-
Revert the bomb damage radius nerf(at least partially if not totally)
-
Increase sp cost for every bomb that’s above a 1000kg.
why didnt they receive guided munitions tho?
It looks to me like those planes would be useful with them.
why? Aint it faster and has a good turret?
Maybe they wanted to keep them as meme plane in 8BR. Bomber mains can get nothing useful outside of the WW2 era. in both ARB/GRB.
B-66B is better than B-57 or IL-28 in paper, but worse in real match because
1- B-66B’s loadouts are forced to have bombs than required for 1 base.
= Base reward multiplier gets doomed
2- Because of being Rank 6, it has ground spawns in legacy maps, and has lower airspawn altitude than IL-28 or Canberra. Massive disadvantage compared to inferior jets in rank 5.
3- Have early RWR to get an alert of radar missiles, but has no countermeasures to counter any missiles.
being 9.0BR means you need to face AIM-7D, R.530, and AIM-9D/G/J/P.
4- as a 9.0BR jet, you need to fight against a superior Su-7, which can do better in both A2A combat and base bombing.
That is why.
Not to counter the argument, just to create further dialogue to understand the problem futher.
Thanks for the explanation
Well as much as we now have separate game modes for ground and air, i dont see the problem in making it meme plane in air and useful one in ground. More than that, them A-4s have 8.7 and guided munitions, and them switz hunter for example has 9.7 and FNF ATGMs. SO a large, slow bomber would look fine at 8.7 with same amount of guided bombs or ATGMs to me, idk
Ah so it has large caliber bombs that make it earn worse?
that certainly sonds like a balance issue which can be resolved. But i agree, it makes it worse than IL
well no one there gets such (countermeasures), and the IL-28 can also get clapped with AIM-9s (i believe some 9.0s have them)
No its opposite: the more bombs you drop on base the worse is your reward. B66B has 14 750lbs bombs as stock setup so rewards will always suffer until you get 4 3000lbs bombs.
Oh, i get it now
Demon at 9.0 gets up to 4 sparrows. But C variant, not D. Not like it matters because both work well against bombers. Also french vautour late at 8.3 gets up to 4 matra r511. Not r530s but again, those do the job vs bombers.
1 Like
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?