That’s 1.7 so of course it is. My point is it’s not just the Yak-9K that’s op at the BR, but by that logic you might as well never add fighters with big guns
This, is one of the weirdest and most absurd arguments ever.
1 Like
Youve summed me up :)
Except that’s not APHE. It’s just an AP round with incendiary filler, so it has a higher chance of setting fires when hitting modules that can be set on fire, but it does not explode.
4 Likes
It is OP
When i say you cant counter it cause too much SPAA pressure,you cant…its simple as that,remove the APHE belt or remove the insane post pen damage
1 Like
Its not the Pz II gun, its not APHE and its just 20mm, with mediocre penetration, tho due to ok-ish flight performance, at a low br where there isnt much armor in general.
3 Likes
The c-3604 is also quite good at 2.7, on a down tier is quite a menace.
Do you even know what your saying? It 100% is a Panzer 2 gun. Do research before you say things like this
For real? Yeah, i did my research. Its not. It originates from the same development, but its not the same.
This is my article btw. (it currently has also an update, that is not yet published. Reworking also the MG C/30 L, because after i got access to more documents, it goes even deeper, tho left it rather simple there.)
3 Likes
It has pretty bad flight performance and is only effective against low tier tanks.
It’s not comparable to the Yak-9K that started at 3.7 and then become the destroyer of worlds.
4 Likes
It’s a modified FlaK 30. So it’s a panzer 2 gun
Its not. Its not even a Flak 30, its based on the gun the Flak 30 is based on, but beyond the same mechanism type its different. It had a longer barrel and higher pressure ammo. It had a mount for the drum and different connectors, made for engine mounting.
4 Likes
Ok I need to do my research lmao
Then what gonna save USSR WWII BR win rate? That is good, but not too much, 9K/9UT almost the only thing we can expect to against other nations’ CAS, What rest of things does the USSR have? TU2? Il10？They are not as efficient as Alies CAS
They should correct recoil because right now recoil is too low or non existant. Recoil can easily be tested in full real controls.
1 Like
Well, there is recoil that slows the plane but the plane stays perfectly stable while flying.
Which is certainly not what the stories about even the NS-37 in the Yak-9T tell.
Great take. I’ve love to see that one
Horrible idea.
This is one of the best CAS aircraft. There is also the Pe-8.
1 Like
Its only good when youre biased towards the nation youre playing
Theres a big difference from 3 bombs 3 kills and a Yak who can do 1 kill per 1 APHE ammo spent and you got (example) over 100
Since when you go from the top you just need to hit a tank once and he goes kaboom
Ground should play better instead of relying on a broken plane to win
2 Likes
Or instead, why not apply the same “no recoil for the sake of gameplay” to all other large-caliber cannons?
Most other platforms have lots of downsides to contend with - the current recoil setting on most other large-caliber guns acts as the final nail in those planes’ coffins.
Who in their right mind actually uses an Hs-129B-3, Ki-109, P.108A, XA-38, PBJ-1H, Tempest Vickers P, Bf-110G-2, IL-2-37, Me-410A-1/U4 or B-2/U4, or any other similar plane, let alone manages to learn to use it truly well? If we’re talking big-cannon fighters, P-39s and P-63s are about the closest to Yak-9s in terms of handling.
The lack of recoil is what makes the Yak-9K, Yak-9UT, TIS MA, Su-8, and Tu-1 actually somewhat fun to play as big-cannon CAS.
Bomb and rocket CAS would still be far superior to all recoilless big-cannon options due to the lower opportunity cost - you can jettison ordinance if you need to kill planes but usually cannot do the same with big guns (and those big guns’ AP rounds are usually not effective vs planes anyway, this is true even for Yak 45mm guns unless you happen to directly hit pilot/engine/wing spar).
I see big-gun recoil on aircraft in the same way as unreliable engines, weak transmissions, faulty shells, and similar features are - technically realistic, but not fun for gameplay under any circumstance.
How would it feel as a tank to have gun recoil have a significant chance of screwing up ambushes on opponents even after you patiently did everything right? For me, that would be “the last straw” breaking any chance I would have left to truly enjoy the vehicle in question. We see something very similar in Naval with Coastal Fleet - excessively choppy seas render all but point-blank shots a total crapshoot. Surprise, surprise - coastal fleet remains unpopular partly for this “anti-skill” reason, as no amount of playing skill can fully compensate for guns spraying wildly all over the place in the neverending choppy waves. And obviously, we can’t do point-blank shots with planes on tanks without guaranteed crashing.
Regardless of vehicle class or game mode, I frankly think every single vehicle deserves to be practically playable and fun to use when doing so, not just exist for the sake of existing. If that means some technically unrealistic aspects for the sake of playability, so be it.
If we want counters to Yak-9s, and frankly any other propeller-driven CAS, why is nobody talking much about giving non-radar SPAAG (and possibly SPHs/Heavy Flak vehicles too) some sort of short-range lead marker? We see that once radar AA become commonplace, the average player goes from being next to worthless using SPAAG to swatting down CAS on a semi-regular basis. Thus, wouldn’t giving SPAAGs in lower ranks a shorter-range equivalent of that based on crew skills we already have solve not just Yaks, but complaints about damn near ALL propeller CAS regardless of its weapon choices?
It just seems ridiculous to me to focus so much on this one damn plane, instead of the larger environment around it.
1 Like