wow,
another person who doesnt understand API =/= I
they function completely differently in game, I am specifically talking about the M1 and M23 incendiary rounds
1 Like
Why do you insist on using naked incendiary rounds?
API/API-T is able to penetrate and kill the pilot, wreck the engine AND ignite whatever it touches.
.50 cals, as demonstrated in the above examples, performs quite well if you shoot the fuselage. The P-51C has probably the “worst” firepower too, to boot - only 4 guns, no late-war belts.
why do you insist on misinterpreting my point?
because I very clearly was talking about how gaijin should fix the bugged lack of damage for 0.50 cal incendiary rounds
1 Like
Incendiary rounds are just destined to forever underperform.
They only are useful for being able to light things on fire compared to AP but are otherwise useless.
In a belt with API, having AP over Incendiary would be a straight upgrade since API already has the benefits of incendiary while AP can deal additional kinetic damage.
Not to mention how pathetic cannon tracer or practice shells are damage compare to smaller caliber AP rounds.
1 Like
they cant even do that though. their fragment distance is too low
to light a fire the round needs to damage something flammable eg. engine or fuel tank
while 0.50 cal incendiary rounds fragment distance is so low they can only damage the planes skin
Theoretically. In practice I set quite a few planes on fire using 1/3 Incendiary rounds on early .50cal belts.
Including my famous He 111 snipe from 1.2km.
Set his fuel tank on fire and he burnt down.
So they can work but don’t work the way they should.
normal AP still has a fire chance too
and doesnt that get some API?
No, early war only has AP and Incendiary.
Pretty sure AP has no fire chance.
it does
every round has a fire chance, with mults increased for incendiary; heres ball ammo
1 Like
I see.
Probably the reason why default LMG belts are just as good at setting fires as belts with 100% Incendiary.
1 Like
yet again, no idea what you’re talking about lol
You of all people shouldn’t call anyone a noob.
I’m saying the vehicles you’re saying are OP are far from it. Also, I have over 4k hours. I reserve my right to call ppl noobs.
1 Like
4k hours and you’re still struggling to get even k/d with aircraft, grim. and the f8f is extremely op lmao and you’re still a noob.
3 Likes
Buddy, if you are SOMEHOW struggling against the F8F-1 of all planes, then that is just simply skill issue. There’s nothing more to it, you’re just bad at flying.
With 50cals currently you would need continued and consistent hits, with multiple passes to shoot down even a single engine fighter.
That would mean you will have to spend so much time and spare your energy on a single target, which will make you lose the match sometimes.
Not trying to say 50cals are bad but currently they are definitely underperforming when comparing with 20mms. Yet the damage produced by 50cals currently reflects some historical performance, the 20mm’s ability to simply cut you in half with a single snap shot is totally unreal. I think the problem to solve and rebalance it might be to nerf 20mm HE round to the level that we see 5-6 years ago.
1 Like
What if rather than him struggling against the F8F, it’s him killing everyone in the F8F?
I really don’t have trouble killing them, which honestly just shows American players are literally the worse in game as the vehicle can literally be untouchable if played correctly, I mean it’s literally the faster thing around that br with still very good maneuverability, honestly I don’t know how he think one of the best 6.3s would somehow be terrible at 4.7 like, I’ll smoke what he is lol. I just realized what you said and no I don’t play the 4.7 version because I don’t like to play op stuff (I barely play p51h5 or yak3u despite loving the series) I do however love the 6.3 version
1 Like
.50cals are not underperforming there’s a reason literally everyone besides the us used 20mm, .50cal trades raw damage for tigger time and velocity, you can spray and hit shots you wouldn’t want to waste 20mm on at much higher ranges and are we just going pretend it’s not common for a single 12.7 to graze a plane and burn it down?
3 Likes
First, 50cals are not “trades raw damage for trigger time” , the US basically overload the gun with ammunition and six 50cals with 2400rds would cost 450kg, in contrast japanese four 20mm with 800rds only costs 350kg, and the latter would also feature a long trigger time. While the one-second-burst-mass from 6x50cals at least equal to two or more 20mm.
Sure 20mm should perform better than the 50cals, but not by that much. If you need 200 rds on target to kill a fighter with 50cals and only 1-2 rds with 20mm, the difference is so massive that any “trigger time” advantage from 50cals just becomes a vain in comparison with the unreal efficiency of 20mm.
In real history we see lots of S/E fighters absorbs a burst of 20mm, badly shot up but still in one piece and safely go home. Which is not a case in current game as 20mm works like 30mm in real life.
This also leads to a problem for fighters with 3 or more guns, as back then in 201x warthunder, 4 guns figther has a markable value for having a good efficiency, while a single 20mm need to carefully line up shots for the cockpit. In current game, a single 20mm makes the job done is also unfair towards aircrafts that trades performance for more guns.
Not to advocate the topic that 50cals “deserve a buff”, but rather “20mm’s deserve a nerf”.
3 Likes
I too could kill everyone of they were worse than me. The insanity of calling a plane too strong when no1 who plays it even has above average stats is staggering.