Jump to content


Do 17 Z: What is wrong with this plane?

tactics Bomber

  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

legoboy0401 #1 Posted 14 January 2018 - 05:18 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1778 battles
  • 1,771
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

What is wrong with the Do 17 Z that it clicks with me but no one else? Surely it's not considered a "bad plane". It's not like its "underpowered" at all. It's pretty darn fun if I do say so myself.

 

It can't be a bad plane, not when I have a spectacular survival rate in it and I just got a Lang's Epic Medal with it.

 

Inaccurate? Hardly. I rarely go below 2,600 meters in my Do 17 Z when I'm bombing, and the battle where I got my Lang's Epic Medal, I got 16 ground target kills to my name in 1 sortie(I never died, probably as a result of my Survivability build)(not to mention 93 sections)and 26,000-something damage to ground targets.

 

Perhaps it has to do with the fact I slow down before I bomb to make sure the center of the reticle is in the confines of the red box indicating the correct aiming point for the target.

 

I doubt it, though. Doesn't everyone do that? I think even bot bombers do that.

 

It's not a perfect plane, true enough, as it's not a very sturdy plane without a Survivability build, and it's defenses are all bark and no bite.

 

Why do so many people hate this plane? The Ju-88A is much worse tier for tier.

 

I just don't get the hate for the bomber version of the legendary Fliegender Bleistift.(Flying Pencil, for those of you unfamiliar with it's German nickname)

 

Can someone explain this to me?


Edited by legoboy0401, 14 January 2018 - 05:18 AM.

An average player with an average goal: greatness, someday. Today, mediocrity will have to suffice. But no matter, I will always play to the best of my ability, and I will always strive to make the best of my ability just that little bit stronger and better.

 

#Failureisalwaysanoption

 

#Givingupneveris


Wombatmetal #2 Posted 14 January 2018 - 05:29 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1141 battles
  • 1,045
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    06-02-2013

View Postlegoboy0401, on 13 January 2018 - 09:18 PM, said:

What is wrong with the Do 17 Z that it clicks with me but no one else? Surely it's not considered a "bad plane". It's not like its "underpowered" at all. It's pretty darn fun if I do say so myself.

 

It can't be a bad plane, not when I have a spectacular survival rate in it and I just got a Lang's Epic Medal with it.

 

Inaccurate? Hardly. I rarely go below 2,600 meters in my Do 17 Z when I'm bombing, and the battle where I got my Lang's Epic Medal, I got 16 ground target kills to my name in 1 sortie(I never died, probably as a result of my Survivability build)(not to mention 93 sections)and 26,000-something damage to ground targets.

 

Perhaps it has to do with the fact I slow down before I bomb to make sure the center of the reticle is in the confines of the red box indicating the correct aiming point for the target.

 

I doubt it, though. Doesn't everyone do that? I think even bot bombers do that.

 

It's not a perfect plane, true enough, as it's not a very sturdy plane without a Survivability build, and it's defenses are all bark and no bite.

 

Why do so many people hate this plane? The Ju-88A is much worse tier for tier.

 

I just don't get the hate for the bomber version of the legendary Fliegender Bleistift.(Flying Pencil, for those of you unfamiliar with it's German nickname)

 

Can someone explain this to me?

 

I can't help at all. I have had good success with this bomber. It seems nimble - I can take out targets not in a straight line.

 

Nope, can't help you at all



comtedumas #3 Posted 14 January 2018 - 05:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6887 battles
  • 1,244
  • [FK] FK
  • Member since:
    04-11-2016
Where are you getting that people don’t like it?  Seems fine to me.  

Dell Inspiron 5675 Ryzen 1700X

32 GB Ram

500Gb Samsung Evo 960 game drive

Crucial MX500 250GB 3D NAND SATA M.2 Type 2280SS Internal SSD - CT250MX500SSD4

AMD RX 580 8GB video card.  


SpiritFoxMY #4 Posted 14 January 2018 - 06:01 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4924 battles
  • 2,746
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012
Do 17z is great although... I don't see a huge difference between it and the 88A. 17Z is more nimble but the 88A is faster. I haven't flown the 17Z against determined opposition before so its hard for me to judge but the 88A can give as good as it gets if the interceptor isn't careful.

***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


LMG #5 Posted 14 January 2018 - 06:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 2436 battles
  • 1,986
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
In my case I just don't feel like I can do enough for my team on it. Even when I hit all my bombs I still can't seem to outperform a proper GAA. I think that it has somewhat to do with versatility. GAAs take care of AA and soft targets with gunfire, then use their ordnance on armored ones. Bombers have to bomb everything, which forces them to run on a budget while attacking larger sectors, and even smaller ones like garrisons. Once those bombs are spent, all you can do is dodge the remaining AA and pray the bombs recharge in time to capture the area before the rest of the AA respawns. I don't mind having to pick my targets, but I mind never having a real solution to a problem (in this case, remove the AA while attempting to properly capture the sector with 5 bombloads and about one minute to reload them). I almost cried when on one game someone else shot the high altitude AA for me (thank you whoever that was).

Aside of that, in the specific case of the Do 17 z I feel utterly defenseless if someone actually reaches me. I had someone spawncamp me on a heavy the other day and all I could do was try to ram them or bend over and die. I even had a P-40 erase me in two seconds when it managed to catch up on a turn. Not even on a Bsh-2 have I felt such hopelessness.

Personally I'd decrease the reload time on the bombs and maybe buff the turrets or HP a bit. For now I'll wait for a Bomber line that offers that
This is my IL-2 (t). There are many like it, but this one is mine. :child:

vcharng #6 Posted 14 January 2018 - 08:05 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 3900 battles
  • 878
  • Member since:
    10-25-2017

The only problem with it is the grind before you get Demolition Expert for your pilot, as these bomblets suffer from small blast radius the most.

Other than that... perhaps a bit slow and a bit low altitude? but I feel perfectly fine with it.

I'm actually having more problem with the 217 as it's kinda dependent to your teammates (it has some serious potential though).



HazeGrayUnderway #7 Posted 14 January 2018 - 10:12 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1814 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    03-13-2015
Nothing wrong with it.  You play it like any other bomber and it does just fine.

mnbv_fockewulfe #8 Posted 14 January 2018 - 02:49 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 616 battles
  • 3,490
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013
I don't understand why destroying all of the ground targets in an objective doesn't cap it. :angry:

Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 


 


trikke #9 Posted 14 January 2018 - 03:05 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 3633 battles
  • 3,499
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 14 January 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

I don't understand why destroying all of the ground targets in an objective doesn't cap it. :angry:

 

i guess it's a nod toward the 'idea' of teamwork that seems to have taken over Persha's wowp devs

 

Many hands make light work


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore

mnbv_fockewulfe #10 Posted 14 January 2018 - 03:10 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 616 battles
  • 3,490
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013
There was another bomber there helping me out. :P

Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 


 


compugeek5150 #11 Posted 14 January 2018 - 03:20 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 233 battles
  • 11
  • [LEAP] LEAP
  • Member since:
    05-09-2012

are people actually saying it's bad??  I've been having fun with it.  Trying out all different altitudes it seems like 7k+ and you're 99% untouchable, below 5k and I seem to hit about 25% more targets but the lower you are, the more dependent you are on your team for survival.  I'm still getting re-acquainted with the game but still manage to average 60+ targets destroyed per match.



LMG #12 Posted 14 January 2018 - 03:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 2436 battles
  • 1,986
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 14 January 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

I don't understand why destroying all of the ground targets in an objective doesn't cap it. :angry:

 

If it's a neutral zone, the enemy team is getting capture points as well or your allies are dying over it. If it's a hostile sector, your allies are dying over it. But in the case of Forward Airstrips, they do not have enough ground targets to capture it. You have to wait for them to respawn or kill at least one aircraft


This is my IL-2 (t). There are many like it, but this one is mine. :child:

mnbv_fockewulfe #13 Posted 14 January 2018 - 05:27 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 616 battles
  • 3,490
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

It was a hostile airstrip.

I don't understand the logic.

If there isn't anywhere for the enemy to land how can they control the stupid objective.:sceptic:


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 


 


LMG #14 Posted 14 January 2018 - 06:03 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 2436 battles
  • 1,986
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postmnbv_fockewulfe, on 14 January 2018 - 12:27 PM, said:

It was a hostile airstrip.

I don't understand the logic.

If there isn't anywhere for the enemy to land how can they control the stupid objective.:sceptic:

 

We don't land, we just start in the air already, so it has no impact on its performance whatsoever :P


This is my IL-2 (t). There are many like it, but this one is mine. :child:

mnbv_fockewulfe #15 Posted 14 January 2018 - 07:07 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 616 battles
  • 3,490
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    12-06-2013

This is the other thing that really bugs.

The confusion of "strategic" air warfare, and "tactical" air warfare.

Strategic involves killing the enemies means of production.

Tactical is precision bombing of ground forces, shooting down other a/c, and intercept missions ect.

Conquest tries for a strategic situation in the confines of tactical and fails (hence, the inability to affect the outcome of the battle).


 


Be sure to check your logic privileges before posting on the forum.

 


 


legoboy0401 #16 Posted 14 January 2018 - 08:31 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1778 battles
  • 1,771
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View PostLMG, on 13 January 2018 - 10:07 PM, said:

In my case I just don't feel like I can do enough for my team on it. Even when I hit all my bombs I still can't seem to outperform a proper GAA. I think that it has somewhat to do with versatility. GAAs take care of AA and soft targets with gunfire, then use their ordnance on armored ones. Bombers have to bomb everything, which forces them to run on a budget while attacking larger sectors, and even smaller ones like garrisons. Once those bombs are spent, all you can do is dodge the remaining AA and pray the bombs recharge in time to capture the area before the rest of the AA respawns. I don't mind having to pick my targets, but I mind never having a real solution to a problem (in this case, remove the AA while attempting to properly capture the sector with 5 bombloads and about one minute to reload them). I almost cried when on one game someone else shot the high altitude AA for me (thank you whoever that was).

Aside of that, in the specific case of the Do 17 z I feel utterly defenseless if someone actually reaches me. I had someone spawncamp me on a heavy the other day and all I could do was try to ram them or bend over and die. I even had a P-40 erase me in two seconds when it managed to catch up on a turn. Not even on a Bsh-2 have I felt such hopelessness.

Personally I'd decrease the reload time on the bombs and maybe buff the turrets or HP a bit. For now I'll wait for a Bomber line that offers that

 

The bomb reload is a bit much. 40 or 35 seconds would be more fair, and correspondingly, 30 or 25 seconds for the Ju-88A.(because it has the same bomb armament at a higher tier)

 

As for the Do 217 M, it's reload on its bombs is so long for a bomber, it's just dumb. You could take a semester of a college class before the bombs on that thing reload.

 

Not that it's the worst bomb reload. The FW-57's 210 second reload(3 and a half minutes) is so long, you could be born, graduate, get married, and finally die before those bombs are up again. That reload makes them just for show.

 

Oh, and the German Bomber defenses are laughable. A full-hp TIER I could knock out a Do 17 Z before the Do 17 Z could shoot it down. The Do 217 M is slightly better in this regard, as it's forward and rearward guns have overlapping arcs which means they can stack their DPS, but ne quidem (not even )that can make the Do 217 M's defenses GOOD for the tier.

 

The A-26B's defenses are so much better, it's like comparing the Blenheim IV (e)'s defenses to the RB-17's defenses. They are simply not comparable. In the same way, the A-26B's defenses are in a whole other league compared to the Do 217 M's defenses.

 

As for a buff to the German defenses, I think not. I'm pretty sure effective defensive guns will be either the American or the Russian thing.

 

But an HP buff, yes please. The Do 17 Z is unbelievably fragile garbage without Concealing Livery and Reinforced Airframe.

 

AA, especially high altitude AA, is just too OP in 2.0 for an unmodified German Bomber to have as little HP as they do.


Edited by legoboy0401, 14 January 2018 - 08:43 PM.

An average player with an average goal: greatness, someday. Today, mediocrity will have to suffice. But no matter, I will always play to the best of my ability, and I will always strive to make the best of my ability just that little bit stronger and better.

 

#Failureisalwaysanoption

 

#Givingupneveris


Mini_Marine #17 Posted 14 January 2018 - 09:06 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Alpha tester
  • 1739 battles
  • 28
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlegoboy0401, on 14 January 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

 

The bomb reload is a bit much. 40 or 35 seconds would be more fair, and correspondingly, 30 or 25 seconds for the Ju-88A.(because it has the same bomb armament at a higher tier)

 

As for the Do 217 M, it's reload on its bombs is so long for a bomber, it's just dumb. You could take a semester of a college class before the bombs on that thing reload.

 

Not that it's the worst bomb reload. The FW-57's 210 second reload(3 and a half minutes) is so long, you could be born, graduate, get married, and finally die before those bombs are up again. That reload makes them just for show.

 

Oh, and the German Bomber defenses are laughable. A full-hp TIER I could knock out a Do 17 Z before the Do 17 Z could shoot it down. The Do 217 M is slightly better in this regard, as it's forward and rearward guns have overlapping arcs which means they can stack their DPS, but ne quidem (not even )that can make the Do 217 M's defenses GOOD for the tier.

 

The A-26B's defenses are so much better, it's like comparing the Blenheim IV (e)'s defenses to the RB-17's defenses. They are simply not comparable. In the same way, the A-26B's defenses are in a whole other league compared to the Do 217 M's defenses.

 

As for a buff to the German defenses, I think not. I'm pretty sure effective defensive guns will be either the American or the Russian thing.

 

But an HP buff, yes please. The Do 17 Z is unbelievably fragile garbage without Concealing Livery and Reinforced Airframe.

 

AA, especially high altitude AA, is just too OP in 2.0 for an unmodified German Bomber to have as little HP as they do.

 

The A-26 has a much worse bomb load than the Do 217 M, but it's got much better guns. Pairing the two up is a dream team. The Do 217 M just wrecks ground targets with it's 8 big bombs before moving on to the next objective, while the A-26 provides cover against anything that comes up do try to shoot you down and bats clean up with it's small bombs on anything the Do 217 M didn't quite finish off.



legoboy0401 #18 Posted 14 January 2018 - 09:20 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1778 battles
  • 1,771
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View PostMini_Marine, on 14 January 2018 - 01:06 PM, said:

 

The A-26 has a much worse bomb load than the Do 217 M, but it's got much better guns. Pairing the two up is a dream team. The Do 217 M just wrecks ground targets with it's 8 big bombs before moving on to the next objective, while the A-26 provides cover against anything that comes up do try to shoot you down and bats clean up with it's small bombs on anything the Do 217 M didn't quite finish off.

 

In any case, AA still needs to be toned down a bit, especially high-altitude AA. It's too OP.

An average player with an average goal: greatness, someday. Today, mediocrity will have to suffice. But no matter, I will always play to the best of my ability, and I will always strive to make the best of my ability just that little bit stronger and better.

 

#Failureisalwaysanoption

 

#Givingupneveris


LMG #19 Posted 14 January 2018 - 09:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 2436 battles
  • 1,986
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postlegoboy0401, on 14 January 2018 - 04:20 PM, said:

In any case, AA still needs to be toned down a bit, especially high-altitude AA. It's too OP.

 

I wouldn't mind the high altitude AA damage if there was an easy way to dispatch it. Problem is that there isn't one for bombers, it's bomb or bust. I'll have to agree that it needs to be looked at, but low-altitude AA I feel should stay as is simply because anything it should be firing at can deal with it :sceptic:


This is my IL-2 (t). There are many like it, but this one is mine. :child:

legoboy0401 #20 Posted 14 January 2018 - 10:08 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1778 battles
  • 1,771
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View PostLMG, on 14 January 2018 - 01:32 PM, said:

 

I wouldn't mind the high altitude AA damage if there was an easy way to dispatch it. Problem is that there isn't one for bombers, it's bomb or bust. I'll have to agree that it needs to be looked at, but low-altitude AA I feel should stay as is simply because anything it should be firing at can deal with it :sceptic:

 

And when bombed, they just respawn in a blink of an eye and go on shooting at your bomber, oblivious to the fact that just a minute ago, you bombed them to kingdom come.

An average player with an average goal: greatness, someday. Today, mediocrity will have to suffice. But no matter, I will always play to the best of my ability, and I will always strive to make the best of my ability just that little bit stronger and better.

 

#Failureisalwaysanoption

 

#Givingupneveris






Also tagged with tactics, Bomber

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users