The only difference is that Inc is inherently worse modeled than API, because API keeps piercing through the airframe, while Inc is stopped shortly after impact.
If you scroll up to ~post number 450, and read down, I think you’ll find plenty of discussion and argument about your question, along with more than enough proof that you are incorrect on your opinion
But seriously, what the heck is with the obsession over M23? Its a minority round in a belt you shouldnt be using anyway! Like, theres a full belt of entirely M20 API-T rounds RIGHT THERE! Why wouldn’t you use that?
If we convert it to 20mm terms, its akin to complaining that idk, the FI-T round doesnt do enough damage, in a belt where you are firing mostly API and Practice shells, with just a single FI-T round, meanwhile theres a belt thats almost entirely HEF RIGHT THERE.
Its asinine! Of course you arent doing enough damage, YOU ARE USING THE WRONG BELT!
Why the heck would you bother with a belt where you have to hope that the only one out of 5? 6? Rounds is the one that you are hitting the enemy plane with, and then hope that that one round sets them on fire, when you could just use the literal flamethrower that is the M20 Belt. That belt turns everything it hits into a flaming wreck.
They could even mega buff M23, it’d still only be a minority round and the M20 belt would still be far more effective.
So just use the correct blimmen belt and be done with it.
He probably thinks that M23 should in reality be more deadly than M20 APIT, therefore .50cals underperform, since other nations 12.7mm explosive shells deal so much damage while M23 with 5.83 flash powder filler does basically no structural damage.
And he is right that US .50cals without explosive shells are worse than the same gun having 50% explosive shells, like the Berezin UB.
He thinks that 1:1 API and M23 Incendiary should slap much harder than the guns currently do, thus they are underperforming and should be buffed to be as lethal.
Of course the problem is that US planes having 6 .50cals would simply outperform any other plane, even four Hispanos, if they had explosive rounds, or if M23 did as much structural damage as the Berezin IAI.
Damage in WT makes no sense, particularly explosive rounds, that simply outperform incendiary, when in reality the opposite was the case.
Only wooden structure was very vulnerable to small explosive bullets. And while some planes are modeled as being constructed from wood, they can take the same amount of damage.
And since wood doesn’t fuze explosive shells, it’s simply the superior material at the moment.
So I’ve done a little bit of prelimentary testing. I can’t call it extensive or even remotely conclusive because it was some test flights, a custom game vs a single AI, and two ground battles where I didnt get to do much proper shooting for comparison.
I was using the P-51H again, with the stealth belts as they have the highest percentage of M23 (50%). And on the kills I got, Ill be honest I cant comment much on the time to kill because my aim was horrific both being completely not used to the stealth belts, and the fact I’m not at home on my usual setup at the moment either so I’m not fully comfortable (#throwing excuses out there)
But yes, I was noticing less damage on the hits I was getting compared to the M20 tracer belt. I didn’t get a single fire, even after downing the AI a bunch of times in a custom game. HOWEVER, what I DID notice was that I was getting a lot more situations where wings, or tails, were being blown off. Now, this was almost entirely against the AI. the few kills against players I got weren’t that exciting, I did blow the wingtip off a Bf109, but I think the testing is inconclusive so far,
That said however, switching back to M20? immediately back to instant gigantic balls of fire the second the rounds start connecting.
Even if M23 is under performing, does that mean the guns themselves are under performing? Especially when M20 decimates everything it touches? Its far from being the only gun in the game that has belts with dud rounds in them.
Pointed this out with the original Typhoon post. Having a dude sit still and just eat a burst in the most optimum location to instagib him is not a valid argument. because I’ve done the same with 7.7.
Getting ALL your rounds to hit something important is going to screw someone up. No matter the caliber.
Because it’s a concession to make the gun better by adding a better belt without changing the stats of the ammunition. Would you rather the U.S. .50 incendiary to be updated to have Real Shatter calculations?
Only pokes holes in people unless you’re able to angle your wing to aim at the fuselage of the aircraft. Considering we don’t have custom convergences to allow different convergences for each gun. The closer you get the more likely you’re striking the target’s wing. Stray hits rarely if ever do significant damage compared to other countries’ guns. I’m not even referring to 20mm. But their .50 equivalents.
Bad analogy because one hit with 20mm HEF usually does insane damage or enough to severely cripple an aircraft. API-T is completely dependent on hit location. 20mm you can get away with off shots because even bad shots are highly likely going to hurt something important.
Because the point is that “Tracer belt only does work if you’re able to ACCURATELY hit an exact spot. Universal has damage potential but it’s squandered because gaijin made it the worst of both worlds.” The idea is not to just have a universal belt. But to have a belt consist almost entirely of incendiary with a few API-T. Purely so the guns can do damage that doesn’t entail hoping-to-smack-the-fuselage. There would be probably LESS problems if Gaijin finally implemented custom convergences to help make more consistent shots instead of what we have now.
Tracer is not a flamethrower anymore. That died in 2014-2015 when it had almost a guaranteed chance to light you on fire and you died quickly to flames. Lucky fires still occur, but they’re not common and shouldn’t be taken for granted and you now mostly require a burst on that location to light something. Difficult to do if you’re attacking enemies at odd angles mixed with wing mounted armament or whilst energy fighting. Unless you are able to get a burst that does sizable damage. The enemy has more leeway with what he smacks you with.
You’re using stealth. So you’re running without tracers and since you’re completely trained on the velocities of M20 API-T. M20 has a higher velocity than M8 API. and since the game makes every round in the belt follow the initial round’s velocity. You’re more or less constantly aiming short. Not blaming you because it’s a bitch to use Stealth.
Early war M1 incendiary is leagues and bounds broken due to it only doing damage on the most outboard wing tips. It quite literally is bugged like 15mm german cannons/machine guns where it just doesn’t do any damage.
But you have a better belt, its called the M20 Tracer belt.
Heck even the Universal belt did fine, but mainly because the M20 rounds are busted and even the single round out of 5 in that belt was setting fires whenever it hit (the AI, so still inconclusive*)
You are trying to continue the same argument that you have already been shown, with plenty of video evidence, is completely untrue. We both know it is untrue, so why continue it?
this is literally the M20 belt. Its entirely made out of incendiary rounds that are also AP.
Is that not exactly what you want?
No, its 2025 and M20 is most definitely a flamethrower.
Literal complete opposite of both my experience and my video proof. What was it? Like 80% of my kills in those videos were due to the enemy being on fire, or being on fire in addition to what else killed them. Only ones that werent were the couple bomb explosions or wing rips.
Im not sure why you are arguing things that are opposite of reality.
You are definitely correct here, I need to spend some time getting used to them. Im not a fan of stealth belts in general to be honest
It’s not like any clip will change your mind anyways, there are plenty in the thread already and you always have excuses for them. Fires don’t count, pilot snipes don’t count, critical hits to surfaces don’t count, engine hits don’t count. To you only high explosive-like damage counts so there’s no point in debating this.
(the second match is a better demo. First match he had Vertical targetting on and couldnt hit anything. Matches from around half the vid are best showcase as he finally learns how to aim in ARB)
Couple examples of .50cals range, fire chances, ability to snipe pilots and do structural damage. I ended up deleting by accident a kill where I completely destroy the engine of a Spit Mk24.
In fact, my wingman had less than 6 .50s on target as it looks like he sawed off the ki-43’s tail with their right wing mounted guns while the left one went wide.
Just AP and you’re reliant to strike the guy’s fuselage on any fighter. While literally everyone else in the game just has to hit you ANYWHERE even with their own machine guns because their rounds get real shatter calculations
Nah. You need a good burst into an engine to get consistent flames. One-taps are still possible, but it wasn’t like back then where you could click once, smack someone’s fuel tank and instantly light their plane on fire, with fires being impossible to set out and your plane crumples not long afterwards.
Compared to now, you light someone on fire and they’ll go on for another 20-30 seconds still being a danger. Especially if you only hit their fuel and not their engine. That’s not to say fires aren’t deadly but they aren’t as effective as they were before, especially with that being your main way to kill enemies with lower chances to light fires.
Said they were inconsistent and mostly only occur in the fuselage.
Can only occur in the fuselage.
For the vast majority of aircraft, they’re only in the fuselage.
What does this even mean? I stated before that EVERY flight surface is vulnerable in the game from EVERYTHING. Even 7.7s are a major threat to flight control surfaces.
But notice how everything you brought, guess where the rounds need to go? Directly into the fuselage. Something you can only strike at specific ranges. the issue is not that it doesn’t do damage there. It’s the fact that you have such a narrow area to do something while other countries machine guns can literally do that but even better. I’ve said that multiple times and you just ignore that.
It’s weird how you guys go about this. I’ll say “.50s only do damage in these specific areas. while other countries’ machine guns can do reasonable damage just about anywhere.”
You go ahead and post a video of you confirming the exact thing I said, smacking the fuselage. Or even better yet. Smacking somewhere where you’re doing minimal damage and only when your rounds finally connect into the fuselage or the specific areas that need to be hit, does he finally burst into flames.
Or you’ll make the argument that “You can just shoot wing spars!” By showing videos of an enemy being completely unaware of you or you being completely unaware an enemy and just allowing yourself to be mowed down.
Getting hit from this angle is infinitely worse than getting hit
And just about every gun in the game can do wicked damage if you sit still and let someone rip you to shreds from the most optimum angle. Woah! Who woulda figured that out!
Wing spar snaps are too inconsistent. They happen. But they’re not some guaranteed occurrence. Not something you should bank on versus, some dude with two MGs being able have real-shatter rounds tear through your wing while also having AP (Looking at the russian 12.7s as the worst offenders) to penetrate plating.
I’ll pull out the F8F and get into a fight with a Bf-109, but because I used the hallowed tracers you guys praise, my rounds soar through the wings of the target constantly with little to no damage on the wings. Or I have only a split second snapshot and my rounds sail through the enemy with basically minimal damage.
