安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
IMO WT needs a rework on airplane damage models and weapons :P
and krisu the 30mms mk 108s are imposible to aim the british ones are lasers..
the damage models have been improved since i started but more improvements are needed
I have yet to play british or american aircraft but something tells me hitting targets and destroying targets in single bursts will be much easier. So far sticking with my 109F4 and just got the G2 (non premium).
Seriously tho, thanks for posting this, couple weeks ago i could shoot down any aircraft fine, now it feels like i am shooting paintballs at them.
As far as raw power, the British .303 is way overperforming at the moment, due to how simple the internal structures of planes are modeled. It makes it pretty much so that any hits on the wing are damaging the spars, which are also all treated as a single hitzone, rather than multiple smaller ones. The .50 cal american and russian 12.7mm also benefit from this, as well as from very good accuracy and incendiary capability.
Japanese 12.7mm and Italian 12.7mm, on the other hand, are low velocity rounds relying on non-modeled chemical rounds and what is effectively 12.7mm HEI, which is badly modeled as to just how much damage it is capable of.
War thunder's damage modeling is horrible in general, you have a fair number of historically tough planes, that are fragile as your run of the mill craft, because the things that made them tougher aren't modeled (the P-40, for example, was extremely durable becuse the plane had extra spars, which also enabled ridiculously hard manuvers at speed without danger of shearing the wings. Not to mention that in North Africa, the P-40s were considered equivalent to the 109, At least the E models, and likely the early F series as well, at mid to low altitude. Despite this, and the good documentation of such, the P-40 in warthunder is a flying cinderblock made of extremely low quality cement,as in it falls apart extremely easy and lacks the high speed manuverability the plane was known for. There are multiple other planes that lack their historical ruggedness due to Gaijiin either outright not modeling the cause of it, or mismodeling it. The wellington, for example, doesn't have it's Geodesic design modeled, which allowed the real craft to come home with absolutely absurd amounts of damage).
People like to complain about IL-2 1946 having outdated damage models, but at least the planes in that are as durable as they are supposed to be, and the damage modeling is such that if you directly hit the elevator or rudder or aileron with a 20mm shell, it actually stops function correctly, unlike in war thunder.
War Thunder doesn't count structural design in an airplanes durability.
Take the Wellington. It had a Geodesic design making the airframe itself take a lot and still work. In War Thunder, the tail falls off if sneezed at.
P-40 and P-47 had redundant wing spars. This isn't modeled.
Next. Chemical rounds don't work.
They are counted as HE. Imagine a tiny 12.7mm HE impact versus being sprayed with what's equivalent to Thermite. War Thunder doesn't simulate this Thermite.