Actually its other way around. .50 cals are more effective in RB due to 3rd person view where one can hit deflection shots which are basically impossible to hit in sim due to cockpit view. In sim one needs to get really close behind.
.50 cals are more effective in RB due to mouse aim, but 20mms are massively more effective in RB than .50 cals. In RB 20mms can get the couple of shots off they need to kill a plane much easier than the .50 cal can get its dozen(s) of hits it needs. The only thing .50 cals have over cannons currently is the number of bullets that might get a pilot snipe.
And better ballistics as you said above.
They don’t matter in a gamemode with mouse aim, though.
In other words, “no not like that, just like in none of the other examples Ive been shown, they do no damage in this one specific scenario that only I know about but refuse to provide any evidence to back up my claim”
4 Likes
When you’re firing at 4500rpm, a “dozen shots” is literally nothing.
1 Like
0.16 seconds to fire 12 rounds.
Nope, remember there’s 6 guns. it’s 0.0027s. Each gun only fires twice.
No, you’ve done the same thing I originally did with the calculation, and it sounded wrong to me so I checked my maths.
4500rpm is 75rps. 12/75=0.16s your number is 0.0027 minutes to fire 12 rounds. (Which if you multiply by 60 gets you to 0.162)
Yeah, .50s are terrible.
1 Like
50 cals are better than most ww2 cannons. Much better endurance, easier to aim. It’s better to damage something than nothing at all even if overall damage is lower.
Also full API-T M20 belt ensures less ricochet
You know what, yeah that does look more accurate lol.
Its a joke chill please. :)
They do. Ballistics always matter especially in RB where one can use 3rd person view to perform deflection shots which are impossible to do from cockpit regardles to mouse aim or joystick.
Actually trash-tier example because the vast majority of all your hits were either on forward fuselage or the engine nacelle of the Yak-2 where wing snapping doesn’t actually occur. Even 20mm wouldn’t have done much too much to most of the spots you hit. That quite literally is just bad luck.
You mean the evidence I’ve shown how singular japanese .50s can do ridiculous amounts of damage? But according to gaijin. 1 gram of petn somehow can rip to shreds huge sections of wings? Burst mass doesn’t actually mean anything if the round doesn’t do diddly squat.
Again. I used only the outboard guns. and with just two guns I can rip planes apart with ease.
Just two guns.
What’s even funny too, is that you were shown from a pyrotechnics manual that incendiaries should have explosive effects. But, you shove your fingers in your ears and cover your eyes hoping the data goes away. You literally were given documentation showing “Yeah this stuff should actually be pretty explosive”
You give your thumbs up for planes with .50 cals that can literally detonate people with two guns while I’m in my P-47 with american brownings having to get most of my kills from pilot snipes, and you balk and screech when I dare even say “Maybe the incendiaries should be a bit stronger.” for a set of planes that barely have any incendiary in them.
You struck rear control surfaces, they are exceptionally weak to any gun in the game. Even 7.7s could do that. I’m not joking.
Also. Based Heavenly enjoyer.
That’s not what you claimed previously.
So what is it? Either they have to aim to do damage like with US .50cals, or they don’t have to aim and everything just dies. Clearly it’s not the latter, otherwise I wouldn’t have died to a Yak-2 that ate a bunch of these “onetap” HEF shells and kept flying just fine.
The same would have happened if using US .50cals. He was pretty much stalled out in front of your guns.
These .50cals are SO POWERFUL… that they hit him a bunch of times and only actually killed that Ki-61 when you got within 150m of him.
Skill issue.
Was doing some sim dogfights with a friend the other day. He crossed in front of my guns, I fired just 49 shots as he crossed in front of me, undoubtedly many missed and only a few of those hit. That was enough to rip off his wing just a few seconds later.
But no, 50cals are totally weak even though they’re by far the easiest to aim of all the aircraft I flew that night and all planes with them had zero difficulty in removing either of us from the fight.
3 Likes
What did I even claim? Did you gaslight yourself into believing I said things I never did?
I have stated before there are simply parts of the aircraft that won’t break because they aren’t coded to break. The nacelles won’t break off in-game. No matter what gun. You can have a direct hit with a 155mm cannon and it won’t budge. it might bra If you shoot in the upper fuselage that won’t break because it’s not programmed to snap.The inboard wings of any twin engine fighters won’t snap for whatever reason.
Never said the japanese .50s were one-shot kills. You can use this function called the ‘search bar’ in the top right up there and see that for yourself.
You need to print this quote out and tape it to the corner of your monitor so you can remember because this is like the 2nd or third time I had to correct.
Are you sure? Use only 2 U.S. .50s. Dumped on him anyway because he was annoying. Funny how you ignore the P-63 vid as I separate BOTH his wings with a short burst from the jap .50s with the majority of the damage coming from one gun each on each wing.
Please. Show me that U.S. .50s can do that much damage with 1 gun.
You’re forgetting I have good K/Ds on the P-47Ds. But sure go on.
You got good RNG. Congrats your API-T worked for once. They’re just not that good. I can say that you have skill issues with japanese .50s
I dump U.S. .50s into a guy. I have to get lucky with a fire or get a pilot snipe.
I dump Japanese .50s into a guy he either dies or I know his aircraft is severely injured because he’s trying to run away at that point and I can finish him off.
The response you quoted was to speclistmain1. Not you. He has provided no evidence or information to the discussion to enforce his claim. You have quite clearly done so. My argument was not with you in that post.
I dont think I ever quoted any of your discussions about the Incendiary rounds, or had made any comments on them. In fact I was confused why so much discussion was going into a round that is only in like two different belts and was only like one in every 6 rounds being fired out of those belts. Meanwhile all the clips I posted were using almost exclusively M20 API-T rounds, which sure weren’t exploding, but were consistently setting fires and have no problems with destroying enemy planes.
I believe I showed you in all of my clips that most of my kills were not from pilot snipes, with me reinforcing MULTIPLE times about how I was literally not having to bother aiming specifically for anything on their plane to kill it with .50 cals, instead just aiming in its general direction and watching it desintegrate.
Again the whole argument comes down to what KillaKiwi summed up 2 weeks ago:
My opinion lies firmly in agreement with the second statement.
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
The problem is that your videos boil down to "See? It makes a ton of damage! You just have to be sure you have every single round get dumped on target… "
I can argue that the Typhoon Mk1/a would be fine going up in BR with it’s cannon armed variant because if you score the vast majority of your rounds on target, you’re going to rip someone apart no matter the caliber. Guess what? 7.7s can pilot snipe too! Or that the Hurricane mk ii/trop should be 3.0 because it carries 12 guns. Of course this is sarcasm. But this shows my point that if you can get the majority of rounds to hit target a specific point, you’re going to crap damage on people. Just a reminder too. This was a 6 kill game. But as everyone points out. The 7.7s don’t have great damage potential.
