The Ki83 is a terrible aircraft, it needs to get buffed or moved down to 5.7

necro? this thread has been made less than a week ago. The reason nobody is commenting is because they like to shitpost a high aura rating meme calling me bad and leaving, even if their updated ki83 timer shows only 10 games in 6 months and more than half of these games with a loss and a death.

Ki83’s guns suck, i see ki87’s guns would also suck but now that you say this, i never flew it.
As per performance and handling, the ki83 flies exactly like a heavy bomber would fly like if you removed wing snapping at 5g’s.

2 Likes

Yeah I agree with you on lots of other posts you’ve made aswell, honestly some ppl are running on outdated opinions lol

Could be a difference in the amount of time on target each plane allows you to have, and the quality of your aim with them.

1 Like

boeing just runs on bad takes though

1 Like

You’d be surprised how many kills you score with twin Breda MGs.

2 Likes

you’re wrong in everything lmao, tell me how on earth 550 TAS at 4km of altitude is faster than the LF Mk9

1 Like

the fact the echo chamber of the community disagrees with me doesn’t mean they’re bad takes.

1 Like

yeah cannons i noticed are as good as usual but some matches the server or netcode decides to not make them do any damage whereas Breda Safats and Ho-103s are amazing with their HE filler rounds.

Well, it’s funnier actually. Shells do damage, just a lot less. Look up this and next few posts, including the video, there is damage, there’s hit detection, Gaijin just decides the damage is 1/3 to 1/5th of what it should be in some cases and it affects everything you fire for quite some time.
IMO in some matches the game is rigged for 1 side to have a much greater chance to win:

you’re right, it’s the whole just being a bad take anyway that makes it a bad take

You’re so unbearable it’s annoying. I went ahead and tested them out myself.

Ki-83:
581 IAS/ 586 TAS @ 150m
552 IAS/ 642 TAS @ 3025m
507 IAS/ 691 TAS @ 6025m
Lf MkIX:
564 IAS/ 568 TAS @ 155m
518 IAS/ 602 TAS @ 3030m
478 IAS/ 653 TAS @ 6040m
Conditions:
Test flight was used
Ki-83 set to min fuel, Spitfire set to 20mins
AEC was used.
Airspawns were used (for example, to test out SL top speed, I spawned at 3km then dove.)

Before this, I used MOBB’s top speed charts, then after that, the top speed docs. Did you even test out whatever you’re saying at all?

3 Likes

this is chill asf though

Statshark isn’t too accurate for props, but it can give a quick prediction as to what’s really happening.
image
Statshark also promises higher maintained speeds during climbs for the Ki-83
image

statshark and real scenarios aren’t compatible.

yes, i tested it out, and yes, your test shows that the ki83 is one of the slowest rank4 fighters. The Spitfire might be slower, but it is much more versatile (and in fact one of the best rank 4 fighters in the game)
THe Ki83 is a brick with little engine survivality and a huge fragile target, which gives it a very bad diving acceleration and compression. The Ki83 also has very bad guns, known for their late fuse action.

thats normal

1 Like

How is it normal that a heavy fighter with self sealing fuel tanks has more fragility than a rank 1 biplane?

Which one though? the Merlins are a little slow, but the Griffons will give most planes a run for their money, for a minor cost of turn and climb rates.

The explosions are due to the lack of neutral gas pressurization, with out it a partially empty tank is just a fuel air explosive waiting for a spark to set it off.
I do think most airframes in game are far to fragile though.

1 Like

im just saying its normal for 50cals to hit way harder than they should

1 Like

ah ok lmao sorry