.50's deserve a buff

Then shoot at that point.

I really, really fail to understand your issue.

Typical altitude I loiter and patrol in ASB is 3000-4000, sometimes I go up to 5k if the germans like being up at 3K as well. Plenty of high energy dogfights that start at such a high altitude and descend down to 500 meters while we’re both sitting at 500-550 km/h.

Then hit something.

APDS bad because I can’t shoot the corner of enemy tank like with HE and instakill the open-top M10!

Positioning is basic dogfighting skill. If you don’t have a firing solution, make it happen - whether by saddling up on someone’s six and riding them until they’re out of energy, jumping them from above in a boom and zoom ambush or by making them reverse themselves in front of your guns.

The literal key to propeller air combat is gaining this dominant position, whether you are flying P-51C, Spitfire II/V, Ki-61-I, Bf109 F/G, F4U-4, F6F-5, P40.

To refuse to do so is a questionable decision.

What’s your problem with AP.

Let’s compare HE shells vs AP:

What happened? (This is following some turning fight where the spitfire lost track of me or decided to go for hail-mary “I’m taking you down” on the bomber we were escorting. Also look at how I only have 62 20mm shells left - about enough for 2 more dogfights and it’s back to base if not even that. I really hated flying the R2001Cn because I had enough ammo for 1 fight and was forced to ditch. Spitfire II and Vb are similar - barely enough ammo for a manoeuvring fight and I MUST drain the opponent until they fly slow and steady using the .303 until I can actually use the 20mm HE on them.)

I got a solid burst into him from his six and his pilot survived and the only reason he went down was because in ASB, losing your rudder without realizing is an easy way to irrecoverably spin your plane to its doom.

Another example of Armour piercing superiority.

If I were shooting with german mineshells and hitting the spot I was, my shells would have fuzed on their skin and did nothing. I’d have had to hope for my APHE to hit a bomb.

Here, my early war AP/AP/AP had such insane volume of fire that I could penetrate right through the bomber and make them explode like fire works.

Meanwhile more MG151 shell failures:

Bf109G10 had my perfect six in the yak-9k. It hit me with a direct burst and chewed off half my horizontal stabilizer but my pilot was not wounded. Having died way too often to P-47s and P-51 and Hellcats in that position, if he had .50s he’d have killed me if you look at my pilot doll being white surrounded by yellow fuselage.

You’re not reading. I was responding to him about GRB.

No one is fighting at 4000m at that gamemode.

Okay, do deflection shots at 400-500kmh.

Zekken seemed to struggle to hit a deflection shot on a Bf-109. Mahr struggled to do anything worthwhile on a Bf-109 with even though he struck it several times.

“Just hit that spot bro.”

Yes of course. Just hit it. It’s easy bro just hit that red spot.

You’ve posted this analogy already so I’m posting it again.
“Everyone has APHE, my APHE is broken and worthless and I’m stuck using APDS”

Bro. Every single clip you basically show is some dude sitting still while you grind him into paste or you’re still while you get grinded into paste. I already pointed this out before literally over a month ago with my typhoon video. Every plane is going to have good ‘guns’ if you can get your rounds to all hit on target. But when you’re in RB, and everyone can see and look below them, and people are pulling way harder, and you’re not getting many straight shots from behind.

True. I was gonna mentioned the problems with the Hispano but chose not to.
Eventually the problems were solved and the RoF increased to 750 RPM with the Mk. V while the last modification of the Type 99-2 probably didn’t see any service before the end of the war.

1 Like

image

image

image

You mean like this?

More like this since any hits to the engine will render them dead. But you don’t even need to aim much because .50cal dispersion (without guns mod) will hit everywhere all at once. Even if you have merely 4 guns.
image

The MkVs also shortened the barrel to reduce weight, at the cost of muzzle velocity so I dunno how they stack up then. But at least in the early WW2 stage, IMO the Oerlikon design made far more sense to use. After that, tomato potato.

1 Like

Id go even further and say its actually more like this for many planes, lots have fuel tanks in the wings. Plus hits to the tail and elevators often disable them or at least make them pretty combat innefective as even with the elevators still attached, if they are black they lose most of their ability to turn and can only really run away.

Not to mention that M2 brownings still can and will snap wings if you put a burst into them. It just takes ~4-5 rounds instead of ~2-3 rounds.

450dc468ed6506b5942d58a611e5004c9a2b5568

2 Likes

Nah, takes more than that.

and you’re banking on the enemy dying from a fire, especially if it’s a fuel fire.

3-4 minutes into the match he’s still in the air, didn’t repair, and was harassing one of our Bf-109s.

The ‘spread’ that you guys love so much doesn’t show up because there is none and he flies through my convergence.

Ho-103s seem like the better option. to just smack him, and blow him to pieces. Or better yet. Just add a different belt to U.S. plane with m23 incendiary.

Yeah, I was doing it for the 109 in particular so I didn’t include the wings. Tail is basically empty so I didn’t count it. Wing snaps are very common, though usually they’re dead well before that.

  1. you’re straight up missing
    image

  2. you should take it as a sign that your convergence is set too far (and that you should uninstall the guns mod). In my i-16 clip I was flying about 50% faster and doing it inverted, and I actually hit my target the first time. With the same plane.

Again, as I’ve claimed before - if I had .50cals in my japanese props I’d be doing even better. A Ki-43 with four of those would go up by a full BR and people would still cry about it.

1 Like

Don’t see how.
I think you argue that they would need more ammo so that they can spray at people from long range.

Ho-103 have both a higher RoF and will deal more structural damage with explosives rounds than US .50cals.

You might need to get a bit closer but Ho-103s are going to have much shorter time to kill than US .50cals.

They can be very unreliable at times with how realShatter works but explosive bullets are in the end much better in WT.

They also don’t rely on penetration performance so you can deal the same damage at pretty much any range.

From what I’ve been seeing while using the chinese P-51C lately? Nah, it’d be more than fine, people die super easily and I’ve gotten easy 6 kills without rearming or trying too hard to save ammo. Remember that the Ki-43s in question only get two Ho-103s.

This is a more relevant argument for the Ki-44-II Hei or Ki-61-I Otsu which have four of them, but that is as good as it gets for Ho-103 armament and I’d be at least willing to try 6x .50cals. 8x would be a very easy choice.

And for other aircraft like say… an A6M3, with its 580m/s cannons and a pair of .303 MGs? Yeah I’d take 4x .50cals and ~1200rds of ammo anytime. Much higher velocity also ensures people can’t reactively dodge your fire even if they’re just 7-800m in front.
Similar story with 13.2mm Type 3s, if I could have those I’d ditch the crappy short barrel 20mms entirely.

God damn what is your convergence even set at? 800-900m?

This is entirely a convergence issue and has not an M2 browning issue. You’d have had the same issue if you had Quad 20mms in that situation. No wonder you are complaining about only tagging wing tips with convergence that wide.

Its honestly becoming a common theme, planes flying through your convergence. Yet it is such an incredibly rare occurrence for me that I never even think about it.

Its probably yet another reason why the Ki-44 is doing well for you. The 2.7 one the .50 cals are mounted in the nose, so you don’t have convergence issues, and even the wing mounted ones in the Hei are as close in as possible so its not as big of an issue - though as evidenced by that VB-10C clip you posted earlier it still definitely is an issue.

1 Like

I may be poking the bear a little bit… but can anyone spot the subtle difference between this F8F clip and my last one? No, my aim is still pretty shit, it’s not that ;-).

I run my convergence at 500m, FWIW. I am experimenting with vertical targeting. I had it at 600m before, found that was too far.

ETA: that kill started out as a really solid 3 v. 3 - U.S. versus Italy. It was one of those wonderful little moments where you and your teammates just synchronize. One of the P-51s and I traded off targets, and this was the result. He got the other one (and our other P-51 isolated and won his dogfight).

1 Like

yeah your ai-

the difference is that you’re flying a 6.3 plane now )))

1 Like

I did manage to get a little closer to this one!

1 Like

So, just for the hell of it, I tried an Air RB in the P-51C with the express intention of trying to ONLY aim for wings, I wanted to see if I could get a proper answer to how many rounds it actually does take to kill a plane with wing hits only.

And well… it didn’t go to well. It was only one game to be fair (please ignore my friend and I chatting about cars in the clip, after this game we went and played something else). But hitting only the wing is actually quite hard.

You can see the first kill against the C202, I was trying to aim for the wing but he rolled left slightly and so the burst kinda just hit all of the rest of his plane as well, resulting in an instant kill.

The second against the P-51, I was trying to go for his left wing but honestly its quite a small target and you have to get your lead pretty perfect. (Like seriously if I had just aimed center mass like I usually do he would have taken a pile of good hits there) He then went evasive so I reset the engagement, went for his left wing again, was a little bit high but tagged his wing tip with one round before he rolled left back into the rounds and ate a burst to the rest of his plane instead, which again instantly killed him.

The 2nd two kills are both AI, Im not trying to show anything serious with those kills, but I did get the wing of the first Bf110, which did take a noticeable burst, and a whole lot more precise aiming than if I had just aimed center mass.

The second AI I fully missed the wing, fired exactly 20 rounds which all went straight into his rear fuselage and tore the tail off lol.

Gonna be honest here, just aiming center mass and going for the “specific fuselage” shots feels a WHOLE LOT EASIER than trying to get wing snaps.

Also, I run my convergence at 500m, vertical targeting on.

4 Likes

Vertical targetting + 300 meters is my go to with wing mounted guns. If I put it to 400 + VT I find I keep missing all over the place, which is fun because with nose-mounted guns I put it to 400 + VT and if I swap between say p38 and F6F/P51C… my aim goes haywire. Then i go back to Bf109F4 and I can’t hit anything until I adjust it again.

Gaijin, pls give us per plane convergence :c

Caveat is ASB not ARB so engagement distances fall well around 100-400 meters.

Sums up my Spitfire (II, V) suffering. I shoot for wings and enemy flies in between shots.

2 Likes

I am not really going for a specific point of aim most of the time. I’m so busy trying to figure out where I think they’re flying, where my lead needs to be… I just sort of default to center mass.

Just inside or outside my convergence sometimes produces hits to the wings/wing roots instead… just barely missing the fuselage. I was looking at some A7M1 footage… and like the F8F-1 above, ~400 meters, give or take, is a nice sweet spot to pepper the wings.

I need to be more cognizant of my engagement ranges… but, like you observed, the bandit gets a vote.

ETA: I would LOVE to have convergence setup to that aircraft specifically, like equipment. I would also love, if we’re dreaming big, being able to independently set vertical and horizontal convergence. Oh, what a world that would be…

1 Like

I made a table from my Air RB data… and, yes, small sample bias applies here because I don’t have that many matches total, let alone in any given aircraft.

Browning Gang up top, Cannon Gang at the bottom. You can see I am a lack luster Corsair pilot pretty easily from this table. I have a hard time with that plane. The P-47D-28 suffers from being an aircraft I played 5 years ago… and was somehow even worse than I am now ;-).

However, notably, the Browning Gang doesn’t really suffer in terms of K/S… despite (or because of) my skill issues. I would have a very hard time arguing form my own flight performance that they are not balanced without collecting a lot more data.

Aircraft Kills Spawns K/S
P-51H-5-NA 38 25 1.52
P-51D-20-NA 105 69 1.52
P-51C-10 31 17 1.82
P-47D-28 61 46 1.33
F8F-1 42 37 1.14
F4U-4 27 37 0.73
F6F-5 25 20 1.25
F8F-1B 42 26 1.62
F4U-4B 50 38 1.32
P-39N-0 59 33 1.79
P-63A-5 41 20 2.05
2 Likes

500m. Again picture from the same match. I was firing at the Yak-9. My rounds aren’t far off from converging


I get the kill here but it was a straight lucky shot because the guns on my left wing were what hit and killed him.

This is how .50s are within convergence

.50s are accurate (Tbf almost any gun in the game is super accurate) enough that I struck this fw-190 in the wingroot, basically doing nothing to him
image
and he flew on by.

Except with 20mm you would still decimate or heavily damage the dude with just 1-2 stray hits unless an AP round hits.

Every time I flew the Ki-44 I only used the wing mounted guns. Like the video I posted. It does ‘well for me’ because it does damage and even if I get bad hits, those bad hits are likely more damaging than a U.S. .50’s bad hits. Remember, I got three kills with just the wing mounted guns, and I still had basically a whole load of 12.7mms left in the nose which I dommed a spitfire with but I didn’t include in the video.

You’re aiming for something you’re not used to aiming. Which is why you’re missing. You’re better off shooting normally with convergence off or shooting out of convergence. Most of the time I find when you ‘hit the wing’ it’s because you’re firing center of mass but your rounds are smacking the wings due to convergence, this happens a lot at 0.3km or you firing center of mass but to the left or right and you’re smacking the wings instead.

This was from a P-47 shot I made. It was basically a free kill from below but because all my rounds missed anything important he was still able to initiate a dogfight with me and still performing well despite the damage. The only thing that really happened was that he lost energy more quickly. I would say that’s due to the Fuselage damage more than anything. Getting shot in the Fuselage in the P-47 is like a giant airbrake and you can feel it at lower altitudes.

Since we were going near nose to nose while I was below, I fired out of convergence 0.6-0.5-0.4 So my rounds were able to strike the wing and basically rake the entire aircraft. The only place I did ‘sizable’ damage was to the fuselage, but the fuselage is weak to AP rounds to begin with. Since I didn’t hit anything ‘important’ he was still a big danger to me and kept up. The fact he just ate 8 .50 cals is what I find absolutely stupid.

Again, it’s why I argue for a belt with more M23. It just does more structural damage to the wing panels, and that’s it. It doesn’t pen cockpit glass, it doesn’t smack internals. That’s what AP is for. It’s not a wonder round, But if I had more M23. That Bf-109 would’ve been instantly ganked instead of just flying through 8 .50s and just eating it. Or if he did, he’d be basically dead at that point.

Weirdly, I just had a match in the F8F-1 with nothing but good things to say about the .50s… it was that (perhaps?) rare combination of the .50s doing everything you want them to do consistently. Maybe aided by removing the gun upgrade?

The kills were not spectacular, it must be said, but they were decisive - Fw 190 F8, Fw 190 D9, 2x Me-264. The F8 lost engine and tail control (1 rd each in the hit log). The D9 might have fared better if he hadn’t caught fire (3 rds in the log). Neither 190 required a 2nd pass/re-attack. I’ve never seen so many hits in the log as for the 264s - which could be seen as a negative, I suppose. It might also be that they’re big planes and taking out multiple engines/components and crew members gives you a lot of things to log. The 2nd 264 required a re-attack because I jumped him as he was landing - I strafed him on the AFLD to finish the job.

I did take one 20mm shell from the 2nd bomber - just aft and below my left wing root. Yellow to my fuselage and left elevator - the area of damage was broad, but it didn’t have the placement/penetration to get anything important fortunately.

2 Likes

I would disagree on the gun upgrade. I’ve removed it and the difference is negligible upclose more detrimental if you try to fire outside of your convergence on long range shots or do headons. You’re better off changing your convergence to match the range you find yourself usually getting kills at. Going from 400-500-600 meters with gun upgrades off, and 400-500-600 meters with gun upgrades on

Using the F8F. I find myself doing better with 400 meters on average with the guns on. The difference between gun upgrade off and on was negligible with the only stark difference being longer range shots or headons at which point not only do you still need to aim. But you’re having to hope your rounds actually hit because once your rounds go past convergence, they HEAVILY lose accuracy compared to when they are heading towards the convergence.

This match I had 400 meters convergence, gun upgrades off. If I had the gun upgrades on. I would’ve most likely gotten the kill a little sooner on this Do-217.
Eggsample:

These kills here are basically within convergence, 0.45km-0.4km The gun unlock wouldn’t really make a difference.