R530s would actually have no place at 8.3, those are surprisingly good
1 Like
i ment the countermeasures. there are little to no planes at 8.0-9.0 that have countermeasures
I misunderstood you then
1 Like
Its cool, i wrote it the way it can be interpreted the way you thought, my fault. Ill change the message
1 Like
The payload ot the Chinese Tu-4 can inflict 400k + damage on bases and airfields. So the double of the B-52.
About this part, Gaijin just wanted to be lazy, just like how they went with F-100F.
Historically, F-100F were capable of equipping the AIM-9P, but Gaijin decided to limit it to the the AIM-9E because
“It has no countermeasures, if it gets AIM-9P, then its BR get too high, then nobody can use it as CAS plane.” (inaccurate, maybe need to check devblog)
And then F-100F became a dual-seat-and-worse version of F-100A/D, and nobody plays it.
Just like that, Gaijin didn’t want to put extra effort into the meme April Fool vehicle.
Last time I checked B-57H, their cockpit was a ‘cockpit placeholder’ as usual bombers do.
No no no, not about large calibre. ‘heavier total bombs’
Gaijin penalise players if player carries bombs which are more than enough to kill a single base in ARB.
4 FAB-500 or 16 FAB-100, 5 1000lb and such.
If the player’s potential damage of payloads gets bigger, the reward per base cuts down.
I need to test it, but IIRC, if Tu-4 or B-29A players succeed to breakthrough the intercepter lines, and succeed in nuking all 4 base in a single sortie. Tu-4 players get drastically lower rewards per base than IL-28 player which carried 4 FAB-500.
Same effect to H-5 players which forced to carry 8 250-2 napalm bombs (2 base per sortie).
Because of this mechanism, all bombers with heavy payloads are getting ashamed in ARB
And the payload difference between Tu-95M and B-52H is meaningless in ARB except when you are going with the stock loadout (the stock loadout of Tu-95M probably cannot destroy the base at once)
Because both players will just carry a minimal payload on their bombers.
AFAIK, Morvran tested this with some planes.
Thanks you, IDK why B-66B and other rank 6 bombers need to have double whammy.
Well, what I meant was
IL-28, Tu-14T, Tu-4 (8.0) faces AIM-9B equivalents as an IR missile threat. Shafir 2 from Israel super mystere.
For Radar threat, R.511 from Vautour IIN Late (8.3) as a bonus, and facing F3H’s AIM-7C in full uptier.
AIM-9B has 10G manoeuvre. IL-28 and Tu-14 can try to evade those by turning, Tu-4 can turn the engine off to let them need to get closer to get tone (which gives a chance to gun them down)
and maybe, IL-28, Tu-14 could evade those SARH if the player managed to notice them quickly with bare eye, and the enemy fired them too early for ‘free kill’. While Tu-4 basically cannot defeat those SARH and being free kill.
But, seeing Shafrir 2 and AIM-7C only happen in full uptier.
B-66B(9.0) sees AIM-9D/E/G/J/P, and AIM-7C/D, R-3R, R.530.
Those missiles move generally better than AIM-9B/R.511.
So, B-66 gets doomed.
The problem of Tu-95M and B-52H is a general problem of bombers, and B-66B has some unique points which makes her even worse than others.
2 Likes
Give it reverse thrust too.
1 Like
I would like to have RDS-37. I dont care that it would be too broken :D
I was hoping they’d add them to the test drives, they are very cool to look at.
2 Likes
1 Like
Still can see F-106, which is even worse.
EEeeehhh…
Weren’t F-106 designed to shoot bombers down?
.50 BMG M2 (AP), M8 (AP-I), and M20 (AP-IT) can all penetrate 20-25mm of RHA at 500m. Gaijin uses a formula to calculate penetration over historical values meaning the penetration can get to 29-33mm at point blank.
Sounds like a Soviet Skill issue for not integrating Megabombers into their tactics.
But in all seriousness, the US gets big bomb loads because we designed whole planes around carrying big bomb loads, like the F-111. Whereas on the other hand, Russia did not necessarily. Not to the degree of things like the F-111, at least. I mean think about it; the F-111 can carry so many bombs it can’t even sweep its wings. So that is important to keep in mind.
Did you get the TU-95? Dropping the Fab-9000 in the middle of the tanks in the test range doesn’t even kill them. Like it’s that bad.
They could limit the small yield nuclear warheads to air rb / sim.
Why does it matter? In air, sim especially, the reward amount for dropping 21x 2000 lbs bombs is going to be good, despite not being premium (like I wish these were), and it can wipe an entire enemy airfield away in one pass. Depending on the map you get between 3-7 airfields.
The spaa cannot shoot them down. The enemy jets will have a tough time seeing them.
Btw if you think the Russian napalm bombs are op, check out the USA ones, they’re even more op.
I don’t think they’ll ever be meta. But the 8.3 br and 8.7s are too close for planes not similar in capability.
If that’s how you think I’m thinking, you got it twisted. Or you just are naive to the fact the B-52 is vastly better.
Right, but I’m not talking just a USA vs Russian plane here. But all nations.
I get some didn’t develop any and they are sadly out of the running, but the brs should be adjusted adequately for them no?
Wiki doesn’t show the 9k in full detail but that’s the stats I can get outside the game
1 Like
Yes I know. The fab 9000 is worth less.
The best loadout is the Fab-3000 x4
But even then, that less than half the damage the B-52 can cause
They’re correct stats afaik.
If the Fab-9000 was TGAG-16 or TGA-16 it would be way better
1 Like
I’m not sure why they gave the B-52 the wing racks while the Tu-95 is restricted to an internal load but it might be down to a balancing concern?