Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rakonas]

Maybe in the future they'll actually simulate that hitting the top of the ship isn't how to sink it?

[dennislp3]

Yeah they are going to model and add ship combat later...I think right now ships just use a simple HP system...I expect them to make it a little more accurate in time

[Sonlirain]

Yeah they are going to model and add ship combat later...I think right now ships just use a simple HP system...I expect them to make it a little more accurate in time

I wouldn't cout on it too much since tanks are still somewhat basic in that regard despite tanks being in open beta
At least for me hitting them from any angle that right behind didn't do anything... even the usually thin top armor bounces 20-23 mm AP rounds like nothing.

[Jopax]

Torps are generally too annoying to be useful, first you gotta get real low which makes you a juicy target for pretty much anyone, then you gotta line it up and hope the ship doesn't move too much. All the while the bombs require you to just get slightly closer for the most part, and while this is more dangerous if you're this close to enemy units chances are there will be enemy planes around so an extra few shots your way doesn't make much of a difference.

Also about sinking ships, I just take it as the bombs taking out most of the topside stuff like all the guns or the bridge, you know, not neccessarily sinking the thing but disabling it for the duration of the battle which might aswell count as a kill since the end result is the same.

Also tanks need to be shot at with stuff that's atleast 37mm if you want a guaranteed penetration. Everything smaller is pure RNG in hitting the top side at just the right angle.

[Sonlirain]

Well tanks vary in their weight cathegory and that impacts what can and can't pen them.
From my experience it's:

Light tanks - 20 mm AP rounds wreck them from the side and behind but 12 mm AP can destro them by shooting directly at their rear.
Medium Tanks - 30-37 mm can comfortably destroy them when shooting at the rear but 20 mm AP can still work.
Heavy tank - Requires 30+ mm guns shooting the rear.

[10ebbor10]

Torpedoes are absolutely useless, which is why they're the only payload you actually risk loosing money with.

[BuriBuriZaemon]

Oh great, Panther D got stealth nerfed. Reverse speed lowered from 12kmh to 4kmh and its Battle Rating upped now facing T-44. Also I feel the crew dies more easily.

[Aseaheru]

I had some success with torps...
But not in a while.

[serephe]

Torpedo bombers are basically the only reason I fly planes... so I fly planes in those AI mission things more often than not. 

[Cthulhu]

I decided to reinstall, having fun.  BnZ is tougher but if you have the energy advantage it's still almost impossible to lose.  I've been having fun getting up to 4km in my bf109 and killing stupid people who think they can come at me.

Except when I get one shotted by helicopters four times in one round.  Energy fighting is possible but that doesn't change the fact that arcade is UFO bullshit.

[Evaris]

Since I do not post this on the WT forums out of fear of being banned or simply having my post deleted.

Russian bias.  Blatant, simple, Russian bias.  And WT devs have gotten more and more lazy of late. 

Look, I get that it's easier to just take the values of a gun in one vehicle then apply it for all tanks that carry the same gun, but that's not how things work in real life.  Also, yes WT devs, you're biased.  If you can't see it, close your eyes, clear your thoughts for a moment, and look again.  Your T-34 tanks are firing as fast as your SPG platforms and heavy tanks, despite having more cramped turrets compared to these other platforms, yet on the German side not only do you reduce weapon rates of fire to that of the slowest RoF of any vehicle mounting a weapon, and giving some tanks outright unhistorical rates of fire. 
Long-gunned Panzer IV tanks?  You give the rate of fire of the Hetzer.  Never mind that the Hetzer lacked ready racks, unlike the PzIV, nor that the Hetzer required the loader to lift a round over the gun to the other side to slide it in the breech, unlike the Panzer IV.  Oh and the historical sources suggesting an average of 2-3 times the RoF historically in comparison to the T-34, you instead make it reload slower.
Panther?  You give it the manual's stated -training- rate of fire.  Yes, they limited it to 6 rounds per minute in training soas not to cause undue stress on the recoil mechanism.  Yes, if you fired too fast for too long the recoil mechanism would stop working correctly and would take as long as thirty seconds to return to a position where it could fire again.  But I don't see any of your tanks or planes, known for recoil issues, being limited to a -training- rate of fire due to their flaws.  The panther?  Never mind the post-war French tests showing a maximum RoF of 20 rounds per minute.  Or the Eisenhower and British reports suggesting 12-15 rounds per minute. 
Sherman Premium?  Here is a blatant disregard for... everything.  The manual says 20 Rounds per minute.  International testing had a record of 24, with most crews averaging a maximum RoF of 18-20 RPM from the ready rack... which has 20 shells.  But you reduce the Rate of Fire to 12 rounds per minute, the average rate for pulling ammo from the hull.  While your Russian tanks all get their RoF's based on ready racks.  Oh, and let's leave in the Sherman's ready rack as a full ammo rack able to be set off for extra lulz even though obviously you're not using the values.
Oh, and then we have the fun bit that all the German guns are being give penetration values at 30 degrees in-game, for against 90 degree armor in the game calculations.  Nevermind that the Russian guns all get those nice vs 90 penetration values.
Another thing, transmission fires, nevermind it doesn't bother Russian tanks.  Sure, you -say- that you have historical evidence... but when asked for it you say you can't provide it, ignoring the fact that all historical sources the entire international forum community have gone through shows not one single occurrence of a tank lost to a transmission fire. 

And this isn't even getting into planes, where Russian planes are severely undertiered compared to all the other nation planes for the most part. 

Just... what the hell Gaijin.  What happened to historical accuracy and your promise to be unbiased?  If you're wondering, this is why I haven't bought gold in quite some time.

Sincerely, Evaris.   



... I apologize for that everyone, I just needed to let that out.

[Sonlirain]

I kinda stopped playung tanks quite early 9halfway to researching the KV-1 when i just said eff it). But yeah the russian bias is everywhere and mind you i have a full set of tier 3 russian planes in my hangar!

But i jsut had this fun experience when playing my American aircraft... it was one of the Naval fighters... corsair or hellcat armed with long toms and 50 cal.
A yak-1 goes head on with me so we fire a bit but ultimately none of us did any major damage.
Knowing my plane is crap at turnfighting i decided to dive... and here's where things get silly.

An american plane in full dive got shot down by the Yak-1 that had the time to turn around dive after me AND catch up to me ripping my left wing apart with its single 20 mm cannon.
And speaking of cannons... i have a strange feeling that russian guns work better than they should. And by that i mean the lone or dial 12mm mgs mounted on some Yaks just set things on fire like no tommorow while i'm hard pressed to set anything on fire with a murrikan 50 cal.

[Rakonas]

I basically totally stopped playing planes after tanks came out. My biggest gripe is probably that they removed kill credit from ramming since I first played. Ramming is a totally legitimate strategy especially when you're already fucked that was actually extensively employed in WW2...

[Sonlirain]

I basically totally stopped playing planes after tanks came out. My biggest gripe is probably that they removed kill credit from ramming since I first played. Ramming is a totally legitimate strategy especially when you're already fucked that was actually extensively employed in WW2...

Well its still a good way to deny the kill.

[Cthulhu]

I basically totally stopped playing planes after tanks came out. My biggest gripe is probably that they removed kill credit from ramming since I first played. Ramming is a totally legitimate strategy especially when you're already fucked that was actually extensively employed in WW2...

Remember, if you tried to dodge and couldn't, ramming takes skill and you got outplayed, so you can't complain.

If you didn't try to dodge then obviously you can't complain.

No matter what happens, if you get rammed you lose and it's no one else's fault.

I ram a lot.  You'd be surprised how many people will go head-on with a crippled plane, thinking of nothing but that kill credit.  I figure even if I don't get the kill, it's worth it if my plane's fucked and his is fine.  If my propeller isn't spinning don't play chicken with me, I have no reason to turn away.

I'm getting pretty frustrated as well overall though.  I don't want to deal with RB (I heard somebody say that RB's highs are very high, and its lows are very frequent, which pretty much sums it up for me) but energy fighting is such a bitch in AB.  I can do it, but it's very difficult, doesn't always work because of UFO physics negating all my advantages (BnZ still works fine if you pick your targets well.  Tunnel-visioners and other energy fighters zoomclimbing are especially easy targets, but most of the rest of energy fighting is a crapshoot).

And I know if I went over and grabbed my float Zero instead I'd be scooping up kills by the bucketload so I'm not really sure why I'm bothering trying to energy fight.  It works, but it's not fun in AB. 

And if we're being totally honest part of the reason it doesn't work is I'm just not very good at it.  But why learn when I can just do the furball with everybody else and get more kills.