Hey, long time no see. I was just playing on the same server as you a moment ago. And I noticed something. You’re the type of person who starts complaining before ever studying or practicing. You were flying low without securing altitude, like some adolescent boy humping the floor. And you kept only targeting the rear of enemy planes and losing.
What’s worse, you decided the top ace player on your team was a cheater and made a big fuss about it in chat. He was just better than you, which is why he got ten times as many kills as you.
To be frank, you’re a miserable egoist whose only talent is overestimating yourself.👎 While you’re busy complaining, other people are practicing or learning the strengths and weaknesses of each fighter.
5 Likes
Don’t change the subject, amateur.
And then there’s this plane called the FR 1—I mean, what were they thinking when they added these things? I’m expecting an F-86 Sabre next, just like that monstrosity called the Yak-3.
They’re making a mockery of the players.
Also, amateur, I’ll give you some information next time we meet in the game; you can do a quick review based on that, Pollyanna.
1 Like
Maybe its because they’re too strong.
Let me quote myself. “Based on performance, unfortunately. Also, those 3 vehicles are, relatively speaking, on par with one another; the year doesn’t matter.”
Relatively and on par do not mean equal. It means it performs similarly enough that they share common ground.
Already reported, not worth arguing honestly.
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
You know, when you decide to start insulting us, cause we do not agree with what you have to say, we remain silent. Cause at this point, we have said our piece.
You do not speak for us Japan mains, and you certainly do not speak for Italians, Romanians, Hungarians, nor Finnish of the Continuation War mains either.
I wouldn’t say on every platform, the WWII heavies are hard to best but yes facing french autoloaders in an uptier isn’t usually that fun unless you’re pretty good at the game. I do agree with buffing bombers, they were not only inaccurate but just straight up horrible to play before but some of them went WAY overboard, or gave those models to planes like the TIS MA that DID NOT need them. And yes I also hate the people who complain about every single change, even the ones they themselves requested.
Speaking of the Romanians, the IAR-81C entered service in early 1943.
It has 2x MG 151 cannons and 2x machine guns.
It uses the DB 605A engine—the same one found in the Bf 109 G-2 (which has a BR of 4.2).
So, what is its BR? 3.00!!!
This is an absolute disgrace, a total outrage.
Those who play the German tree are forced to put up with this because they are complete jackasses.
For some reason, the German tree doesn’t even have the standard models of these planes—the very country that produced the aircraft lacks the standard version. They used to have the standard G-2 in the Romanian lineup, but they removed it; apparently, we’re forced to go play the Italian tree instead.
Do whatever you want; we aren’t going to play it.
This vehicle issue isn’t limited to the German tree; it affects the Soviet tree as well. Take the IS-7, for instance—its development was fully completed around 1948, yet it gets pitted against the Leopard 1. It’s just like how they pit the Tiger II against those autoloading monstrosities. I honestly don’t know which situation is worse anymore.
I don’t know if it’s up to me, but historical accuracy really ought to be respected in simulation battles.
I am sick and tired of fighting against planes produced in 1944—which are superior in every conceivable way—while flying an aircraft that was built in May 1941.
1 Like
Have you actually used the IAR or have any evidence that it is some op super weapon? Or are you just looking at the engine? Battle pass planes in IT are not exactly known to be that good (cough Re.2005 VDM).
Claiming that the IS-7 is weak and Soviets need buffs is wild. Something something irl production dates have nothing to do with br.
Breaking news, heavy tank in a full uptier is weak, definitely not the case for every heavy tank ever. Now try playing one of these “monstrosities” when it gets uptiered against faster, stabilized Leopards that just lol pen it everywhere. I bet you would enjoy having your ammo literally center mass from every angle.
Not to mention the Tiger II is one of the 6.7s with the best chance against a Somua
3 Likes
Frankly, having twin MG151 cannons and 350 rounds of ammunition is an advantage in itself; the vehicles from the nations it faces against rarely carry more than 120 rounds.
I maintain my position: the IS-7 is a vehicle designed around a different concept—much like the Tiger II. If you take these vehicles and pit them against those designed for Cold War-era combat, you stand no chance against anyone playing with even a modicum of care. Besides, the IS-7 often ends up being ineffective anyway.
You seem to find it perfectly normal that those French monstrosities are being thrown into battles against the Tiger II. After all, who wouldn’t want to face a lumbering, sluggish enemy?
For players lacking skill, what could possibly be better than that?
1 Like
Every heavy tank struggles in uptiers. That is how it is. B1 bis vs pz4 F2, KV1 ZiS vs panther D
They are also very strong in downtiers. Try playing your poor IS-7 when it is against an M47
As someone who has the IAR-81C. I can tell you it’s dog crap. Yes, it may have the same aircraft engine. But the engine doesn’t determine an aircraft’s performance.
The design does.
It has a good engine, but its design is horse manure.
The 109F4 is a 1943 model with boosted engine settings, as is the G-6 which is a 1944 model.
The P-51C-10 entered service in 1943 although I don’t know if the WT variant is using later “hotter” engine settings. So the match-up against F-4’s is spot on.
As someone who has spent a fair few hours with Germany the aircraft are largely fine and are actually overperforming in some instances.
The 109’s in general have far too much elevator authority at higher speeds. Unless something has changed you still have near perfect pitch control at 400mph, in reality both old and modern flight reports of the 109’s suggest that controls begin to get heavy at 250-300mph. Mustang pilots also reported they could out-turn 109’s above 300mph. Also don’t get me started on certain late war German bombers with highly questionable flight models.
The 109’s and 190’s are far from dead ducks in game (barring later BR’s I’ll touch up on in a moment). The later Yak’s will out turn you (as they should) but they suffer at higher altitudes. A lot of the issues I see is when 109 pilots love to fight on the deck with Yak-1B’s/Yak-3’s and then complain because they got shot down. The 109’s/190’s can extend and climb away from pretty much any Yak that isn’t a Yak-3U wonderplane.
That said there’s stuff worth complaining about. The 190D-9 for instance with AEC at least is almost 20mph slower than what the original datasheet said it was capable of (360’ish mph on the deck compared to 380mph which it should be doing).
Germany doesn’t have it bad at all in WT. The main issue is that late war 109’s and 190’s in reality thankfully did have issues against later allied designs which is somewhat reflected here (although still not fully). The problem is that the Luftwaffe didn’t also fight Russian prototypes that are the best thing ever, some of which are rocket powered, American early jets, the StrikeMaster, Korean war Corsairs and the Wyvern.
In Ground Battles Germany during WW2 eras is arguably the most OP of all nations during WW2 tiers thanks to generous BR’s, high penetration with OPHE with pixel perfect accuracy and usually tons of armour. I’m a crap tanker through and through but even I get 7:0 games in German tanks on occasion.
Germany is far from a nation that “suffers”. The aircraft during WW2 tiers are superb right until the highest BR’s and the tanks have an unmatched ability to bounce shots and one-tap kill everything they see at all ranges.
1 Like
Unlike what people like to parrot, Germany actually really benefits from not having historical brs. German mains always complain about the Tiger II facing more advanced opponents, but seem to forget that the tanks Germany was using for the majority of the war were Pz IIIs and early Pz IVs. Historical mathmaking would have them suffering against KVs, B1s, and Matildas with the Pz III E
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
You’re right about the tank. However, there is a lack of alternatives there, too. Also—I’m not sure if it existed back then—anti-tank ammunition could penetrate it; at least, that’s how the game portrays it :)
And let’s not overlook the Panther series.
However, regarding aircraft, despite the existence of alternatives, better planes stubbornly have lower BRs. I don’t understand that. In simulator battles, those small differences lead to significant advantages.
No, no, Germany suffers is right, Re.2005 should be at 4.3 obviously ;)
1 Like
Were it so easy…
Hmmm, oh look, A6M5 0.0. Why tf am I fighting jets.
The F-4 is more on par than the G-6 in regards to timelines which is what you were talking about to begin with. The F-4 as mentioned is using 1943 engine settings, depending on the engine settings on the P-51 that is also a 1943 aircraft being delivered in August 1943.
No I’m talking about dates which was your original yardstick. In regards to performance the P-51 is faster, dives better and has a similar turn at higher speeds. You out perform them at lower speeds and I believe you also out climb them.
To confirm I’m not defending the P-51’s BR. Almost all American aircraft have too low of a B.R due to Gaijins obsession with player performance based battle ratings.
Bit of a contradiction there but okay. The G-6 also turns worse than the F-4. As time went on 109’s got heavier and began losing their turning advantages. If you’re only talking about dogfighting the F-4 will probably do much better than the G-6.
At no point have I ever said that. I even mentioned post war Corsairs in my post being an issue, calm down.
To be blunt other than the D-9 which from what I can tell is underperforming massively at least with AEC the 109’s seem to be more or less fine. The K-4 is more or less the only 109 that is a bit trapped as you can’t put it at 5.0 as it’ll crap all over everything in the 4.0-5.0 battles. It’s essentially stuck where it’s at. That being said it’s far from a bad aircraft, it’s probably one of the strongest late war aircraft in the game.
It’s almost as fast as a Tempest V (with a hilarious 6.3BR) on the deck whilst being faster at higher altitudes, it also turns better at lower speeds and probably accelerates faster as well.
It pretty much outclasses the La-7 across the board and absolutely spanks it the higher it goes.
It outclimbs almost everything barring an LF IX only at low altitudes. The only other competition is the Hornet which the K-4 easily out turns and the Japanese twin who’s name currently escapes me.
It’s faster than the Ki-84 whilst also climbing faster.
It outclimbs, out accelerates and out turns all P-51’s until the P-51H at most combat speeds.
It off memory out accelerates even the dreaded F4U-4B along with out climbing it.
The lowest you could drop the K-4’s BR is to 5.3, any lower and it’ll sneak into 4.0-5.0 matches which is not only completely and utterly stupid but it also means you wouldn’t be able to raise the LF IX’s BR as it’d be the K-4’s only real competition in that bracket. I sure as hell don’t think it’s fair to fight a 1.98ata K-4 in a Mk V Spitfire or Whirlwind…
Exactly this. German mains have no idea how well they have it. This goes for air as well, I’m sure German pilots would love to fight Mk IX Spitfires in early 109’s with engine restrictions. or the current 109F-4 fighting the LF IX’s from 1943.
1 Like