Only reason they have a tendency of claiming they are the “Axis” is cause they don’t know how to play their crafts.
1 Like
For players who really only think about dogfighting, the lighter E-4/T-2 would be better than the Bf 109 F-4. In fact, back when I still didn’t really understand how to handle the Gustav series like the G-6 and G-14, I loved using the E-4/T-2 in Sim at BR 4.0–5.0. Since it has a turning radius equivalent to the Spitfire, you can gain the upper hand if it’s purely horizontal turn fighting.
1 Like
The P-51 C-10 isn’t from '43 or anything like that. You’re lying again. It entered service between late '43 and early '44—and by “late,” I mean December. I suppose December is part of 1943, so… are you a lawyer or something?
I don’t have a problem with the BR of the K-series.
Also, let’s consider the LF separately. It’s like the IS-3; we could do without it. It’s the kind of thing that makes you lose interest in the game.
Anyway, the Mk IX entered service in June 1942—meaning around the same time as the Bf 109 G-2. That’s fine by me; I don’t enjoy hunting planes that are lower-tier than mine.
You seem to be living in a fantasy world, just like that other tanker friend of yours. You pit the Mk IX against the F-4, or the Panzer III against KVs and the like. I’m talking about service entry, not the year of manufacture; I mean the encounters that actually happened at the front.
Frankly, I believe fairness should apply to every nation’s tech tree.
And I want to make this point specifically:
There’s also that monstrosity called the “Eremin’s Yak-3.” Seriously, what was the point of that name? Just lower the Yak-3’s BR to 4.0 and be done with it. The P-51 C-10 sits nicely at 4.0—any objections?
“Despite there being sufficient existing vehicles, they stubbornly keep adding vehicles that outperform Axis players—especially those playing the German tree—in every respect.”
I can repeat that, if you like.
We’ve found yet another piece of nonsense. The Yak-9B entered service in 1944.
What’s its BR in Simulator Battles? 3.0!!!
Don’t you dare say its BR was lowered because its performance is similar to other vehicles. The people claiming performance parity are constantly lying. No, folks, no—aside from the P-47, most aircraft outperform the Bf 109 or Fw in turn rate; and the P-47 is a hybrid sort of thing—more of an attacker anyway.
Why should it have the same BR as the Bf 109 E-series or early Fw models when it performs better at low altitude? Most matches take place at low altitudes.
If all planes are supposed to be equal, then let’s just give everyone a Yak-3 and fly in circles forever.
You won’t find this kind of absurdity anywhere else.
The 8th Air Force received their P-51C’s in October 1943 with other sources saying they were received by other units in August and some as you’ve said in December… which is still 1943.
At the P-51’s BR it fights the 1944 G-6, 1943 G-2 and of course the 1943 F-4. If this was an original 1941 109F-4 I’d agree with you, but it isn’t. So if we’re sticking to timelines I don’t see the problem. If we raise the P-51’s BR to 4.3 or 4.7 that puts it within striking range of the 109G-10 (or K-4)… which is a November 1944 aircraft maybe even later depending on if this is using later max boost engine settings like most German aircraft are.
The issue is that our G-2 isn’t an early production G-2 but I believe a 1943 model but someone may correct me on this. So your high boost G-2 is possibly fighting a 1942 Mk IX. A matchup that using your own standards is unfair.
To clarify I’d love to have historical EC back but it’s inevitable that depending on the battle one side would be slightly stronger than the other. I’d still rather play it than what we have right now though.
So then lets raise the 109K-4’s B.R to 6.3 as it’s running 1.98ata, the LF IX goes down to 4.3, the F MK IX goes to 3.7, the 109F-4 also goes to 4.3 along with with G-2. The G-6 goes up to 5.3 etc etc…
That Yak is stupid as the Yak-3 is easily a 5.0 aircraft let alone 4.0.
I actually to an extent agree with this… kind of.
Players always want new aircraft and they want them running at their peak despite what it’ll do to balance. Germany and Japan have issues to an extent as lets be honest they lost the war and couldn’t invest in new aircraft like the allies could. So they’re always going to struggle at high B.R’s.
That said that doesn’t mean you get to lower German BR’s so they can club everything below them. You’re already given max boost whilst even some with “superior” aircraft are not. Plus even late war German aircraft (barring the D-9 which could be bugged) have important advantages over their opposition which I mentioned earlier. The G-10/K-4 are superb, the G-6 up high can toy with Yak-3’s and even I do well in it in 5.0-6.3 battles most of the time. You also commonly see F-4’s at high tier battles because they can out turn Mustangs even better than the Gustav’s can.
The Yak-9B is dreadful.
The P-47’s are superb and if you’re turn fighting in them you’re doing something catastrophically wrong.
The 109’s will comfortably out turn the P-51’s with even the G-6, arguably the fattest 109 out turning them and they’ll also out sustained turn the Typhoon and even Tempest.
190’s share a similar playstyle to the P-47 but with better manoeuvrability.
Then easily get above them where you massively out perform most Russian aircraft and dominate them. You can boom and zoom them to near impunity. If they somehow follow you just shallow climb away and watch them fall back as their engine suffocates.
Yeah but this is Gaijin we’re talking about, so the German Yak-3 would run max boost, the Russian Yak-3 would be even faster somehow and turn better because of secret documents and the British version would be down on power and have an unstable FM like the Spitfires with a dive limit 50mph lower than the rest because one document said so for safety reasons.
1 Like
I mean, you keep dismissing everything by constantly harping on about the “Model 43.” You talk about hidden performance and so on—fair enough, that’s possible.
You’ve finally acknowledged the P-51 series as the benchmark—specifically the B-series, not the C-10.
It’s not a “43” or anything like that; it is quite clearly the Model 41.
It seems to me that your desire to tweak the BRs of the F-4 and K-4 series outweighs your interest in reverting other aircraft to their proper ratings.
Furthermore, you can’t conclude that your aircraft performs well simply because you’re hunting down novice players. Only when you face equally skilled opponents will you truly see the limits of what your aircraft can do.
You also suggested bumping the K-4 up to 6.3. That essentially means raising it to the level of aircraft that entered service in '46, '47, or '48—or even pushing it up to jet-tier territory.
I wish you applied this same sensitivity regarding BR adjustments to other models—across the board—that are clearly superior in every aspect yet still have low BRs.
It feels like the British tech tree is getting a raw deal, but you do have a point.
We agree on this point as well: naturally, the Germans found themselves in a desperate situation, especially once the Merlin-engined P-51 appeared.
However, that does not justify moving these P-51s down to the Battle Rating of the Bf 109 F-4.
That is simply unscrupulous.
It is treating people like fools.
In my opinion, you should adjust the Bf 109 F-4’s engine to late-1943 standards; then it might be plausible.
They say the DB 601E was such a good engine—yet the DB 605 engine was introduced to replace it.
You are either lying, doing this deliberately, or are simply ignorant on the subject. I believe the first two options are the case here.
Firat reference to me!!! Yay!!!
Completely impossible to implement, considering how many vehicles in war thunder never got entered into service in the first place. And identical vehicles in different trees entering at different times.
France recieved American vehicles much later than the Americans (obviously).
Do we have the French hellcat fighting 50s jets because that was when it entered French service? Should we just remove all prototypes because they never entered service?
The first battle between the Germans and Soviets that included the KV was June 1941. The Germans were equipped with Pz35s, PzIIIs with the 37, and PvIVs with the short 75
Edit: most early German victories can be attributed to superior employment of combined attacks, crew training, and well organized forces. Individual designs were never really anything extremely special
You really are trivializing the issue.
I suppose I have to explain everything down to the finest detail, as if I were talking to a fool.
For instance, let’s take your example: the KV-1 and the Panzer IV (with the short-barreled 75mm gun) facing off in combat for the first time.
Are their Battle Ratings (BR) in the game similar? Even if a similar vehicle arrived later for another nation, it doesn’t matter; you just set it to a comparable BR and that’s that. Of course, things would change if, say, the HE ammunition had been upgraded.
The Yak-9B is literally a heavier less maneuverable Yak-9 because it has a lengthened fuselage to let it have a bomb bay. If we had historical MM I would be killing Pz35s with KV-1E and shooting down He 51s with 20mm armed I-16s lol
3 Likes
So do you want historical BRs or not? You earlier advocate for battles to be fought between historical opponents “Encounters that actually happened” -you. But now you are saying that similar vehicles from a later time should be placed at a comparable BR. Which is not historical, and what we already have.
Edit: I swear I am trying to understand, but I genuinely do not understand. Either we have historical encounters, which is extremely hard to balance (impossible with the gamemodes we have). Or we do not have historical encounters, which is more balanced, but provides less of a representative experience how real battles were actually fought
2 Likes
It would be incredibly goofy if they did that. You would have SEPv3s, 2a7s, and T90Ms able to fight M3 Stuarts because Paraguay still uses them lol. Or for something actually in game, the Concept 3 would have to fight M1s, 2a4s, and T80Bs
The “derail-the-discussion” squad is at it again.
Please stay away; I’m sick of these brats.
If it were up to your lot, the initial update for bombers would have been considered correct and left unchanged.
When it comes to game balance, things are always skewed in favor of the Allies.
For some reason, the German side always ends up using vehicles that perform worse.
They throw in G2 and G14 “Ace” models just to get us to play other nations.
The only solution is to stop playing or to sabotage the game.
I’ll say it again: these issues need to be addressed—at the very least in simulation battles. In fact, the whole system needs an overhaul.
This fallacy is basic ad-hominem (everyone who diagrees with me is derailing and a brat)
This is a strawman fallacy (if you think this thing that I don’t like, you must also like this other thing that is unrelated!)
Sometimes called the black and white fallacy, or false dilemma (the only options left are to either suffer in oppression, or take extreme action!)
3 Likes
Just like a fascist…
skill lacking
shouldn’t be saying that with your stats, either way bombers even now are horrendously broken a 4.5kg HE rocket should not be able to be effortlessly shrugged off by a B-29 yet I’ve had that happen often
meh i play mid planes because i like them. still do better than the majority, and understand the game under the hood to some degree. Im topping the leaderboards in NE with a harrier T10, but that mode is full of death bubble SPAA kneecapping recent session ratios. I also wouldn’t throw stones in your glass house.
agreed. large explosives arent doing enough. unless you hit a single random point and then the tail will fall off from a single 20mm but that is pixel sniping.
This is still vastly better than pre bomber buffs, even if theres teething issues like the nullified damage from even 155mm HE and the lack of fire damage.
They arent free kills, you need to learn to shoot the engines out. This is the thing that fighter zombies dont understand, and what they keep throwing their toys out of the pram over.
1 Like
kneecapping recent session ratios
you do know NE doesn’t show up on recent sessions?
I also wouldn’t throw stones in your glass house.
saying this only works if the guy has worse stats than you its, the other way around here i literally have twice your k/d ratio while also playing meh to decent aircraft like the A-21RB or the Italian props also are we really pretending like outside of a select few aircraft Britain doesn’t have some of the best aircraft BR for BR which you mainly play like the spits or the GR.3 harrier the thing has 2 guaranteed free kills every game on its wings
They arent free kills, you need to learn to shoot the engines out
shooting out bomber engines is mostly useless they can put out engine fires every single time if they have EFS and they never spread to other components the only bomber that does is the Tu-95 but that’s because its model is bugged and its control surfaces are outside of the model itself so they have 0 protection and fires actually damage it
it seems to be to some degree. It wouldnt show these in my sessions if it didnt, ive not used hawk 209 outside of NE for months. its certainly missing a lot of the scores though
in a downtier sure it can be. theres a lot of AV-8A players and all those flares being thrown around shafts its only chances.
lose both engines on one side, its going down. just because it doesnt die instantly doesnt mean it wont die. A rework to the severe damage an kill assist reward system is needed to reflect that.
Yeah if MG151 was still considered a good gun sure
190s are awful in 2026
This is also just false. Two reasons, one yaks dont actually lose all that much performance by climbing in war thunder. This is a myth. It is entirely overblown and exaggerated. They lose some, not enough.
Two, games dont actually take place at 7km. They take place at 1-5km. Well within the Yak’s performance envelope.
How? USA and USSR are just as strong easily
2 Likes
Nope, not what people mean by historical matchmaking. That’s just your interpretation.