation is understandable, 650kph for J2M2, not really sounding for validity.
Best horsepower to weight ratio, less efficient props make up for the altitude performance(it’s bad). Otherwise suited for current climb meta.

J2M3 5.7
//TAIC suggested 670kph, not realistic at all though. Different stick stiffness values for control authority from J2M2. Ko variant(J2M3a) had 4 mark 2 cannons, no mark 1 cannons mixed. Type 2 30mm had the 42 round magazine. J2M5 in this game is taking the magazine size from J2M3 (Type2).

J2m5 5.7
// Not actual upgrade from J2M3 in terms of performances outside the cockpit.

J1N1 3.0
//Not 2.0 at all, very maneuverable. Literally designed to be as maneuverable as A6M2 from the development. The remote turrets and the counter rotating shaft engine, sakae 22 is specific to the first prototype. This is the first prototype of J1N1, mass production model saw the day as a night fighter with upward firing 20mm guns. Test showed that it could fight against fighters with its tilted guns. The version is not in the game. The tilted gun variant is supposedly equipped with Revi25B meant for the remove turrets, to aim the tilted guns. Not sure of the sources.

Ki-45 3.0 for ko. 2.3 for tei. 2.7 for otsu.
// Irl it had nacelle stall issues. In this game, this thing only pulls at the max 13AoA. Meaning it’s not using the wing’s potential fully. It’s not maneuverable just because its AoA is very limited. If they fix the 37mm’s fire rate to be historically accurate, then the current BR is fine. Except Ki-45 ko, it’s capable just because of the Ho-103. Maybe 0.3 BR rise for switching to ho-103 late just like on ki-43.

Ki-96 easily 4.0
//Nothing to talk about. Only 500kg heavier from Ki-45 and the 850 horsepower increase. The sleek design allows it go real fast, it climbs really good. It’s competitive against single engine figters.

Ki-108 3.7
Turn really good for having larger wings than successor, wing loading is really low. The high speed controllability for this specific aircraft is set to be very light for whatever the reason.

Ki-102 otsu 3.3
Not splendid, it’s bad imo. Turns decently for 3.3. Turret’s freedom of motion is too tight to be practical.
57mm is a total joke, not used for ground pound as it doesn’t have AP. Bombers can be dealt with 37mm more consistently. The HE doesn’t even have tracers so the learning curve is hella high.

Ki-67 ko 4.3 ki-67 otsu 4.7
Fast and nimble. The defensive guns are top-notch. Bombload is minimum. Playing as a gunship is the way to go. As Annoying as B-34 from the enemy’s perspective.

D4Y1 2.3 minimum
//Basically BF109E with 2 7.7 and a very weak turret. Even with the unnecessary fuel, it’s very light, historically accurate though.

D4Y2 2.7
//dunno why they don’t add ko variant with13.2mm on the tail gunner. It’s less maneuverable with the added 300kg. Only 20~30kph faster than D4Y1 until you hit like 5000m. Engine can’t run at lower porp pitch or otherwise the power is decreased real hard. Radiators are slightly more efficient if I guess. Climb rate is literally comparable to D4Y1. 200kg of unnecessary extra fuel hindering the performance, same thing goes for D4Y1.

D4Y3 3.3
//Lighter than D4Y1, suffers from having just 2 7.7mm. For ground, it has 3 250kg bombs. It can bomb bases in air RB safely. And it has a better turret. The engine does 1500 but limited to very low alt, above 2000m you get like 1340hp If I remember it correctly.

B7A2 4.3 B7A2 Homare 23 4.7
//They can absolutely fuck off. Not fun to deal with it. Removing air spawn seems logical. Otherwise we should give Corsairs and F6F, P-47 an airspawn. They are less-dedicated fighters, B7A2 is definitely multi-role. It’s not a pure bomber.

J7W1 5.7
// It does not do well against props, fighting against jets and props at the same time would be more sufferable. Actually, I had more success in fighting against jets. It sucks getting chased by spitfires and P-51Hs, they are faster. Cannons are nice though, it’s the only redeeming factor. The split flaps are not functioning at all too, the canards are supposed to have multi-slotted fowler flaps to balance out the main wing flap’s nose-down. The canards have slats, yes they stall late, I think it’s 25deg or even 30, I forgor. But the game only gives you 1.3CL at max, I remember. It should give at least 1.7 by the game’s standard. It’s not even inside the propwash. It should get around 1.8 to 1.9 since leading slats + 2 stage fowler flaps. They simply could increase the lift when the flaps are deployed, we can simply deflect the canard down to Keep the AoA neutral. They simply won’t increase the lift in this game as of now, that’s how they solved the nose pitching down, that’s how this game treats the flaps currently. Sad thing that is. P-51D loses around 7~11% of wing lifts from the tail downforce btw. Rudders and the yaw stability is adjusted in an arcad-y way.

Ki-83 6.0 or 6.3
//Best Japanese twin hands down. No complaint in BR.

Ki-43 is better than A6M in my opinion, the flight performance itself used to be always better. The armaments held it back, now they perform really well. Type 99 mark 1 only weighs 23kg, around 40kg with a relatively small mag. Ki-43 should be at higher BR with Ho-103 late. The weapon should be switchable, and the BR should be depending on the modifications applied by the players by their choice.

3 Likes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

I mean specifically for the 44 hei, looking at its data sheet(assuming it’s still accurate) it weighs 2106 kgs empty, and 2746 with full fuel and ammo(no bombs,) with about 389 kgs of that being fuel. So it gains 640 kgs from fuel and ammo.

I’m voting none of those because I’m using some of them in GRB and having a good time.

6.3 is too high, it isn’t an equivalent to the P-51H or G.56. It just doesn’t have enough extra stuff outside of it’s climbrate to warrant a higher BR.

I don’t have any other complaints about your suggestions.

Yeah, not 6.3 I agree.

Ki-44-ii comes with a Water methanol tank. In-game it weighs 110kg.

Want to see something broken? You can casually climb to 12km in Ki-27 and still retain decent speed, while the engine should be way past the ability to propel the aircraft.