It’s just talking in circles at this point
2 Likes
it was months ago and it still is now
1 Like
“Just aim for the fuselage”
I said it before: Wing mounted guns and you’re stuck using AP. while everyone else has a real-shatter round, british SAPI for some reason being real shatter even though it’s just an incendiary compound
And the fact that everyone else has 12.7mms where they DONT need to worry about that is BS. Simple as.
Firstly: You used an I-16 which has almost a biplane damage model.
So any structural damage is amplified. Even basic .50 AP rounds would rip the plane apart.
Secondly. Lol.
You had a STALLED OUT I-16. and you proved my point that even when he was COMPLETELY STILL, the kill basically given straight up to you. That your first burst would do jack crap against any other target because you DIDN’T hit the fuel tanks.
Every video you post as ‘PROOF’ literally just proves what I’m talking about. Unless you smack DEAD CENTER where all the important bits are at. That’s the ONLY way for you to get a reliable kill for most aircraft. If you were using a Berezin, a Ho-103 or 12.7mm Breda. You would’ve absolutely DELETED him in the first burst.
Going back to this. You wouldn’t care if they gave it real shatter then? Because you went from “You can’t buff m23 because it’d be OP” to “It’d still suck if you mega-buffed it.” And that’s under the belief if we kept universal belt the same and just buffed m23 alone. I wouldn’t even call it ‘buffing’ because the round is using over 10 year old calculations when it simply needs to be updated to use new calculation
If that’s the case, I’m glad we’re in agreement here, because in that department, it would be completely fine by you.
Watch me from a year ago scoring my first air kill in air sim as a noob who could barely NOT crash, much less know how to aim beyond spraying blindly.
I could do it. A literal useless noob who spent more time crashing than flying.
You can do it too.
This was with 4 .50 cals too, not six.
Struck the part I said that you needed to strike to do damage and the uncommon wing snap.
you act like I can’t get kills and think .50s are just complete invalid rounds that are no better than 7.7s. I mean. You can obviously see my stats with the D-22 to see otherwise.
But the fact I can pull out a Yak, click once, just with machine guns, and just watch how just a few rounds can completely disassemble some dude’s wing is not right. It’s not even just damage to the wings. Real shatter helps do damage to the fuselage too. That’s the point.
.50 is generally just less reliable than it’s other countries’ counterparts. You fly a P-47 and you have a Yak-3 above you that decides you’re tasty. Yeah. go fast, turn, watch as he can’t keep up, but he’s going to stay latched on you so you keep the speed going to stay within his circle… You can fight him off, but every deflection shot you make you wind up just smacking his wings doing minimal damage. After 3 or so passes FINALLY do you get a hit. Woops. Turns out the round didn’t catch him on fire and now he ran off, and it’s not worth it to chase. Or he catches fire, now he knows he is on a timer now, and he decides to turn and reengage. Now you’re in a worse off position because you expect him to be dead when in reality he’s coming back for one last swing at you before he goes down.
On the opposite end. The opponent just has to hit me ONCE anywhere and the likelihood I will be severely damaged is extremely high. So if he had guns on me for even a split second there was a decent chance for me to get hit and completely grounded if any “”“HE”“” rounds hit.
2 Likes
^^^
British SAPI uses hitpower (old forumla) not realshatter, it’s basically a useless round since it has like 0.00001g of TNT equivalent. You may get some damage if it hits engine or cockpit but even then u may not get anything.
1 Like
So you didnt bother watching anything past the first clip
1 Like
Watch the Captain Squishface grinding video. He’s using the P-47s in ARB and has none of the issues you describe once he learns how to aim with mouse again. Once the P-47 looks at something, it’s dead.
1 Like
Again. I have a 3.22:1 K/D with the P-47D-22. You can get them to do damage if you smack where the rounds actually DO something. This isn’t a skill issue.
I decided to watch the vast majority of his stream. He runs into the same issue that I run in to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IB86KtxjLU
At 28:51 is a prime example of what I’m talking about. Your rounds simply do absolutely nothing unless you smack dead center of the fuselage. At which he finally does. If he was in any other aircraft that was equipped with rounds that actually did damage. He’d more than likely would not need to go through so many passes and bleed that much altitude.
For the most part, all the Yak-9 had to ensure was that he was not hit center while strikes to the wings are not good, but more survivable than getting hit dead center.
Any other aircraft. He would be screwed as he’s going to more than likely get his wing snapped instead.
I did watch, the problem is you’re constantly showing the same thing. Your first clip is a perfect preface for the rest of your video and I’m not going to bother picking apart each and every single little clip when it’s just the same thing. you showing me what I’m exactly saying over and over again and going “SEE! SEE!” when your beginning clip practically shows my issue in almost the most exaggerated way possible.
You kill enemies by lighting them on fire by hitting their center of mass, or pilot snipe. Congrats. I said this constantly. It just goes in one-ear-and-out-the-other for you for some reason.
Again. .50s can kill if you hit the spot that actually lets it do damage. But anywhere else it’s utter trash or you’re banking on hoping to hit a spar, which at times, is literally pixel thin. Which is why when they do happen. You’re either already completely on the tail of the dude and you’re spraying him down where you have the widest profile shot. Or you got RNG lucky.
Also, you didn’t say no to agreeing with me on real shatter.
1 Like
It’s interesting to see this conversation play out… as an average player with relatively little experience…
I am sometimes frustrated by the damage from U.S. .50s. However, I am much more frustrated by the high speed handling (P-63 and P-47 excepted to some extent). Given a choice, I’d take a buff to high speed handling before a buff to my guns.
The conversation on incendiary modeling is… interesting. It should be consistent… but if we’re leaning towards realism, incendiary fill is not HE… not even close.
The real issue isn’t even incendiary. It’s the abhorrent lack of detail in Warthunder’s damage models.
If it were my choice, the strength of an airplanes fuselages and wings would be determined by the airplane’s weight (minus guns and armor plating), the airplane’s size (mainly volume) and an extra modified for weight:size ratio.
Armor plates will provide a structural integrity buff, but only to nearby parts.
This would make planes like the Zero and spitfire have extremely weak airframes (buff to both balance and realism) whilst bombers, and heavy fighters like the P-47 would have very strong airframes.
It makes 0 sense that a Zero currently takes identical damage to a P-51.
I’d also make shots deal extra damage of they hit a thin part at an angle (e.g hit a rudder from behind) as there’s many, many real world accounts of .50cals 1-tapping rudders and wings at the right angles.
2 Likes
I mean… duh? What else do you want? The same thing that is happening is: I fire a short burst into the enemy, the enemy turns into a flaming wreck and falls out of the sky. How different do you want me to be? just start missing?
I have no idea how the I-16 kill shows your issue, while I don’t take much stake in the I-16 dying to a P-51H by itself, either, its the pattern that was being shown. I was simply filming the kills I made and posting them in the order they happened, rather than cherry picking.
Its interesting you accusing me of it going in one ear and out the other, since that’s literally what you are doing. You are completely hyper focused on “you have to hit their fuselage to do anything”, and missing my entire point that you literally don’t have to do that. My whole point is that I am not aiming at anything specifically. I am aiming at the enemy plane, and using the stupidly high burst mass and excellent ballistics that U.S .50 cals give you to allow me to hit EVERYTHING on the enemy plane.
I’m not aiming for the fuselage, I’m physically not aiming to be accurate, I am aiming to saturate the general area of the enemy aircraft with lead. The whole point is that your argument of “you have to hit these specific areas to do damage” is the literal opposite of what I am doing to achieve these kills. You are arguing past me, not against me here. Your argument is completely irrelevant because its not what’s actually happening. There was one pilot snipe in that video clip, but his entire plane disintegrated as well, so assuming his pilot didn’t get killed it wasn’t going to have changed the result.
That’s because I was doing this amazing thing called positioning myself for the best possible shot? How is this even an argument? putting yourself in a bad position for bad shots, and not being able to hit the enemy is a completely different discussion from what happens when the rounds hit, and doesn’t just apply to .50 cals. In fact their ballistics, ammo count, and burst mass honestly makes them far better in a situation like that than a pair of 20mms.
Because I genuinely don’t have enough knowledge of the real shatter mechanics, or what the mechanic being used instead of real shatter is to be able to comment on it. I did qiuckly look it up but in the short search only really found conflicting info from a couple of years ago, so would need to read more and more up to date info to comment.
Your prime example is… Him missing a bunch? He missed, missed again, had him fly between his convergence, missed some more, and then finally got a short burst to actually hit the Yak, which was only from one wings guns it looked like, and it immediately decimated him in just a couple of hits
1 Like
Weren’t you the guy who wanted removal of traction of control surfaces?
“Buff APDS because I cant kill tanks by shooting hollow spots of armour.”
Oh and
P-47 shears off bv’s wings
P-47 instakills-kills Bf109F4 (me) using full-real/sim controls and cockpit view at very high aspect and very long range. I do concede I was quite slow at 300 km/h coming out of a dogfight with a spitfire, but even at such speeds it was a very high aspect and long range shot.
If Beans can do this with sim controls and cockpit view and only friendly blue markers, you can do it with mouse aim and third person view and red markers that give you all the info you need.
High speed handling also seems fine, he landed those shots at 560 km/h no problemo WITH bombs and rockets strapped to his wings.
Also notice his insane ammo count after so many misses on the BV and after killing me.
1 Like
It’s actually pretty close.
The damage effect of explosives comes from their ability to shatter steel body’s into many smaller fragments. Something incendiary filler can’t do.
When it comes to blast effect, there’s practically no difference.
Since calibers below 20mm are very light, it’s basically pointless to fill them with explosive over incendiary filler.
Since all they do is form very small and light fragments that don’t have much damage potential.
While incendiary filler results in the same blast damage but also much better chance to set fires.
With all nations we see a development towards more or exclusive incendiary filler for anti aircraft shells.
German and Japanese 20mm FlaKs at the beginning of WW2 fired HE-T shells but they were soon replaced by shells containing incendiary elements.
Germany even replaced their 13mm, 15mm and 20mm explosive-incendiary shell with shells containing just incendiary filler.
Even Italy replaced their 12.7mm explosive rounds with explosive-tracer rounds and then incendiary-tracer rounds.
In WT Italy only has 12.7mm explosive bullets.
The Japanese Navy planes are still missing two exclusive 20mm incendiary shells.
But with how badly incendiary effects are modeled in WT, they are pointless over shells with explosives filler that deal massive damage in comparison.
5 Likes
Traction of control surfaces are ridiculously buggy.
Bad analogy.
Better analogy. “Everyone has APHE, my APHE is broken and worthless and I’m stuck using APDS”
I don’t get what this is supposed to say.
It’s spars are thick, span the whole length of an aircraft and it’s a slow bomber.
So you admit it was a lucky shot then? So my statement stands true. Spars are not consistent sources of damage.
Read above. You had him dead to rights, and even after one burst, you STILL didn’t light him on fire while someone else’s 12.7s would’ve melted him.
So you agree with me then
“You have to hit the fuselage with all the important bits to do any meaningful damage”
“Well! I saturate the area and use my volume of fire so that I can light him on fire!”
“So you’re still hoping your rounds hit something important because your rounds only do something in specific spots while other countries machine guns will spray and do insane damage no matter what.”
What even is there to argue? The only time you hit the spar is if you’re lucky or you’re in a good position to hit it as that’s where you have the largest profile. (I.E. directly behind)
Congrats thanks for agreeing with me.
It’s not that he missed. It’s that he raked his guns through the target. And it did NOTHING until he had his guns hit dead center. In fact you can see the Yak leaking fuel from both fuel tanks.
If this was literally anybody else, a few shots from their .50s would’ve just detonated their aircraft or severely crippled them.
They are buggy. The sad part is. the planes with realistic redundant systems are actually at MORE of a disadvantage because they’re larger
1 Like
How was it a lucky shot? He shot a bit short and pulled his nose while holding down the trigger to kill me by walking his shots onto me.
I trust Beans to be a skilled player capable of flying his P-47 and other aircraft to their potential.
I was highlighting all the odds stacked against him which you don’t have to deal with, odds which he overcame as any other sim allied pilot overcomes to land a high-skill shot.