So it was the Ki-44-II Hei with the 4x .50s.
And he fired a 2.5 second burst at you, going by the timestamps the first hit was at ~12.10.600 and your tail seperated right about at ~12.13.00. his burst was a second longer or so from his first misses.
Thats a lot of rounds he wasted in killing you
is that from pilots not being on target? or it could be from convergence because IRL they ran very wide convergence patterns unlike those we have in game.
there is a reason that even as late as the early sabers US air force fighters could be armed with 0.50 cals (the navy and marine corps went to 20mm for increased effect on ground targets)
Guess this guy was lying too:
Just forget that Robert Johnson is considered a good resource on the P-47, and we have pictures of his damaged aircraft but alright.
He didn’t fire a long burst. You can hear him fire intermittently. Not continuously. And when it hit 12:13:00 He fired once and it instantly bisected my plane. He fired once, fired twice, realized he wasn’t hitting and held back until 12:13:00 where he fired clicked one more time and instantly bisected my plane
No, you see ther tracers going in every direction in a wide cone, centered on the target.
Because all their attempts at making reliable 20mm cannons largely failed. Even those which armed the Scorpion and Sabre Dog had reliability problems and did not last very long.
Anecdotal. If we want to go down that route, Col. Neel Kearby (which I believe at the time was the leading P-47 ace) was shot down by a mere Ki-43 with its two nose-mounted .50cals. Clearly these guns worked very well.
yes, that is what convergence does
maybe its because they were happy with m3 0.50s until then
If they were happy with them, they would not have been trying for so long to replace them. They served well enough for their convenience in logistics and the reliability issues of their replacements to mean that replacing them wasn’t urgent, but there was a definite and consistent effort to replace .50 cals with 20mm guns. 8 .50 cals weigh more than 4 20mms, while delivering less firepower.
The fact that the majority of the kills were from relying on a fire to do passive damage (or just dumb luck in the case of bomb explosions and the pilot snipe) is bad, yes. If you remove any way to show how the 0.50 cals are bad then they might appear ok, but I’m not ignoring that the 0.50 cals are unique in being forced to rely on fire rather than doing actual damage with bullets.
Here is the argument I’m hearing:
When a .50 cal kills an enemy aircraft by setting it on fire, destroying it’s fuel/cooling, or killing its pilot, this is a bad kill, and inherently inferior to the damage done by cannons. The only scenario where .50 cals can be called equal to cannons is one where they have an equal ability to deal structural damage, including tearing off wings, control surfaces, etc. to the cannons that have HE filler. We want this capacity to do structural damage while still retaining the good accuracy, rate of fire, ballistics, and ammo pool provided by the .50 calibre guns. Anything less than this puts the entire American air tree at an inherent disadvantage.
Do I have the right understanding?
Yes, quite literally yes. 0.50 cals in real life were less effective than 20mm cannons, but the gap was not as massive as it is in game currently. With a comparable amount of mass of bullets being shot out, 0.50 cals should not be several times worse than cannons or even 12.7mms with HE shells.
0.50 cals should not have to rely on essentially RNG in order to get kills.
Except that currently the accuracy, rate of fire, ballistics, and ammo pool do not mean anything when 0.50 cals are much, much, much worse than 20mms in terms of damage. Gaijin could increase the damage dealt by 0.50 cals by 50%-75% and they’d still be just equal to cannons.
… Im sorry what?
“if we remove the way that the 50 cals do their damage, they don’t do damage”
I mean… duh? If you remove all the HEF shells from 20mm cannons, they don’t do damage either. Have you tried a belt filled with practice shells? they’re pathetic. Just like a .50 belt filled with Ball ammo is pathetic.
Regarding fires, the only planes that died because of the fire was the FW-190, and maybe the Ki-61. the Tu-2 would have burned out too if I had let it. The rest of them, the fire was in addition to the fact they had been completely ripped to shreds.
Look, here is even a clip of the La-9 in that video dying form his perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1e1LNCBlH8
the first shot hit him at 9.02:945, and rounds stopped hitting him at 9.03:520. That is just under 1.6 seconds of fire.
Ignoring the fires, because that isn’t enough time for them to really do any extra damage, in that 1.6 seconds he had destroyed:
-His Right tail fin
-His right Wing tip
-His Fuselage
-His left aileron
-His entire left wing
I even ripped his wing off, That wasn’t the fire, the fires weren’t in that wing.
I genuinely don’t understand how that “isn’t enough damage” for you.
They don’t rely on RNG, they rip enemy aircraft to literal shreds.
Making 0.50 cals rely on passive damage should not be acceptable when they were not glorified lighters IRL. They should be doing more damage than literally nothing.
Except the entire reason he wasn’t able to do anything was due to the fire destroying the right aileron and snapping off the tip of the right wing, limiting his control.
They were not, it wasn’t possible to tell in the earlier replay, but in this replay I could see that it took three (three!) near perpendicular shots to the wing spar for the wing to snap off. That’s not even mentioning the possible damage the wing spar might have had from the fire near the fuselage.
Relying on fire = RNG. Ripping to shreds =/= relying on fire.
They quite literally do damage. I had 12 kills of proof of that
Fires quite literally do not do that much damage that quickly. It takes several seconds at least for a fire to burn through something. The rounds themselves are what destroyed it, not the fire.
As I said, only two of those kills relied on the fire for them to die
You had 2-3 where the 0.50 cal bullets did most of the damage, the rest were fuel explosions, bomb explosions, or fire breaking control surfaces/the tail.
Incorrect, from what I can tell.
Relying on fires is not RNG.
Hell, relying on pilot snipes is not RNG.
Shoot from closer, shoot within convergence range. Aim for the fuselage.
Pilot snipes occur when you fail to hit the enemy engine. Are they accidental? Technically - but that accident is a very positive outcome for failure to achieve the primary objective (wrecking the enemy engine, causing a engine fire).
Tertiary outcome is striking the fuel tank near/under the pilot and causing a fire. You have two scenarios with high risk of fire - engine strike and striking just behind the enemy pilot.
Maybe it’s because in SB average engagement distances are ~300-500 meters, but I’ve never in my life thought that pilot snipes and engine kills were RNG. The target jinking and being non-compliant does make them harder to execute but that’s where .50 shine over 20 mm and especially 37mm. With .50 guns, I can squeeze the trigger every time I might have a shot, while I have to make every shot count using 37mm or 45 mm guns. .50 calls are consequently more resistant to enemy attempts at evasion. And this is not even considering the differences in rate of fire (it’s kinda hard to evade a wall of lead)
Fire is somewhat RNG but burst mass vs enemy pilot reacting appropriately weigh the dice heavily in either direction.
One kill was due to a bomb explosion
and we are straight back to “if you pretend all the ways that the rounds do damage don’t exist, the rounds don’t do damage”
I dunno what Speclist is getting at. But to avoid all this talk about ‘muh realism’ and ‘Gubment said boolet deeid theiiss’ or ‘this plane flown by Joe Michael Bob survived by his scraped anus’ I wanna get to the gist. my general point is this:
20mms are insanely overpowered. They can obliterate vehicles that shouldn’t be obliterated the way that they are and Gaijin needs to fix the insane discrepancy in damage models and I think everyone agrees to some degree. (Fly the P-38 using only the cannon. It’s possible and the only thing you have to mess with is the velocity and that’s it.)
If they refuse to do that (because y’know. It takes effort). Buff .50s to be akin to Swedish 13.7mm guns or slightly below. Cannons take invariably less skill to use, glancing blows will either melt your enemy, if it doesn’t, it cripples them, and if that didn’t happen. You were plain unlucky which I find rare, but it does happen. There has barely been a time I have taken a hit where I go “That’s okay, I can return from this”. even in aircraft that’re supposed to be ‘tanky’.
You’ll need to put a considerably large burst (90% of your rounds hit target) on an enemy all on a focused area to actually make a hit that matters or… You’re lucky. This is difficult when one: You’re usually in an inferior plane. A Yak-3 will utterly gank me, A Ki-100 is nightmare fuel, and spitfires make me gag. While I’m in a P-47D or a P-51D. I can’t really do anything. I don’t turn good, I don’t climb good, I don’t even really roll good, my matches will either end up with me dead or I’m stuck doing like in the japanese aircraft replay. I’m running and running and running to get separation only to take really really risky headons at them and repeat the process while my guns basically do nothing and I pray I hit the engine while my enemy just has to hit me literally anywhere. For a good chunk of U.S. planes. You get very little if any chances. While with other aircraft. You can screw up and make it up.
If I decide to get ballsy, even with my better altitude performance, it’s a massive risk to take as one round will utterly end me while I need a good burst to hurt them or else I am now scrambling to get away. All this while fighting the clock as well.
Think about it. Like what Zekker said. “You need to fire within convergence and hit the fuselage”. Think about that! Your guns will be WAY WORSE, if you do not fire within that specific range in your convergence and if you go outside you will do PIECEMEAL damage. Even in wing mounted cannon armed aircraft, you’ll know that at least 1 cannon round might do something important. You can only do—for sake of argument—equivalent damage of a cannon within a SMALL window while most of the aircraft you fly are usually inferior in most ways compared to the enemy you’re fighting.
Like with any aircraft, performance can make subpar weapons ‘work better’ because you can position yourself where you’re more likely to get hits compared to your opponent. A-36 (Though this is partially due to nose mounted .50s allowing that square pattern–this makes me believe custom convergences is required in this game but I digress) You can go almost 600kmh flat while having six 50s in a favorable config.
P-51H. Literally one of the best props in the game because you basically have a crap load of options for yourself. You can make those guns work, because their performance is so great. I may take 3-4 passes. But I know I’m in control and have great performance and can position myself as I please. Like boxing. Weak arms, but great legs.
The same can be true somewhat vice versa. F6F-5N. Good armament, but the performance sucks BALLLSSS. I feel like I have nuke blasters on each side but the plane has the performance of a covered wagon. Weak legs but strong arms.
I don’t think it’s fair to have an aircraft that you have to play the complete opposite way Gaijin built the game while having guns that are atrociously finicky and you need to be PINPOINT PRECISE to succeed in when you fly aircraft that punishes you greatly for even the slightest misdemeanor in performance where your foes beat you in most ways while also fighting the clock. While on the opposite side of the fence. You can fly quick climbing, relatively fast, aircraft with great gun performance where even at altitude you’re still seen as a threat where you can be confident that you’re going to get several kills. (cough cough yak-3) That’s not to say there’s nothing REDEEMABLE about .50s as they have a few distinct advantages but the advantages they have do not seem much better than getting good quick kills with a cannon.
This is my whole Shtick.
I don’t agree with you, but I can get where you’re coming from with this. I’m soon to bed, but I’ll try to answer a couple things here so you’re not left with nothing.
20mms are insanely overpowered.
It is better to say that .50 cals are a bit below average in damage. If you know how to use them, and if you set situations up right, they still work well, and there’s things you can do with them that can’t be done with other guns, but the damage isn’t going to be as good as most 20mms, and that’s just how it is to compare an HMG with a cannon. Ultimately, 20mms are generally the standard, with .50 cals a step below that, and 30mms a step above.
This is difficult when one: You’re usually in an inferior plane. A Yak-3 will utterly gank me, A Ki-100 is nightmare fuel, and spitfires make me gag. While I’m in a P-47D or a P-51D. I can’t really do anything. I don’t turn good, I don’t climb good, I don’t even really roll good…
“You need to fire within convergence and hit the fuselage”. Think about that ! Your guns will be WAY WORSE, if you do not fire within that specific range in your convergence and if you go outside you will do PIECEMEAL damage…
Until about a year and a half or so, maybe two years, I was an Fw 190 main. At that point in time, it rolled quite a bit better than US planes, but climbed about the same, turned worse, and had about the same speed; I say this because this makes them relatively comparable for the purposes of this conversation.
Yaks, Spitfires, Japanese planes, and all the other UFOs are always annoying and cancer to deal with. You can deal with them, but one of the perils of shorter games is that planes like the Fw 190 or P-51 that fight with speed are disadvantaged, because with a longer game you’d be able to win almost 100% of the time, but with a short timer you’re forced to take risks you shouldn’t.
That said, having flown the Fw 190 quite a bit, and more recently having been flying P-51s over the last month, it’s definitely doable, just incredibly annoying. I won’t get into the specifics of it now, because it would take too long for my exhaustion to tolerate.
The armament I can discuss more briefly though. In real life, 20mm minengeschoss was objectively, on the balance, the best A2A cannon in ww2, because in real life pilots were usually shooting within 100 meters, which means the poor ballistics didn’t matter. In-game, you tend to shoot around 600-700 meters, or you do a lot of deflection shooting, and in both cases the German rounds are too low velocity and too high drag to be convenient. In addition to this, other cannons do comparable damage while being much easier to handle, resulting in MG 151s being below average in the game.
This does, however, make them fairly balanced compared to .50 cals. While the MG 151s tend to need to be fired within 500 meters or at stalled targets to hit in the first place, .50 cals tend to need to be fired within 500 meters or at stalled targets to do consistently good damage. .50 cals are easier to use, since you can hit longer shots, which gives you an extra option, but if you want to be certain of a kill it has to happen sooner. Having played the P-51s, especially the C-10 (which only has four, not six guns), this is entirely doable, because against a slow target, or one within 500m, it is fairly easy to line your shots up on the engine and canopy, which will kill or cripple the enemy.
To end this, and I may well extrapolate further on BnZ stuff tomorrow, since that’s my bread and butter, I really like both the Fw 190 and P-51. I haven’t played the Antons since the overheating nerf, but before that they were both awesome planes. The case you describe where you have to fly with great precision and not make any mistakes is the reality of a high speed, slow turn plane in this game, and having good guns doesn’t fix that.
The dynamic of it is that, while you can’t afford to make any mistakes, if you do play it perfectly you will not lose. A turnfighter has a much easier game, but even if he does everything right he might still lose. A speed-fighter can’t make any mistakes, but if he does it right, he’ll win 100% of the time (excepting carry situations).
There. I got all I wanted from this. That’s it. I don’t care about anything else. In a million years I’ll be happy again when Gaijin adds custom convergences (I have no clue why that was accepted) Just so I can also get a flat ‘pan’ of gun fire.
I highly disagree with that, 20mms are fine. The damage they do over a single 12.7mm is consistent with the size in round. Plus its only the HEF shells that do the damage, 20mm AP shells often fly straight through and do nothing.
a P-38 with only its 20mm is gimping yourself, you are getting rid of a whole lot of volume of fire that you want have in order to delete people quickly in single passes. the RoF on the cannon isn’t high enough to make up that volume, and you can miss simply by having the enemy fly between your rounds. It is an issue on many especially single cannon armed aircraft, since cannons normally have lower RoFs which make having MGs as backup beneficial.
Swedish 13.2s have an HEF shell in their belts. Find a source where the USA used HEF in their belts during WW2 and maybe they’ll add them. But I dont think they will as the M2 brownings are fine in their current state, and adding HEF to a group of planes that already put out more 1 second burst mass than most 2x 20mm + 2x 7.7mm aircraft is gonna make them OP as hell. a P-47 is firing 6000 rounds a minute, you think the Ki-44s HEF rounds are broken, oh boy wait until you see that lmfao
I completely disagree here, Cannons require good trigger discipline and accurate aim. Theres a reason the best advice for learning to fly in RB is to go fly an American .50 cal armed plane, they come with piles of ammo that you can spray as you please and learn how to aim. You can’t just spray cannons as you’ll run dry in a few seconds of fire.
As for getting back to base, a Cannon is going to rip a wing off, but .50 cals are going to pepper them with lead. I’ve seen more players get back to base and land missing a wing than I have players that have been crippled by a burst of .50 cal rounds.
The Yak 3 is busted yes, But the ki-100? really? That is one of the most average of average planes in the game at its BR lol. of all the planes in that BR bracket, the Ki-100 is not one I’d point at to make a point.
Spitfires are strong yes, but its not because of the cannons that they are strong, they’d be just as good with a set of .50 cals as well. Meanwhile, as I said in the other thread, a high up P-47 is a stupid scary opponent to fight. I definitely wouldn’t call them inferior to most other aircraft at the BR (with the Yak 3s being a blaring exception)
Based on the few videos I’ve seen of your gameplay, I genuinely think you just need to learn how to aim better. Or put yourself in better positions so you get an easier time aiming.
I didn’t say that, someone else did. They aren’t wrong, but you don’t NEED to be right within your convergence, close to it helps, as it does with every gun, but isn’t absolutely necessary, a bit of spread can even help. You just need to use the guns differently to how you use a cannon. Its not even hard to do. Fire slightly ahead of them and make them fly through your bullets. If you are flying most US planes, you have 6 guns with a combined RoF of 4500rpm. That’s a LOT of lead in the sky. You also have lots of ammo, so make use of those major advantages! Make them fly through it all. You aren’t trying to hit one specific spot on their aircraft, you are making it so you hit EVERYWHERE. Its flat out easier to do than firing cannons. You use more ammo but WHO CARES? you have 2000 more rounds where that came from.
the P-51H may be an extreme example, but you can do this with Most American aircraft.
Look, here is me doing the same thing I was doing with the P-51H, but in a P-51C:
This is a positioning and tactical issue on your part more than the fault of the guns IMO.
The F6Fs have had borked flight models since day 1, Its been reported and reported and reported ever since OBT all the way back in 2012, but they have never fixed it. No one knows why.
You don’t need to be pinpoint precise, thats the whole thing. You have so many guns and so much ammo that you can afford to miss and still succeed. If anything thats one major disadvantage to the Yak3, its got barely any ammo. you have to be VERY conservative with your trigger time in that plane if you want to make the ammo last the distance, which means more time spent lining up a perfect shot, whereas in something American I can just go dakka dakka dakka, make them jink to dodge and bleed their airspeed, and set them up for an easy kill.
