What exactly makes you powerful by being fast at bombing and “quick to escape”? That’s not more powerful than having 6x20mm and 1000 km/h max speed like an F-89, you know. That doesn’t make you defeat enemies.
The only thing that could cause a BR increase is shifting the problem. They will remain a burden for the team, but now no one will play the Ju 288 (is that supposed to be a victory?), and those who do will continue the same brain-dead speed run towards the base, perhaps with a more resistance…
!Oh, look at that, a Ju 288 zooming away at full speed, how terrifying!
That thing can’t engage in offensive air combat better than a fighter. It’ll shed its wing before it even reaches 620 km/h in a shallow dive, and if it tries to turn, pretending to be a 13-ton Zero, it will drain all its energy and be left gasping for air.
You all just have a deep-seated mental complex; you can’t conceive the idea of any bomber do some shit (if a fighter kills you and zooming away, that certainly doesn’t get your attention)
The current system of respawning bases is not working much better, as it took away the one advantage that bombers had, which was the fact that they could theoretically finish off the airbase and win the match. That system doesn’t really exist anymore, as by the time one manages to fly back to base and rearm (if they don’t get shot down), the base they had just bombed would re-spawn. No thanks, it’s a useless system.
I second that, the number of occasions where you get bots that just spawn in, bomb a base, kill a couple of chasing fighters and then J out is just ridiculous
There would still be B-29s for bombers and there would still most likely be jets and there will definitely be superprops. Idk what the big deal is with making prop bombers not be a sitting duck as they try to climb to normal operational levels at rates 10-20x slower than jets at their same BR.
I’m only a fan of realism when it makes gameplay better (or more fair), and only facing jets in nearly- or full-uptiers is making the gameplay of bombers better.
Bomber hunting is not a late game activity currently, it’s a “two minutes into the game outclimb the bomber you just spotted thirty seconds ago” activity.
This is a joke, right?
That’s the exact opposite of my experience outside of BRs where most planes only have 7.7mm.
No, attacking bombers is extremely easy, they’re currently just XP pinatas.
You barely need any ammo, less than what’s necessary to take out a fighter (since bombers move so slowly).
Very much depends on the bomber, and even then most bombers’ defensive turrets are not larger than 12.7mm.
Pointing your nose at a bomber is much easier than dealing with the terrible bullet spread while also somehow trying to take out a fighter with less guns.
If somehow you run into someone who spent the time or money to have Ace, then also just start firing before them - you still have the firepower advantage.
You can’t outclimb it 2 minutes into the game. You can point your nose up and get hosed down by a rain of 20mm, and then die to enemy fighters if you somehow survive.
Depending on the plane you’re using, and the bomber you are facing, you can do it before the bombers turn back. Something like the Bf-109 K-4 or Ta-152s can get to bomber altitude somewhat quickly, and easily kill bombers.
Personally, the only change I’d make to bombers is making the AI a bit better, and not balancing them based on payload. Moving certain ones down in BR can also be done.
K4 and Ta-152H both will get roflstomped by any G8/Tu-4/B-29 user that has 1 working hand and 2 braincells, unless they climb way over it, which will take AGES.
Ta-152C3 has a chance but not by trying to attack from below.
If he does so, he’s wasting away his main advantage vs fighters - airspawn because P-51H will eventually catch up.
I think for bombers to be viable, Air RB would have to be completely redesigned. I’d love to see this, don’t get me wrong.
No, mate, 4000 meters of altitude at the start of the game is more than enough. And that “I am in favor of realism only when it is beneficial” is the most hypocritical thing I have heard in a long time. If you want realism because it brings good things, accept its bad things too, don’t accept it only when it suits you.
Also, historically, bombers always flew in formation and, if possible, with escort, as they were very vulnerable targets. In War Thunder, if you go alone, what happens is what has to happen: a plane designed to go after you will shoot you down, although if you have hands you can defend yourself well.
b-29’s should still be brought down to 6.0 to avoid cold war jets 9while it is somewhat realistic its still unfair that a b-29 get a max uptier and have to face missiles.
They don’t outclimb the bombers.
In airspawning Fw 190 F8 I only score kills if bomber user refuses to climb. If they do climb and go a bit to the side - they can hose me down just fine.
This is not what you said before. If you want to add realism to benefit gameplay, you are bound to ruin the gameplay of something else. You would have to restructure the entire RB. Just imagine a poor A6M fighting a B-29, it would never shoot it down. It is true that bombers are fragile, but if you introduce “realism” you turn bombers into the most op thing in the game, more than half of the planes that are already in their tier, and even worse, those that would be in their tier if they were put in 6.0 as you want, would not be able to do anything to them.