Because all you ever talk about is ussr stuff, indicating you only want the russian one to go down
1 Like
I talk about Italian stuff quite often. Clearly you don’t pay attention enough. In fact I typically advocate for them more than Russia.
Funny how i cant be on here 24/7 since i have other things to do
I’m not.
And how is this relevant to the discussion?
What if they made B-29 6.3 and Tu-4 7.0
The G8N1 is at 6.3 with at least 5 times the firepower of the B-29, and I don’t see anyone complaining about it. The B-29 won’t be a problem to shoot down in comparison, as long as you have altitude interceptors (thank god that role exists for something)
2 Likes
Somewhat related but they should make planes be able to take out nuclear bombs in GRB for 2500SP. It wouldn’t change anything except you can now have your own custom nuclear bombers.
The day we have nuclear yields as a selectable option is when air has peaked. I reckon that’s how it’s gonna go when nuclear thunder comes into the game as a normal gamemode.
I asked you and @_Renzo as well as @MotorolaCRO
Here to see if it makes any sense to have a 2 br step gap for
A 12.7mm vs 23mm defensive armament.
7.0 vs 7.3? Sure. 7.7 though? It’s not that good…
I have no idea about Tu-95M. Never played it.
the 23mm is incredibly powerful compared to the .50’s i think RoF is higher aswell
has better bombs too iirc
Well the discussion drifted towards the TU-4 vs the B-29.
Because Stockholm believes it’s fair the 23mm gives a 2 be step gap.
But yet he also believes the B-52 should only be one br step gap above the TU-95m.
Yeah, still have no idea about those.
Bomb load is better on the B-29, and B-52 over their counter parts.
About 6-8k better on the B-29
About 150k better on the B-52
Ah I see. Well thank you anyways
1 Like
6-8k pounds or base points?
B-52 has overall worse defensive coverage than Tu-95M
and there is the sad fact that the BR range is more compressed so being 2 steps above is basically unplayable
Base damage.
Yes the Tu-95M has better all around coverage, but lack in more in rear compared to the 52.
Previously I said:
Additionally they need to fix bomber fragility.
Then, lastly…
Make the TU-4 a 7.3
And the TU-95M a 8.
Because:
- airbrakes
- more bomb load
- higher speed (can go max speed at sea level, TU-95M needs to be 8000 meters up)
- better acceleration
- a radar
- thermal imager
- better rear defense
(At least 5 or more) better things over the TU-95M…
These are as far as I can currently recall all the benefits the B-52 has over the TU-95M.
I am mainly thinking in terms of Simulator sure, but considering other modes as well.
AAB, ARB, GRB, GSB
But even in other modes an F-86 or the like has no problem downing a TU95.
To Stockholms credit, he could see it being an 8.0 in SAB
its a bomber just drop throttle or reverse thrust with props
that just means its freer food for fighters
that does what?
that does what for you in most games?
not that big of a gap
8.0 tu95m is fine by me but i think for it vs. B-52 one step is more justified. its pretty standard difference in performance for the BR range
I’m rather sure I tried reverse thrust already, and another method of tilt which neither seemed very effective, yes it’s a giant aircraft…
Better speed lower though means you can out run attackers climbing to you by diving, that’s not an option in the TU-95, your far more likely to wing tear.
A radar can scan for forward incoming threats generally.
True the better rear defense is not a massive gap, nor did I ever say it was. However, if the 52 gets the rear radar guidance for its 20mm the ball will certainly be in the park of the B52.
I could see it being one br step if they had similar payloads.
As it stand now the B52 has roughly 2.3728~ times the amount of payload. All in 2000 lbs bomb drops.
More bomb drops is crucial in GRB GSB, and Naval, as you can quite literally carpet bomb so much ground (or water) it is more likely to result in 3 or more kills than not.
(Pair this with the thermal imager) and you can see your targets in ground far easier than the TU-95.
but its an air to ground focused radar no? like terrain following/weather/navigational
then in GRB and GSB B-52 should be 2 steps higher but not ARB
If there is anything I don’t know much about it’s bomber balance.
I only got the Tu-95M to use it as CAS in my Russian 8.3 GRB lineup.