???
How is that related to german tanks?
2 Likes
German tanks over preform, and do not have any of the issues that plagued Germany in WWII.
The Yak 9 cannon had issues with ripping the plane due to the recoil, otherwise it was a good tank hunter.
Therefore if the Yak 9 is OP because it doesn’t perform like it did in real life, then German is also OP because they over perform.
German tanks perform just like an ideal condition real example would.
That recoil is precisely what’s missing. You can fire several shots from it with minimal speed loss or deviation. It was not a good tank hunter because of all of these flaws and more.
We have a BR system for a reason which is the point of this thread. Also, nothing is known about its APHE shell and it is likely overperforming.
5 Likes
And it is easily as known that it is under preforming. We can go back and forth about the APHE, but we will never know. You can cry for a nerf, but it could easily be that it is nerfed already compared to what it actually is.
Also I agree that it should get recoil, all of those tank hunter planes needs it.
Neither do they because nobody has been able to find any specs on the APHE shell, with some documents just calling it “AP-T” and the cannon itself being a dead-end.
Exactly what is underperforming about an almost perfectly accurate, low recoil 45mm cannon on a fighter which one- or two-shots any tank it sees?
2 Likes
Who knows, surely not us
Has anyone made the case that the Yak-9K essentially out performs the cannon version of the Me262 due to it’s ease of use and maneuverability, so I could really sit at 6.3 given the role that it occupies.
Realistically, no one cares about it’s performance as a fighter, (no one is complaining about Yak 3s being undertiered in Ground RB for example) so It could easily sit at 6.3 and it’s performance would be otherwise unchanged, it’s not like tank roof armour gets much thicker between 4.7 and 6.3.
5 Likes
Im using in my 6.3 lineup and is a beast. Right now is one of the most broken planes in the game by far!!!
2 Likes
While this true for you, I think it’s important to consider that increasing the BR of a vehicle should come from it over performing in the hands of an average player, not especially skilled players.
Otherwise we end up with the issue of sub trees having over tiered vehicles on account of skilled player driving the BR.
I think it was Oddbawz or Oxy that pointes out years ago that uptiering certain vehicles only punishes the average player. He was using the french autoloading tanks as an example. The premise is that skilled players aren’t impacted by BR changes, if a vehicle’s battle rating increases, it generally won’t impact their performance. The opposite is true for the average or less skilled players who are in far greater numbers, increasing the BR of vehicles can render a vehicle unplayable for most people. It’ll be interesting to see how the popularity of the KV-1E changes now that its facing 5.3 vehicles, the F-32 76mm gun is going to be at the absolute limit of its performance now AS 30-40mm autocannons have more penetration than it.
You also avoid the T-77 (one of the few decent SPAA, and the only ground based threat to the Yak) spam when playing higher BRs too.
I still think the best solution is to remove the APHE or nerf it’s accuracy.
Even if German equipment was superior (it wasn’t, M4 best tonk of WW2), they were outmanufactured and were out of oil already by 1942. Also out of tungsten hence German APDS development went nowhere (they had a lot of working APDS designs, but they made little sense without tungsten cores).
4 Likes
Or both just like Gaijin usually do with Germany CAS )))
6 Likes
Debatable, on paper more or less, but the rest yeah.
Reliability is absolutly overstated because of ready rates, because of a shitton of spare parts and ease or replacing.
Stap good on paper, but many didnt use it/didnt even know how to use it, because secit.
Beyond that its just as good as any other tank of the time period.
Fighter performance matters in so far that the Duck and similar aircraft are awfully vulnerable to enemy aircraft and only really stand a chance if their opponent overshoots and keeps flying in a straight line afk.
Yak-9k has the duck’s air-to-ground potential while also being a capable enough fighter to use its roll rate to jink, use scissors for reversals and then play for trajectory to get a shot off on at least bf109G10s.
The idea is thus to bump its BR up so that it’s equivalent to the duck (pure A2G) rather than multirole.
I believe vehicles should be balanced around players achieving their skill floor requirement while also giving regard to their skill ceiling impact. We observe the opposite problem you describe happening constantly - a vehicle with unusual characteristics, difficult controls with incredible potential once you stop fighting the vehicle often ends up significantly undertiered due to that skill floor, leading to those who are capable of hitting the skillfloor bullying players with that vehicle.
I think it’s worse to have multiple other players made victims than to ‘gatekeep’ a vehicle to some active hours’ worth of mindful practice.
The idea is thus to bump its BR up so that it’s equivalent to the duck (pure A2G) rather than multirole.
Did you not understand that I too am arguing to raise the BR?
The point that I was trying to make was that the capability as a ground attacker is the only element that needs to be balanced, and that while it can readily dispatch other fighters in Air to Air, it is not in my opinion over performing as a fighter. I wholly agree that yes, the flight characteristics are a major part of it’s overperformance, however seeing as its battle rating can be adjusted separately in ground RB, there’s no reason why we can’t uptier it until it has to contend with Radar SPAA. My opinion is that you can freely adjust the battle rating of the Yak 9K with no consideration for its ability to dogfight as a limiting factor.
Can you give me an example, bear in mind I’m approaching this from a ground perspective only so I haven’t consideres planes or game modes other than ground RB. Additionally, your comment as far as I can tell is simply describing a skilled player achieving better results as result of practise and experience. I can scarcely imagine any ground vehicles that have such a unique and obscure playstyle as not to have mostly transferable skills, as if to say that any player thay can unlock major hidden potential in slme vehicles isn’t already overperforming in every vehicle they use and no amount of BR manipulation is going to change that.
leading to those who are capable of hitting the skillfloor bullying players with that vehicle.
I think it’s worse to have multiple other players made victims than to ‘gatekeep’ a vehicle to some active hours’ worth of mindful practice.
The text reads like you making a counter argument but I can’t help but wonder if you’re actually disagreeing with me or not.
Air RB - Classic example is U.S fighters getting downtiered because people flat-turn everything in them (F8F). Just because U.S planes don’t do well in the intuitive response (ring round the rosey), they aren’t bad planes.
Air SB - Spitfires is what comes to mind. At my skill level, unless I do intentional practice beforehand to ease into them, I spend more time trying to control my plane than doing things to win. As such, I grossly underperform compared to the potential of spitfires. If you took someone like me and considered my performance for balancin, you might consider downtiering the plane because compared to other vehicles I use (e.g a6m3, bf109g14, mustang mk ia), it’s seriously underperforming. However, give spitfire to someone who made controlling it second nature and the mk 9 becomes a very dominant player.
In case of the Yak-9k, the difference between has the skill floor met/learning isn’t that big, but with given differences in observed results, footage posted and counter-claims, I do feel there’s at least a significant enough skill floor that might make it seem to underperform. From Percussion’s reports (or was it someone else?) for instance, it seems people tend to be very tunnel visioned while flying it making it easy to catch them out, which judging from my own experience flying it around for dogfighting comes from low ammo count and fire rate making you hyperfocus on setting up that perfect shot, so the skill floor is learning to “use the force” and developing a muscle memory for when to shoot.
However
I concede I reacted assuming you were defending the yak-9k due to the mention of balancing around skilled/average/learning players, since earlier in the thread we’ve had people claim they don’t get the amazing results others claim.
The Yak-9K is the new Horten and should get the same treatment…
(crippled flight model and cannon accuracy)
4 Likes
Actually, I’ve found the M2 on any American craft literally requires 1 hit and boom, fire, they burn down and it’s free kills.
1 Like
Yeah, poor Horten. From very good to trash in less of one week. Meanwhile the Yak-9 several months for only 0.3 bump.
3 Likes
This I definitely appreciate, I am mediocre pilot and have recently discovered that the F8F-1 is a remarkable plane to fly and it’s performance is very forgiving when I make mistakes (which is often). I don’t have a great vocabulary for discussing the strengths/weaknesses of planes and how they perform however, planes like the F8F-1 (BR4.7), The Yaks and Japanese planes give me the distinct impression while flying that ‘the plane’ is doing all the work, I’m just pointing the nose at the enemy.
I just want to make sure I understand what you mean by skill floor. From what I understand you’re suggesting that vehicles should be balanced around players results once they’ve achieved a minimum level of competency in a vehicle. This reminds of the quote about Judging a fish by it’s ability to climb a tree. I would wholeheartedly agree with you if war thunder as a game made even the minimum effort to instruct its players on how to use the vehicles but it doesn’t.
You mention US planes being under tiered because the average player insists on trying to use them as turn fighters, resulting in more nuanced players being able to dominate owing to the fact that the true strength of the vehicle has not been accounted for in its Battle Rating.
I stand by my original comment about balancing around the ‘average player’, what you describe as the misuse of specific vehicles, I describe as the misuse of all vehicles. To me, the players who are turn fighting in US planes are turn fighting in everything some planes work other planes don’t and BR rises and falls based on the ignorance of the playerbase.
I don’t like it anymore than you do but consider how we would implement the skill floor. Assume that there is a cut-off for player stats when considering battle rating. I.e. player stats don’t start being considered until the plane is fully spaded, the player stats don’t start being considered until the player has achieved a minimum number of kills etc. We would limely end up in a situation where large portions of the aircraft become unplayable for most people. War Thunder is not a very accessible game, so I feel like balancing around the average skill of players is a necessary concession for the game.