doesn’t it literally contradict your point?
You spray a fuckton on 50cal turrets and you still come down
You do timed taps on 23mil and your opponents come down + you survive
Also quick question, why are your opponents openin fire from barely past 500m? It’s a bomber, +800 meters can be a decent distance to fire from since it is such an enormous target.
Also love how you still skip over the obvious proof of the difference in damage, round selection, belt composition and firerate.
So trying to see what damage they do in a battle is a bad idea now? Or it simply doesn’t align with your agenda?
I let way more planes get closer to the B-29 because I didn’t want to fly all the way over twice. Also, I caught fire, but never burned down.
I had then literally touching me in the TU-4 I had to see this “one tap” capability you and @iegaatdao keep talking about. Which was generally 6-8 shots given you fire typically 8 shots at once the way I was shooting.
I’m glad you keep bringing up: “-Against AI fighters instead of real players
-Who doesn’t do evasive manoeuvres
-Who fires against you at 600m-ish instead of trying to gun you down outside of 50cal’s effective range“
Because like I said before, if one is screwed, they both are, regardless of their defensive armament.
Don’t forget, you already agreed that they are the same plane else wise.
Here I grabbed the link in case you forgot :)
How does it contradict my point?
I shot further with the .50s in the first match I’ve played either plane in a very very long time.
The 23mms were right up on me, to test your “one shot” theory.
you had more time on the B-29
You died because fires aren’t insta kills
And they dealt with your opponent in an even smaller window of time + you survived
Funny how you show “proof” that still is in our favour and yet apparently when I showed this The Tu-4 needs to be rethought (br) - #145 by iegaatdao
You never adress any of my proof, not once even a mention or an error to point out, just pure cherrypick.
Even if your lie was true, NR-23 simply has more firerate and kinetic punch, how can you even lie so badly that the fact you try to cover up is still obviously true?
Tu-4 and B-29 will have a 0.7 BR difference.
now if you want your Tu-4 at 7.3 then move B-29/B.1 down, else stick to 7.7
I didn’t die period lol.
I caught fire sure, but it went out and she was still flying fine btw.
Projection much?
I don’t address your “proof” because you don’t have any? We all already admitted the 23mm is better, but in different evaluation levels.
still funny you cannot even point out this supposed string of lies you continuously accuse me of
Yet I can point out many occasions of you lying, and you still won’t admit to them after I’ve posted the facts to you.
Where does your bias end man?
You, and Stock think it’s such a massive difference, it’s like modern weapons vs WW2 weapons to you guys.
To me, I think it’s more like mid WW2 weapons vs late WW2 weapons.
Copy pasted just for you
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
NR-23 FI-T damage (3 blows)
M2 API
NR-23 AP-I
Let’s look at our test dummy and see where does each cannon need to land to deal a nice useful blow.
M2 with AP-I
NR-23 with FI-T
even with a bad hand with a paintbrush tool and with limited angles you can see an NR-23’s effective target is much larger.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Don’t forget armor reduced effective range of M2 50 cal by a lot.
Which also happens a lot of planes have armored glass at the front and even some plates below those ones
Only one who I can say is “Projection much?” to is you.
You’ve 100% cherry picked your info by a third time already (3rd time I point you to this post)
Third time you’ve ignored it, well maybe not, since now you just called it a “lie”, def a step above ignoring it’s existence.
give it up
For ARB:
B-29 and Washington B.Mk.I sent to 6.7
Tu-4 and Tu-4 (China) to 7.3
or
B-29 and Washington B.Mk.I sent to 7.0
Tu-4 and Tu-4 (China) to 7.7
When have I cherry picked info?
And I’m so glad you know how to use the armor viewer, congrats!
A real match isn’t perfect with the armor viewer.
With your nearly 9k games, I would’ve expected you to know that by now.
Because it is a massive difference. There’s a reason why the IL-28 and Tu-4 are some of the only bombers with competent levels of defence, and it’s because of the power of the 23mms. .50s are great, but they just aren’t close to NR-23s.
If you really want a test, get into a custom with someone and simulate attacks on a B-29 and Tu-4 and see which one kills the attacker the most.
Depends on the competency of the fighter, most fighters will kill either plane no issue.
And that is what I’ve been telling you all.
Sure are the 23mms better? Yes.
Are they going to stop you from being 1 tapped? No.
Are they worth a 2 br step or more gap? Hell no.
Because it failed to reflect real match counterparts
You can see the enemy plane keeps firing at you while they are burning when you tried B-29, but with Tu-4? You can’t see enemy bots can’t shoot you back after you damaged them well, while you lit fire on the last one, also, real enemy players would never get closer to B-29 like that and easly snap your wing off, while Tu-4 can shoot back to enemy fighters which also shoots damn autocannons.
Nitpicking, so you want to say “It wasn’t mathematically a single bullet, so One-tap speech was lying”?
Jesus got damn Christ, even on your cursed footage, your NR-23 took drastically shorter killing time even with your cursed aim.
BECAUSE, in a real match, enemy opponents would just show up at a blind spot, with fast speed, and start open fire outside of the effective range of 50cal for B-29, while Tu-4 still has a chance to retaliate against them thanks to autocannon, YOU ARE THE ONE INTENTIONALLY IGNORING MAJOR GOOD POINTS OF NR-23.
ffs, it is more a your problem that you get screwed unless you are being full uptier, or facing missiles.
You are intentionally ignoring explanation why it need to have gap even though other parts are same.
Stop ignoring other player’s explanation and stop sealioning because others just simply doesn’t agree with you.
Still, Tu-4 can go down with a fight before getting shot down, and can give a fighter a tough time.
But B-29 won’t.
In summary, yes exactly, in a real match neither plane has any survivability, except one only sees jets, the other can see props and some jets.
It’s even more egregious how slow the Tu-4 is for the Br of 8.0, when everything is doing 200-300+ mph higher than the TU-4.
And lastly again, your “oh your on fire in your b-29, b-29 bad! Bad b-29!”
Yes… I was? I waited and flew straight into 5-6 planes, I took a 30 sec recording because that is the default option on Xbox, and it didn’t record the first plane I downed which was an instant kill.
despite being further away than the TU-4, the .50 cals didn’t really prevent me killing any one plane, I just decided to light them on fire.
Because you lot keep saying “they don’t commonly light fires, they don’t do damage” etc etc.
which is just a lie.
They do damage, and if it wasn’t for 5 of them, and I wasn’t super out of practice, I could laser beam them all.
TU-4 I had they touching me, and tried to hit them with one bullet, but it usually hit 6-8 which was the bare minimum required, and even in the clip, didn’t kill a prop…
A prop… which is weaker than the Jets.
I thought the 23mm was a 1 tap, laser beam of doom?
There no point in continuing to talk about it. You guys can’t stand a fairly br’d vehicle.
If and when it is set to 7.3 and if it over preforms… then move it to 7.7, yet I doubt that would occur.
Whatever floats your boat I guess.
Can’t wait to see the anti Tu-4 thread to open and be filler with completely valids points
Such as NR-23 is an enormous upgrade from M2 50cal and justifies a 0.7 gap.
At this scorpion is just a question of how do you manage to ignore when even your proof talks against you.
It seems you cannot even summarise properly.
A2D-1 wants to say hi to Tu-4, and Spitfire Mk.24 were capable of saying hi untill it got buffed last year.
It’s even more egregious how effective NR-23 is, especially when everything in downtier cannot stand a chance against Tu-4 if Tu-4 goes 7.3BR.
Will you stop shoving your words into mine, please?
B-29 is an awful bomber because almost all of the enemy jets have autocannons that simply can outrange B-29, compared to Tu-4.
You can catch them on fire, but they will shoot you back until they are completely burned out.
And as you know, those last resorts easily make you die.
Because these autocannons can snap your wing, while the M20 API-T Tracer belt from the fighter’s 50 cal can burn your fuel tank till die.
We didn’t say it doesn’t light the flame, no?
We said it is vastly ineffective compared to Tu-4 outside of 500m.
And it is a cold fact that single 23mm ammunition deals drastically heavier raw damage than a single 50cal bullet, even if we completely ignore FI-T because it is a heavier stone to throw.
It is more your problem that you failed to hit the enemy target, not NR-23’s problem.
Even in your footage, you managed to kill those bots quite rapidly.
Also, did you use a Tracer belt? It seems not.
There is no point in continuing to talk, because you will sealioning against opponents untill others lose their temper.
Asking the same thing again and again and again while acting polite, then opponents lose their temper, break rules, and are eliminated by mods for a better community,
Sealioning cannot improve the discussion and you are the one who keeps doing it.
Do you really think that eliminating debate opponent a way of winning debate? :/
Fairly Br’d vehicle? Tu-4 in 7.3BR?
Do you really think those 6.3BR planes such as P-51H or Strikemaster stands chance against rain of NR-23’s 23mm FI-T?
Tell us the truth, you just want to massacre poor bastards in lower BR, while letting B-29 rot in the same 7.0BR.
Straight down from 8.0 to 7.3, from Gaijin? For bombers that have a notorious history?
When does it have better general stats compared to B-29A, even though Tu-4 has drastically higher BR?
Gaijin wouldn’t do that. Do you know how many months it took to send B-29A from 7.3 to 7.0BR?
How many years do you expect to see Tu-4 go straight down from 8.0 to 7.3?
Also, I didn’t completely debunk your idea of keeping B-29A/Tu-4 a 0.3BR gap even though I disagree with it.
If we try a two BR gap first, and if it underperforms, then we can try further buff.
I reckon you even know it wouldn’t happen at all, sending it down to 7.3 directly… it just cannot happen. :/
Ignore your (continuous) lies and disingenuous comments? It’s easy, read through your nonsense.
I have only posted fact, and actually looked up relevant info, which you and stock kick and scream like children the “23mm” this and that.
Reality is the planes are very similar. But as a caveat, instead of being the same br, the TU-4 by all rights should be a 7.3
I didn’t fail to hit the enemy??? Are you crazy? You can watch the frame with a puff of smoke coming off the enemy.
I’m actually glad you brought that back up.
Because using the FI-T only belt,
I realized, I didn’t even kill the BF-109 in one burst, it took two.
So lemme get this straight once more.
you say I’m seallioning, never even heard that term till you brought it up. (And what ever various other terms you said)
call me a liar, or ieatgato has, pretty sure it has been both.
accuse me of bias / trying to only get the TU-4 buffed which is not true at all, I’m in favor, or certainly was in favor of making the B-29 a 6.7
now accuses me of trying to forge false videos?
claim I am trying to get people to leave the thread (which is not the case at all, I enjoy a good debate)
Like… jeez man your claim is that weak, that you continue to “discuss the user” not the topic?
Ieagatto has no excuse, he’s been straight up lying for many topics now.
But anyways:
In reality that’s for you to do.
Relevant info for you, revelant doesn’t equal true info for you.
I was even kind enough to suppose FI-T for 23mm doesn’t exist and yet
Even the AP-I from the 23mm deals more structural damage vs M2 50cal’s AP-I
AND NR-23 has more firerate, 900 RPM vs M2’s 750 RPM.
Undefendable atp
You want me to paste the again?
4 times now you played dumb, 10 bucks on a fifth anyone?
Uh huh. Yep. Only relevant info to the discussion.
Btw I have given you 5-6x times to come clean btw, yet you double down.
@Forum Moderators can the trolls be removed? They’re clogging up the discussion with personal attacks, and nothing in relevant data wise. They continue to just slam their opinion down as fact.
The max distance for nr-23 rounds can travel is 5km, so considering the relative movement between you two that must have been a shot at the very edge of its range. Well done!
buddy that’s not how you call mods, you are not scarin anyone.
They do check the forums periodically, which means if neither me or any people in here were banned or kicked then that means we are safe.
The evidence we show is hard cold number, that cannot be affected by rng, the screenshots we showed also act as cold proof and your video is also proof to us.
I suppose you do know how modules work in WT and how your cannons work?
I suppose 2k battles in all modes should be able to teach you that these parts are inseparable but contains all vital bits that you need to take down an interceptor before its too late.
Tank battles even teach you that if you play cannon SPAA, specially after 12k battles.
All of these points we have been talking is stuff your learn the moment you look more than 3 seconds into damage models.
But cherrypicking, sealioning and lying are your specialty and this and many other threads show it. (hope you liked the new words btw), You win by tantrum and by hollow threats of “Mods come ban this dude please”
Scroll up, READ OBSERVE AND ANALIZE
Okay buddy, if you really want to say that Tu-4 need to be 7.3BR while B-29 should ROT in 7.0
because
-You ignore the major differnce between 12.7mm M2 and 23mm NR-23
-You ignore precedent on bombers that received +0.3-0.4 BR difference because of "SINGLE TURRET CHANGE’ when Tu-4 did a whole overhaul
-You also ignore Spitfire Vb/Vc, which are almost identical but have +1.0 BR(Three BR step) gap because of weaponry change
-Or maybe you also would ignore Tornado F.3/F.3 Late which are nearly identical outside weaponry but also has +1.0BR gap.(F.3 Late on 13.0 has AIM-120B and AIM-9M while F.3 on 12.0 stuck with AIM-9L/Skyflash SuperTEMP)
Then, for the same reason, how about sending T-34-85 from 5.7BR to 4.0BR because it is a T-34 but with a new turret? /s
Seems you didn’t get that straight even though we explained it for a month.
Because you hear only what you want to hear.
It is not my fault you never heard of the term ‘sealioning’, so let me tone-polish for ya.
You dislike sealioning, and you don’t even want to Google it and such
“Argumentum ad nauseam”, hope you like this term more than ‘sealioning.’
Also, did you forget what you said when you talked about “B-29 to 6.7” from your take?
“B-29 to 6.7 if Tu-4 is 7.0” iirc.
Because you just cannot admit that ‘according to precedents of other bombers that changed weaponry, Tu-4 and B-29 need to have +0.7 BR gap’
I never knew that ad nauseam can be a good debate, or you are having diffrent definition for ‘a good debate’.
Am I crazy? Of course, I am crazy. /s
If I weren’t crazy at all, I wouldn’t fight against the wall who cherry-picks the fact for months to debunk that ridiculous hot take that Tu-4 needs a radical buff, because of ‘both are nearly identical and the weaponry difference shouldn’t be larger than one BR step gap’
When I can just ignore you instead.
I explained why you are wrong with multiple explanations and analogies, and you are the one who is not listening to any of that, and just keep pushing “Tu-4 from 8.0 to 7.3BR, you guys are idiots who hate bombers and soviet vehicles, because you guys cannot accept soviet vehicles need to be in fair BR.”
This discussion can be a plain example of Brandolini’s law.
I didn’t said full no about Tu-4 at 7.3BR, yes?
I said,
A. Send B-29 down to 6.7 and make Tu-4 7.3
B. or send it down to 7.7 first, then watch statistics to check the impact of the buff, and if Tu-4 acts awful similary, then we can try to send them down further to 7.3.
It is easier to make a 0.3BR buff instead of pushing the 0.7BR idea, no?
