Welp....Tu-4 confirmed.....Russian Bias confirmed? I think so. At least when it comes to the Tu-4. Tu-4 is a lot of fun, it has AMAZING defensive armament, but it shouldn't fly as good as the B-29. And that ladies and gents, is where the bias is.
BARON! The B-29 should have 12 .50cals instead of 10. This is due to the 4 ,50cals in one of the top turrets. It isn't modeled correctly. If you don't believe me then add up 2,2,2,2,4
There is no Russian bias. This plane's stats were actually so close to the B29, I can fully understand why the devs gave them identical stats. they had the same exact climb rate, and the B29 was only 10 mph faster. The biggest performance difference is that the TU4 had a higher service ceiling by a little less than 2,000 meters. After that, it all comes down to the armament, and we can clearly see who the winner there is... It's not Russian bias. They're just pretty much even in performance. I wonder if you even looked up the performance specs for both places before making this video. This video only gave bad losers something to talk about when they go whine about this whole "Russian bias" on the forums.
What are you talking about? does Manchuria ring a bell the soviets liberated Mainland China and what not from Japan, captured the Kuril islands and was preparing to invade Mainland Japan which Japan then surrendered fearing a Soviet invasion
OR a normal Schwalbe, it's boring to do the climbing but then it's easy to just fly over them then drop on their 4 or 8 and annihilate them aiming at the wingroots
A B-29 while bombing Japan had an emergency landing in Soviet Union, this is the product. They chopped it up and sent it back to us, the reason they are better is they used all steel instead of lighter materials and this shows up in their early jets aswell. That alone your stats statement is totally correct due to the steel making it heavier and more of a brick, but you should be able to push the over heat on them a bit more.
The spawn altitude is the problem, and rising the BR to 7.0 was actually a mistake because jets at this BR have a lot more trouble reaching that altitude than super-props. And they mostly have weaker armament, at least the US Jets. And in 90% of the cases I see someone engage a Tu-4, they do it from behind, what the heck do they expect?
B-29 is WW2 era, TU-4 is ColdWar era. Not sure why people are comparing them. The technologies used in TU-4 is more modern, TU-4 Engine Shvetsov ASh-73 could produce 2700 HP while B-29 Wright R-3350-23 could only produce 2200 HP.TU-4 was also designed to defend itself against jets, not turboprop fighters. B-29 max speed 574 km/h TU-4 Max speed 558 km/h stronger engines but heavier armaments flight performance is almost same. I couldn't find the exact alloys used but the TU-4 would've probably used the same alloy cold war era aircraft used.
Wow, that intro music caught me off guard. I'm tad nuts with my audio set up though, that bass hit, holy shit. Note made turning off bass boost, before i watch your next video.
The thing is, I would honestly prefer to have the AN/M2s as my defensive armament: the NR-23s had a blistering rate of fire, but like a lot of early rapid-fire autocannons in aircraft they loved to overheat and jam. I'd trust the AN/M2 because it was battle-proven and reliable
+Biased Sherman they put too many full auto guns in ww1 was mostly bolt actions and entrenched machine guns I think that's why people aren't liking it so much
There where 3 B-29 that the Soviets interned. The Soviets also got the B-29s that would suck up there own spark plugs. This was a problem that early B-29s had and the Soviets got. The engines would over heat around the spark plug fitting and they would melt into the cylinder head. That lead to an engine fail. The alloy of later B-29s was changed to get over this problem. But those where not the kind of B-29 that the Soviets copied, so it was an issue that the Soviet Tu-4s also had.
The 29s engines were made for high altitude. Most of the engines the Ruskies produced actually lost power at high altitude. i was in a Spitty IIb and was out climbing and outrunning a La-5 at 12,000 ft.
I think with proper air cover the B-29 would be better but with the game set ups like they are the TU-4 has a better suitability just because of the defensive armaments.
Baron, do a custom battle with TU-4s and tier 1 tanks/SPAAs and use the TU-s bottom turrets to gunship the shit out of the tanks. No bombing, just 23mm turrets.
1- the song in the background is cool i love it 2-i think mix nation in to try fix that BR match so less hight tier ppl join low tier.(like i sey for a long time... the less and less ppl playng hight tier RB) 3-nice vid mate gg. 4- sry for my RIP ENG.
Just finished reading an article on the TU 4 in the July issue of Flypast magazine. It was a miracle of reverse engineering that according to the experts surpassed the original. It was an interesting read I'd recommend it.
The Soviets fought the japanese in manchuria korea kuril islands and china/mongolia. We fought them more than the americans and continued fighting them until the end of the war.
Seeing baron using the 1000kg bombload and 4 of them for 1 base makes my butt hurt, that just shows how less he knows about bombers and planes in general.
the B-29 had a 20mm in the tail. The 23mm held less ammo.The TU-4's reliability was crap one of the B-29s they copied was the infamous "Ramp Tramp" the worst B-29 ever built according to maintenance records.
In the beginning of WWII there were some tries by the Russians to attack the Japanese. It was in North Korea where the Japanese had some occupied territory, and the Russians tried to ward them off with some tanks; but, it didn't work well and they left the Japanese to the United States while they focused their power at the Germans.
God that TU-4 is ridiculous. Obviously getting on its six is death, but the other day I do a high speed pass in my FW190 against one from its 2 o'clock and the bloody thing kills my pilot.
The TU-4 only weighed 750lb more than the B-29 and the engines were round about equivalent in terms of performance with the B-29's top speed being just 10mph faster, otherwise they are identical. Its hardly a smoking gun and all this whining is frankly ridiculous, all the TU-4 needs is a small BR adjustment thats all. Did the devs just copy and paste the stats to save time? Yeah they probably did, but guess what? Tupolev did the same back in 1945. The problem with these calls of RUSSIAN BIAS is that much of the flaws of Soviet equipment came from issues with reliability, ease of use and comfort, factors that are not simulated ingame unlike paper stats like performance or armour. Yes the IS3 was nigh impenetrable from the front but guess what? In reality its engine kept breaking down, you could barely see out of it and you had to jam four very short men into a cramped steel box. Hardly an ideal fighting platform which is why the Israelis could knock them out with Centurions and Shermans during the Six Day War.
Brad Patton The TU-4's engines were less reliable and prone to breakdowns but you cannot simulate that ingame (yet). So you can whine all you want but there are far better swords to fall on than a measly 10mph difference like here.
Brad Patton Like I said, that only translates to the TU-4 being 10mph slower than the B-29 at maximum speed. War Thunder's vehicles are portrayed as operating under optimal conditions. The game cannot simulate factors like engine breakdowns and lower quality aluminium otherwise the Panther's final drive would fail when doing a static turn and the Me-163 would occasionally explode on the runway.
fludblud It's crap though. They used the most optimal predictions from the plans, when the final product was many times worse. No TU4 ever flew with the characteristics of the ones in game. Not even a prototype
idk about the TU-4 bias, because the TU-4 has its own problem, it has a hard time climbing, people say its biased because of its armament that doesn't make it biased, thr Russians did actually reengineer on the the B29 bomber and the Russians loved the 23mm, the TU 4 has its own draw backs, the 23mm has limited ammo, and they are more accurate than the 50 cal and can hit longer range, but it still has its own draw backs, it turns better than the b29 but it can not climb as good as the B29 the stats say they are the same, but actual game play is different. I love the TU-4 but ive already recognized its flaws, if a Tu-4 is turning break off your attack. go for a head on pass with it. the top and bottom guns have a hard time aiming straight ahead. so for those who see a TU-4 and are trying to engage it. which is most peoples top priority because of its bomb load, go for the head on pass which is something newbies love to do or try and dive and clip one the wings. the wings are really fragile
It's annoying especially when playing German props because usually the rest of your team doesn't even bother climbing so it's just you against an armada of 23 MM cannons which isn't particularly fun and it's just frustrating tbh
I have an idea... I say instead of nerfing the Tu 4 again, they should bring some of the 8.0 aircrafts to 7.0, so that way you have planes that are good enough to counter them. The allies especially need better aircraft, so I think that the first Meteors should become 7.0, and the Attacker, maybe the F2H for the Americans but definitely the F80C. The Russians need the MiG 9 (Not the MiG 9/L) to a 7.0. The Germans are fine as of right now and so are the Japanese...
The Bias has been consistent since the Alpha of this game. Been playing since week 2 of its release and the Russian planes are still OP and historically so inaccurate.
I for one am pleased to see a bomber that can't just be boomNzoomd by a griphon spitfire in a single pass. It's only "op" because it's the only prop bomber that is actually viable. Lower the br on all other bombers. They're unusable. (for example, the p61 is currently a better "bomber" than the b25, at the same br, and is not even a bomber.)
The problem with the TU-4's is they copied the early B-29 engines which had a lot of issues overheating; the B-29 should be able to WEP a lot longer without over-heating, The TU-4 should almost start overheating @ 100%
Level one and two American fighters: Normally take a quite a few shots before you down an enemy. Level one and two Russian fighters: Just a few shots and you completely tear an airplane apart. Total Russian bias in this game. ALL ACROSS THE BOARD. For aircraft anyway.
what they won't talk about is how easily 20MM or 23MM Cannons jammed.... the Browning AN/M2 .50 caliber machine gun had a rate of fire of 750-800RPM some variants of the B-29 superfortress did have a 20MM cannon in the rear, it was removed later because of a lack of reliability, a .50 Caliber machine gun will do very bad damage to light fighters, especially with as many as the B-29 had. but of coarse WT is a arcade like world of planes and world of tanks, so realism like guns jamming, and limited ammunition capacity will not be a factor. i bet this game the YAK-3 walks all over P-51 Mustangs too, and i bet without even playing this game the game wouldn't even consider the P-51 Mustangs more favorable high altitude performance, and much greater reliability, a lot of the Russian airplanes might as well have been made of paper, had very poor firepower, and especially airplanes like the YAK-3, the engines where known for having a short life and working them too hard would cause almost garroted engine failure, P-51 Mustangs would operate in excess of 200 hours before recommended engine changes.
You are inaccurate about engines. Soviets already had good bomber engines, that were actually more powerful (+200 hp) than B-29, but tradeoff was slightly smaller combat radius due to worse fuel efficiency. Please research a little before talking nonsense.
This is a man who does not know how to balance audio in his intro
BaronVonDeaf
+BaronVonGamez baron im not able to connect to war thunder from ps4 right now. are thier servers having issues because my wifi is working
+BaronVonGamez can u be my tech support? i am a loyal sub and watch all ur vids :D
And you are a guy who is wasting his time complaining in the comments section.
+Ethan Obenauer You're a hypocrite, you're wasting your time as well.
Welp....Tu-4 confirmed.....Russian Bias confirmed? I think so. At least when it comes to the Tu-4.
Tu-4 is a lot of fun, it has AMAZING defensive armament, but it shouldn't fly as good as the B-29. And that ladies and gents, is where the bias is.
I think it is Russian bias confirmed because it's a pretty much 1 shot 1 kill on the 23mils
hai
hey baron whats the music you use ?
CHALLENGE:
Use the TU-4 as a disguised AC-130 komrad))).
Use it in a custom battle or againts ground units.
CHALLENGE:
Use the TU-4 as a disguised AC-130 komrad))).
Use it in a custom battle or againts ground units.
BARON! The B-29 should have 12 .50cals instead of 10. This is due to the 4 ,50cals in one of the top turrets. It isn't modeled correctly. If you don't believe me then add up 2,2,2,2,4
Maybe a modification to add the 20mm
+Roll Fazzlebeef MTHS Increase Tu-4 BR and slightly decrease performance. Easy fix.
They added the 4 50's in the top turret now
+william raffoul They didn't model it correctly though. it doesn't fire all 4 of them. If you look on Xray even, it shows only 2
+william raffoul They were always there but only 2 of them work
the battlefield 1 graphic is insane .. i really like it can't wait until october 21.. btw nice vid baron keep em goin ;)
This thing is probably the most OP plane in WT now. Especially with the new bomberspawns.
the new bomber spawns help the tanks dude....
+Dylan Willis I think he's talking about air RB, not GF RB
"Little bit of russian bias" So careful to not anger the gaijoo overlords into raping him with copyright shit and lose his yt account
++Akula lol
i dont give a shit if i loose this account
this plane is so russian bias omg
There is no Russian bias. This plane's stats were actually so close to the B29, I can fully understand why the devs gave them identical stats. they had the same exact climb rate, and the B29 was only 10 mph faster. The biggest performance difference is that the TU4 had a higher service ceiling by a little less than 2,000 meters. After that, it all comes down to the armament, and we can clearly see who the winner there is... It's not Russian bias. They're just pretty much even in performance. I wonder if you even looked up the performance specs for both places before making this video. This video only gave bad losers something to talk about when they go whine about this whole "Russian bias" on the forums.
Sup Baron.I was just wondering as to what you use to record your gameplay, as I wanted to start recording WT for a new channel.Thanks! :D
are you done with world of warships? cause they've put out some new premium ships and I was wondering of you were gonna play them.
hey baron whats the name of the 1st track right at the beginning? :D
Airport Confirmed
Lol oops
Baron is on the FBI watch list for that
Airport April fools 2017 confirmed
+BaronVonGamez At least you didn't say nightclub. That would have been very inappropriate.
Too soon man, too soon
Finally some more war thunder gameplay. Upload more because you vids are awesome bro.
6:13 "TIME TO BEAT MY VEIN SAUSAGE TO THE TU-4" lmao im dying
What are you talking about? does Manchuria ring a bell the soviets liberated Mainland China and what not from Japan, captured the Kuril islands and was preparing to invade Mainland Japan which Japan then surrendered fearing a Soviet invasion
Fun to play. Not fun to play with or against.
EXCEPT if you are a narwhale
OR a normal Schwalbe, it's boring to do the climbing but then it's easy to just fly over them then drop on their 4 or 8 and annihilate them aiming at the wingroots
Anyone know the song that hes playing in the first part?
I was in the game with you as the HO-229 that got first place. My name is gcwf10. I saw that Bias. You cant hide it from me Baron XD.
I love the new intro, almost as good as phydaily's intro
:D thats me at 17:15 and in the comments at the start and the guy who killed the vampire at the end
Why didn't you end the legendary Tu-4
+jakob Dornbrach because when it's on your team it's fun, when it's not its incredibly annoying
Russian lama bias
+llama shockz Fuck religion :)
+SuperZombiekillar ?
Gaijin: Is worried the B-29 would be op, adds TU-4 without any second thought....
I LOVE THE NEW OPENING BARON!MNN
Best part was that gaijin added two more 50 cals on the top front turret on b29 in war thunder to balance. Check it out!
A B-29 while bombing Japan had an emergency landing in Soviet Union, this is the product. They chopped it up and sent it back to us, the reason they are better is they used all steel instead of lighter materials and this shows up in their early jets aswell. That alone your stats statement is totally correct due to the steel making it heavier and more of a brick, but you should be able to push the over heat on them a bit more.
7:21 YA I'm in the video! I'm s5xfast the console pleb who got pilot sniped by the f2h
"Bombing the Airport" *Diabolical laughter* XD
you know I have a fully maxed out crew on both planes yet I can't hit anything unless they are behind me directly and even then it's a struggle
the B29 typically had 4 50cals in each of the Remote turrets with the tail gunner being the only one with twin 50's Russian Bias confirmed
The spawn altitude is the problem, and rising the BR to 7.0 was actually a mistake because jets at this BR have a lot more trouble reaching that altitude than super-props. And they mostly have weaker armament, at least the US Jets.
And in 90% of the cases I see someone engage a Tu-4, they do it from behind, what the heck do they expect?
What's the song 2:30? Couldn't get it with Shazam.
B-29 is WW2 era, TU-4 is ColdWar era. Not sure why people are comparing them. The technologies used in TU-4 is more modern, TU-4 Engine Shvetsov ASh-73 could produce 2700 HP while B-29 Wright R-3350-23 could only produce 2200 HP.TU-4 was also designed to defend itself against jets, not turboprop fighters. B-29 max speed 574 km/h TU-4 Max speed 558 km/h stronger engines but heavier armaments flight performance is almost same. I couldn't find the exact alloys used but the TU-4 would've probably used the same alloy cold war era aircraft used.
Wow, that intro music caught me off guard. I'm tad nuts with my audio set up though, that bass hit, holy shit. Note made turning off bass boost, before i watch your next video.
I'm actually kinda glad this thing was added, purely because it pushed Gaijin to introduce a bomber limit to RB.
Kapitalists are just jealous that they can't match the stronk of Stalininium
Jimbob7595 youre right blin
The thing is, I would honestly prefer to have the AN/M2s as my defensive armament: the NR-23s had a blistering rate of fire, but like a lot of early rapid-fire autocannons in aircraft they loved to overheat and jam. I'd trust the AN/M2 because it was battle-proven and reliable
Baron you called it a Flying Fortress, the B17 is called that, the B29 is the Super Fortress.
Are they ever going to add a cockpit view for the bomber.... That would be nice!
Been playing for 4 years, and this plane is easily the most OP little shit I've ever seen. I honestly think it should be removed
Wow is this a coincidence or the video ends in 1945? I think this also happened to your fellow Phly Daily with his Battlefield 1 video lasting 1914
How do you like Battlefield 1 Baron?
It's shit, which is sad:(
Wait, seriously?
+chris gibson No it's amazing. The other guy is on some drug or something.
+Biased Sherman they put too many full auto guns in ww1 was mostly bolt actions and entrenched machine guns I think that's why people aren't liking it so much
hahahaha dergerät was geht ab digga
There where 3 B-29 that the Soviets interned. The Soviets also got the B-29s that would suck up there own spark plugs. This was a problem that early B-29s had and the Soviets got. The engines would over heat around the spark plug fitting and they would melt into the cylinder head. That lead to an engine fail. The alloy of later B-29s was changed to get over this problem. But those where not the kind of B-29 that the Soviets copied, so it was an issue that the Soviet Tu-4s also had.
This is not "BIAS" Baron, the just probably don't have the codes yet, so they just put the same as the B-29, this is still just a game.
How is it that it is a RB match but he still has the bombing reticle outside bomber sight?
you know, it is all because of the sikrit dokuments tovarish
hey i cant log into war thunder ps4 but my connections fine. is anyone else having that issue right now?
Me too but I'm on PC and it can't connect to the server ever since I updated it. I looked in the forums and some people are also having the same issue
+Jose Diaz well thats a good thing lol. at least we know its not us
I'm able to log in just fine
+That Guy maybe its up now.
Dylan Willis its up for me now.
The 29s engines were made for high altitude. Most of the engines the Ruskies produced actually lost power at high altitude. i was in a Spitty IIb and was out climbing and outrunning a La-5 at 12,000 ft.
12 50 cals actually with the one quad plus an an/m2 20mm with the 2 50 cals in the tail gunner
20mm on b-29 was removed for later versions
yeah, LATER versions, we have the early version in game, hell, give the b-29 NO turrets! The latest ones didnt have any!
I like how right when he says the tu4 is the new Death Star I say in the in game chat that they are Death Stars😂
I think with proper air cover the B-29 would be better but with the game set ups like they are the TU-4 has a better suitability just because of the defensive armaments.
What do you use for recording? I have tried obs but it records very dark.
still wanna know the intro song
that music tho. if I wanted to find it on RUclips what might I need to type into the search box?
I stopped playing War Thunder before ground forces when Yak-9s where out performing BF109s FW190s, Spitfires, and Mustangs. I was done.
Same.
Baron, do a custom battle with TU-4s and tier 1 tanks/SPAAs and use the TU-s bottom turrets to gunship the shit out of the tanks. No bombing, just 23mm turrets.
1- the song in the background is cool i love it 2-i think mix nation in to try fix that BR match so less hight tier ppl join low tier.(like i sey for a long time... the less and less ppl playng hight tier RB) 3-nice vid mate gg. 4- sry for my RIP ENG.
do it like this :
1;
2;
3;
4;
it's better
Just finished reading an article on the TU 4 in the July issue of Flypast magazine. It was a miracle of reverse engineering that according to the experts surpassed the original. It was an interesting read I'd recommend it.
The Soviets fought the japanese in manchuria korea kuril islands and china/mongolia. We fought them more than the americans and continued fighting them until the end of the war.
No. The soviets fought JUST to try to expand with the Japanese territory's. And the US did a lot more than anyone else in the pacific
+Gone Ham true they didn't do much
Bombers always get torn up real quick in the higher Tiers b/c a lot of the Aircraft have at least 20-30mm guns, so.. I'd say this is balanced
Baron you should know that you can put out an engine fire if you shut the engine down.
Seeing baron using the 1000kg bombload and 4 of them for 1 base makes my butt hurt, that just shows how less he knows about bombers and planes in general.
The B29 originally had a 20mm rear gun. Later replaced by twin 50s.
I do prefer the twin .50 because of their accuracy
+SuperSmartt eh power over accuracy for me. You land a shot and its devastating but both have their perks
German Heavy bomber HE 177 its a 2 engined heavy bomber with up too 7.4 tons of bombload
also add german 1.6 1.8 2.8 ton bombs
the music in the first minutes are awesome!
baron what if there was a quad 23 on the tu-4
the B-29 had a 20mm in the tail. The 23mm held less ammo.The TU-4's reliability was crap one of the B-29s they copied was the infamous "Ramp Tramp" the worst B-29 ever built according to maintenance records.
Imagine putting a 152mm howitzer cannon on the tu-4 it wouldn't be possible.....but think the possibilities, tovarish?
In the beginning of WWII there were some tries by the Russians to attack the Japanese. It was in North Korea where the Japanese had some occupied territory, and the Russians tried to ward them off with some tanks; but, it didn't work well and they left the Japanese to the United States while they focused their power at the Germans.
Baron, from looking a picture of a TU-4, it looks smaller than a B-29.
well, it IS a b-29
God that TU-4 is ridiculous. Obviously getting on its six is death, but the other day I do a high speed pass in my FW190 against one from its 2 o'clock and the bloody thing kills my pilot.
This plane makes me furious when I see it in a match against my b29. One fly by from them and my plane is on fire or dead.
Extremely biased.
Merica is still better
Am I right
In real life it was. in this game..... not so much
it has higher br tho
is this barons channel but for older audiences
what's the intro called?
why they don't play with phly anymore?
It should be premium further more proving the bias
The TU-4 only weighed 750lb more than the B-29 and the engines were round about equivalent in terms of performance with the B-29's top speed being just 10mph faster, otherwise they are identical. Its hardly a smoking gun and all this whining is frankly ridiculous, all the TU-4 needs is a small BR adjustment thats all.
Did the devs just copy and paste the stats to save time? Yeah they probably did, but guess what? Tupolev did the same back in 1945.
The problem with these calls of RUSSIAN BIAS is that much of the flaws of Soviet equipment came from issues with reliability, ease of use and comfort, factors that are not simulated ingame unlike paper stats like performance or armour.
Yes the IS3 was nigh impenetrable from the front but guess what? In reality its engine kept breaking down, you could barely see out of it and you had to jam four very short men into a cramped steel box. Hardly an ideal fighting platform which is why the Israelis could knock them out with Centurions and Shermans during the Six Day War.
Just. Stop. The bomber was heavier while the engines performed much worse. it was just wrong.
Brad Patton The TU-4's engines were less reliable and prone to breakdowns but you cannot simulate that ingame (yet). So you can whine all you want but there are far better swords to fall on than a measly 10mph difference like here.
fludblud They also didn't performance well. They were direct copies with worse materials
Brad Patton Like I said, that only translates to the TU-4 being 10mph slower than the B-29 at maximum speed.
War Thunder's vehicles are portrayed as operating under optimal conditions. The game cannot simulate factors like engine breakdowns and lower quality aluminium otherwise the Panther's final drive would fail when doing a static turn and the Me-163 would occasionally explode on the runway.
fludblud It's crap though. They used the most optimal predictions from the plans, when the final product was many times worse. No TU4 ever flew with the characteristics of the ones in game. Not even a prototype
Shit, Those clouds are realistic and beautiful.
idk about the TU-4 bias, because the TU-4 has its own problem, it has a hard time climbing, people say its biased because of its armament that doesn't make it biased, thr Russians did actually reengineer on the the B29 bomber and the Russians loved the 23mm, the TU 4 has its own draw backs, the 23mm has limited ammo, and they are more accurate than the 50 cal and can hit longer range, but it still has its own draw backs, it turns better than the b29 but it can not climb as good as the B29 the stats say they are the same, but actual game play is different. I love the TU-4 but ive already recognized its flaws, if a Tu-4 is turning break off your attack. go for a head on pass with it. the top and bottom guns have a hard time aiming straight ahead. so for those who see a TU-4 and are trying to engage it. which is most peoples top priority because of its bomb load, go for the head on pass which is something newbies love to do or try and dive and clip one the wings. the wings are really fragile
Your grandpa served in the Pacific during WWII?!?! Did he tell you any kind of stories about that?
It's annoying especially when playing German props because usually the rest of your team doesn't even bother climbing so it's just you against an armada of 23 MM cannons which isn't particularly fun and it's just frustrating tbh
I feel like either rise BR by 1 or 1.5 OR lower flying performance and it's damage model to be less than the B-29!!
Gaijins idea of fixing this will be to add the B-36 bomber
I'm in
How about B-52 only a couple years younger than the Tu-4... Nukes confirmed?
or the SR 71
+gkp Why add a spy plane with no weapon capabilities?
+САLIMBO ГГГ to be ridiculous
0:45 song name pls
what is yours intro's song name
Baron could you please do the Sheraton USA tank with slick bee please 😎😎👍🏼
Talking plane performance accuracy in warthunder.. yea.. well, good luck to you, sir!
What's the name of that music intro ?
Baron what's the intro song called?
Hey baron... I was wondering... Why didn't either the US or the USSR make a jet version of the B-29/B-50??? just wonderin
I have an idea... I say instead of nerfing the Tu 4 again, they should bring some of the 8.0 aircrafts to 7.0, so that way you have planes that are good enough to counter them. The allies especially need better aircraft, so I think that the first Meteors should become 7.0, and the Attacker, maybe the F2H for the Americans but definitely the F80C. The Russians need the MiG 9 (Not the MiG 9/L) to a 7.0. The Germans are fine as of right now and so are the Japanese...
Just like in World of Warships, all the new Russian ships have magic armor with magic guns.
What song is it at the beginning?
The Bias has been consistent since the Alpha of this game. Been playing since week 2 of its release and the Russian planes are still OP and historically so inaccurate.
What was the original Death Star?
I think it was the G8N1 Renzan Japanese bomber but feel free to correct me if you want.
I for one am pleased to see a bomber that can't just be boomNzoomd by a griphon spitfire in a single pass.
It's only "op" because it's the only prop bomber that is actually viable.
Lower the br on all other bombers. They're unusable. (for example, the p61 is currently a better "bomber" than the b25, at the same br, and is not even a bomber.)
The problem with the TU-4's is they copied the early B-29 engines which had a lot of issues overheating; the B-29 should be able to WEP a lot longer without over-heating, The TU-4 should almost start overheating @ 100%
Honestly being on a low their seems a lot more fun than fighting monsters like that....So maybe I will keep to the low tiers for now.
Level one and two American fighters: Normally take a quite a few shots before you down an enemy.
Level one and two Russian fighters: Just a few shots and you completely tear an airplane apart.
Total Russian bias in this game. ALL ACROSS THE BOARD. For aircraft anyway.
I thought the B-29 got the upgraded quad turrets now?
what they won't talk about is how easily 20MM or 23MM Cannons jammed.... the Browning AN/M2 .50 caliber machine gun had a rate of fire of 750-800RPM some variants of the B-29 superfortress did have a 20MM cannon in the rear, it was removed later because of a lack of reliability, a .50 Caliber machine gun will do very bad damage to light fighters, especially with as many as the B-29 had.
but of coarse WT is a arcade like world of planes and world of tanks, so realism like guns jamming, and limited ammunition capacity will not be a factor.
i bet this game the YAK-3 walks all over P-51 Mustangs too, and i bet without even playing this game the game wouldn't even consider the P-51 Mustangs more favorable high altitude performance, and much greater reliability, a lot of the Russian airplanes might as well have been made of paper, had very poor firepower, and especially airplanes like the YAK-3, the engines where known for having a short life and working them too hard would cause almost garroted engine failure, P-51 Mustangs would operate in excess of 200 hours before recommended engine changes.
what is the name of the intro song
what was that song in the beginning
You are inaccurate about engines. Soviets already had good bomber engines, that were actually more powerful (+200 hp) than B-29, but tradeoff was slightly smaller combat radius due to worse fuel efficiency.
Please research a little before talking nonsense.