86 replies to this topic

[legoboy0401]

hoom, on 12 April 2019 - 08:48 PM, said:

I have this now, played 3 battles so far.

Stuck in some of my best crew (its a Premium -> can put any Soviet crew in there)

 

Its OK but not amazing.

Feels a lot like Bf-110-C6: a kinda lumbering yet floaty feel to it that makes it seem not that quick, long range hard hitting gun(s) but is a bit tricky to dial-in & aim confused by the 2ndary guns. (I've not managed to get dedicated primary fire button to work well)

 

First battle I was staying high trying to kill Bombers & getting annoyingly competed with by a P-51 & a Bf-109Z for a lot of it, the 109Z is much quicker & seemed to be doing most of the damage.

Later split off from them & was having a hard time landing hits on other planes.

 

2nd battle definitely felt pretty 110-C6 but I actually don't remember details much (not enough sleep!), did land some good hits, missed a bunch of others though.

 

3rd battle I had my aim in a lot better & got some real nice alpha hits.

While the top speed isn't that great I'm actually getting round the map pretty quickly, sustaining 650km/h easy level with blips of boost and 700 with a little dive. (running Improved Uprated Engine, Improved Mixture Control, pilot with both Engine Gurus)

 

Its the sort of plane that can do a lot of damage if left alone but will be incredibly frustrating to play when a player/headhunting bot decides to take you down.

 

So, not me then. Thank you, that's all I wanted to know. Well, at least the Me-410 which I am finishing the grind to right now should be more of my style. I'll pass on the Tu-1, I think. Hard grinding for a plane that doesn't even mesh very well with me? No thanks.

Edited by legoboy0401, 13 April 2019 - 01:27 PM.

[CorvusCorvax]

legoboy0401, on 13 April 2019 - 01:26 PM, said:

 

Well, at least the Me-410 which I am finishing the grind to right now should be more of my style

 

Well, the play with these two aircraft is similar.  If you can figure out how to run the Me-410, the Tu-1 is not really all that much different.

[White_Widow18]

CorvusCorvax, on 13 April 2019 - 11:17 AM, said:

 

Well, the play with these two aircraft is similar.  If you can figure out how to run the Me-410, the Tu-1 is not really all that much different.

 

[legoboy0401]

CorvusCorvax, on 13 April 2019 - 09:17 AM, said:

 

Well, the play with these two aircraft is similar.  If you can figure out how to run the Me-410, the Tu-1 is not really all that much different.

 

I'm not so good with sniper cannons at the moment. I'm learning them(thanks Stuka), but I still have a ways to go before I am comfortable with them. I haven't even played the Yak-7 yet, let alone the rest of the Yak multirole fighter line where you really get used to them. Anything bigger than 30 mms at medium to long range I'm not very good with yet. Reference the fact that I suck with my XFL-1.

 

Also, I've never gotten an Efimov, so there's that as well standing in the way of me getting the Tu-1.

[hoom]

Block Quote

 Well, the play with these two aircraft is similar.  If you can figure out how to run the Me-410, the Tu-1 is not really all that much different.

 If it had Mk103s I'd believe this but it has Mk108s, surely that makes it nothing like Tu-1?

Or do you mean in general handling? Turn time, roll-rate & altitude are same.

 

Block Quote

 Reference the fact that I suck with my XFL-1.

 Closer to the Mk108 than a sniper cannon.

The trick is to add 50-100% to the lead you think its going to need.

When you land that thing reliably its glorious.

 

Edited by hoom, 14 April 2019 - 02:08 PM.

[CorvusCorvax]

hoom, on 14 April 2019 - 02:04 PM, said:

 If it had Mk103s I'd believe this but it has Mk108s, surely that makes it nothing like Tu-1?

 

 

 

I didn't say they were the same.  But the play style is very similar.

[White_Widow18]

hoom, on 14 April 2019 - 08:04 AM, said:

 If it had Mk103s I'd believe this but it has Mk108s, surely that makes it nothing like Tu-1?

Or do you mean in general handling? Turn time, roll-rate & altitude are same.

 

 Closer to the Mk108 than a sniper cannon.

The trick is to add 50-100% to the lead you think its going to need.

When you land that thing reliably its glorious.

 

 

The MK 108 has a 240RPM RoF. The HC-45 has a -30- RPM rate of fire. The 108 also has only about 2/3rd the range of the HC-45... I don't see -any- comparison in those two cannons. Flight characteristics of the 410 and TU-1 feel -similar- but the longer I fly it the more it feels like a cross between the pancake and the SE 100 for flight characteristics. Gun wise it feels more like the Bk 3.7s with slightly lower range (those are on the Stuka).

Edited by White_Widow18, 15 April 2019 - 04:16 AM.

[hoom]

Block Quote

  I don't see -any- comparison in those two cannons.

 Thats why I was surprised you agreed with CorvusCorvax that Tu-1 is similar to Me 410

 

2nd part of the post was reference to the 37mm on XFL-1.

[White_Widow18]

hoom, on 15 April 2019 - 02:53 AM, said:

 Thats why I was surprised you agreed with CorvusCorvax that Tu-1 is similar to Me 410

 

2nd part of the post was reference to the 37mm on XFL-1.

 

The concepts between the two are similar enough though that if you can fly the 410, this shouldn't be a -big- leap. I do feel like it floats more like the XF5U/SE 100 and the guns remind me very much of going air to air in the Stuka.. but the combination ends up operating very similarly to the 410.. except ya know.. you hit things with the big guns without being on top of them.

Also, aah, I mis-read the second part =D

Edit: Alright.. I may have to retract the backing of the 410 as a comparative plane the longer I'm thinking. It seemed solid on the surface, but further examination and thought and all that... I can admit when my initial thought was wrong.

Edited by White_Widow18, 15 April 2019 - 09:07 AM.

[legoboy0401]

White_Widow18, on 15 April 2019 - 12:57 AM, said:

 

The concepts between the two are similar enough though that if you can fly the 410, this shouldn't be a -big- leap. I do feel like it floats more like the XF5U/SE 100 and the guns remind me very much of going air to air in the Stuka.. but the combination ends up operating very similarly to the 410.. except ya know.. you hit things with the big guns without being on top of them.

Also, aah, I mis-read the second part =D

Edit: Alright.. I may have to retract the backing of the 410 as a comparative plane the longer I'm thinking. It seemed solid on the surface, but further examination and thought and all that... I can admit when my initial thought was wrong.

 

Congratulations on 6,000 battles.

[StoptheViolins]

Tu-1 eats bombers, and anything else it can get in front of its guns. Two salvos most planes.

[CorvusCorvax]

StoptheViolins, on 15 April 2019 - 05:15 PM, said:

Tu-1 eats bombers, and anything else it can get in front of its guns. Two salvos most planes.

 

Bomber pilots will be crying salty tears of rage at this aircraft...

[legoboy0401]

CorvusCorvax, on 15 April 2019 - 01:27 PM, said:

 

Bomber pilots will be crying salty tears of rage at this aircraft...

 

Erm, actually, I think the Tu-1 could possibly be the plane that gets the mute ADA planes whining and raging.

 

Non-bomber bots will attempt to cheat their way out of being killed by the Tu-1, but study their cheating(maneuvers players can't make) long enough and even that won't be enough for them. Light Fighters, OH MY, they will be SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER after getting one or two shot by the Tu-1. Now, for fighter class players, I think their reaction, inevitably, will be a massive influx of specialist Ki-93s specifically to head-hunt Tu-1s out the dickens.

 

I wonder though, how does it fair against such Tier VIII giants as the Me-262 Schwalbe, the BV P.203 and the XP-58 Chain Lightning?

[White_Widow18]

legoboy0401, on 15 April 2019 - 03:38 PM, said:

 

Erm, actually, I think the Tu-1 could possibly be the plane that gets the mute ADA planes whining and raging.

 

Non-bomber bots will attempt to cheat their way out of being killed by the Tu-1, but study their cheating(maneuvers players can't make) long enough and even that won't be enough for them. Light Fighters, OH MY, they will be SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER after getting one or two shot by the Tu-1. Now, for fighter class players, I think their reaction, inevitably, will be a massive influx of specialist Ki-93s specifically to head-hunt Tu-1s out the dickens.

 

I wonder though, how does it fair against such Tier VIII giants as the Me-262 Schwalbe, the BV P.203 and the XP-58 Chain Lightning?

Honestly? It might be the second best T7 Heavy.. but that puts it at "meh" in competitiveness with T8 heavies. That's my outlook.

[CorvusCorvax]

White_Widow18, on 15 April 2019 - 08:57 AM, said:

 

Edit: Alright.. I may have to retract the backing of the 410 as a comparative plane the longer I'm thinking. It seemed solid on the surface, but further examination and thought and all that... I can admit when my initial thought was wrong.

L.M.A.O.

 

Twin-engined heavy fighters play the same.  The differences in play styles are of nuance, not type.  About the only HF that you can make a case for playing in any kind of a turn fight is the Do-335.  Even then, it's a HUGE stretch.  Of the heavy fighters at T6, which one turns the worst?  Which one has the most alpha?

 

At-tier, you're not turning with any other HF in the Me-410.  And the Tu-1 is similar.  In addition, the plane that hits hardest, at the longest range (the Ki-102's gun is a direct comparison to the Tu-1, however).  Max alt.?  Climb rate?  

 

The Tu-1 in no way feels like the SE-100.  The SE-100 is a very turny HF at T5.  Not fast, for sure, and carp altitude, but can turn like crazy for a HF.  And those 20s just wreck the heck out of everything, at high speed.  The Tu-1, if you can get those cannon to hit, just up and crushes planes.  Hey, just like the Me-410,  with those slow MK108s!  You just have to get them to hit, LOL.  

 

No, they aren't the same plane.  But you have to play them alike, because they aren't the fastest, nor do they turn the hardest, nor do they have the highest altitude.  

 

Similar.

[White_Widow18]

CorvusCorvax, on 15 April 2019 - 08:20 PM, said:

L.M.A.O.

 

Twin-engined heavy fighters play the same.  The differences in play styles are of nuance, not type.  About the only HF that you can make a case for playing in any kind of a turn fight is the Do-335.  Even then, it's a HUGE stretch.  Of the heavy fighters at T6, which one turns the worst?  Which one has the most alpha?

 

At-tier, you're not turning with any other HF in the Me-410.  And the Tu-1 is similar.  In addition, the plane that hits hardest, at the longest range (the Ki-102's gun is a direct comparison to the Tu-1, however).  Max alt.?  Climb rate?  

 

The Tu-1 in no way feels like the SE-100.  The SE-100 is a very turny HF at T5.  Not fast, for sure, and carp altitude, but can turn like crazy for a HF.  And those 20s just wreck the heck out of everything, at high speed.  The Tu-1, if you can get those cannon to hit, just up and crushes planes.  Hey, just like the Me-410,  with those slow MK108s!  You just have to get them to hit, LOL.  

 

No, they aren't the same plane.  But you have to play them alike, because they aren't the fastest, nor do they turn the hardest, nor do they have the highest altitude.  

 

Similar.

 

I've been playing with stall speed turning concepts and the idea that going flat out actually minimizes your capacity to turn. The SE 100 is comparable in its maneuverability with the Tu-1 in all but rate of roll and their floatiness feeling is quite similar -to me-.. and I already said the guns were different. The Mk 108s, however, are -nothing- like the HC-45s. Nothing. 240 ROF on the MK 108s vs 30 RoF on the HC-45s and the HC-45s have -almost- literally twice the range capability. That's not at all a comparable set of guns and while all heavies fly similarly.. that means guns are a big point of difference. I -personally- feel like the TU-1 flies more like an higher tiered SE 100.. all floaty and strange, but that's a matter of flavor really given the miniscule difference in stats between the three in the maneuverability department. I'm actually hard pressed to think of a heavy fighter that operates like the TU-1 because of those guns the -longer- I've thought about it. It's.. different? I dunno.. it's a whole different sort of beast to the other three heavy lines or the french planes. That 30 RoF is -brutally- slow and requires -pinpoint- accuracy in target lead, more so than -any- other heavy in the game to my view. Based on it alone, I'm curious to see what they could do/hopefully will do with a tech tree line of Russian Heavies.

[hoom]

Well Bf 110-C6 has 45rpm & similar range, similarly floaty flying.

Ki-93 top gun is also 45rpm with similar range but on a more agile platform.

[legoboy0401]

White_Widow18, on 15 April 2019 - 06:39 PM, said:

 

I've been playing with stall speed turning concepts and the idea that going flat out actually minimizes your capacity to turn. The SE 100 is comparable in its maneuverability with the Tu-1 in all but rate of roll and their floatiness feeling is quite similar -to me-.. and I already said the guns were different. The Mk 108s, however, are -nothing- like the HC-45s. Nothing. 240 ROF on the MK 108s vs 30 RoF on the HC-45s and the HC-45s have -almost- literally twice the range capability. That's not at all a comparable set of guns and while all heavies fly similarly.. that means guns are a big point of difference. I -personally- feel like the TU-1 flies more like an higher tiered SE 100.. all floaty and strange, but that's a matter of flavor really given the miniscule difference in stats between the three in the maneuverability department. I'm actually hard pressed to think of a heavy fighter that operates like the TU-1 because of those guns the -longer- I've thought about it. It's.. different? I dunno.. it's a whole different sort of beast to the other three heavy lines or the french planes. That 30 RoF is -brutally- slow and requires -pinpoint- accuracy in target lead, more so than -any- other heavy in the game to my view. Based on it alone, I'm curious to see what they could do/hopefully will do with a tech tree line of Russian Heavies.

 

By floaty, do you mean it likes to randomly lose speed rapidly/it rather likes to stall? Because that is in my experience EXACTLY what the SE-100 flies like. It can often lose/bleed speed very rapidly, which is a major reason it likes to stall so much.

[hoom]

For me floaty is not so much actual speed loss, just feels like it kinda stops in the air but the speed is still fine.

 

[CorvusCorvax]

hoom, on 16 April 2019 - 03:32 AM, said:

Well Bf 110-C6 has 45rpm & similar range, similarly floaty flying.

 

 

I was going to mention the C-6 and that derp cannon.  Folks are going to have to define "floaty".  No heavy fighter is "floaty", but they are are all more or less "brick-like", which is really the complete opposite of "floaty"!  What, like not fast, but still turn like a supertanker? 

 

Heavy fighters are sort of a blunt instrument. 

 

One of th points made elsewhere I have been thinking on - If this plane is out there in any kind of numbers, bomber pilots will cry bitter tears.  But that's not the big deal.  The big deal will be bots flying them, and all of us in T7 battles will be flying along, or fighting someone and BOOM!

 

50mm bot one-shotting from a kilometer away.