It’s about nerfing (20mm) cannons so that they don’t magically hit harder than MG 151/20 Mineshells.
Turning them into BB guns, as you called it.
Which is of course a massive exaggeration.
4 Likes
Except it’s not and 20mm are vaslty overperforming. Kugelblitz with 2xMK103 is vastly inferior to 20mm armed vehicles in basically every metric.
There’s also the problem of very little difference in damage in the 23-37mm bracket, and generally the difference between 20mm and 37mm is rather small too.
It should take several 20mm hits on average to down a single engine plane, probably 4 25mm, and 1-2 30mm and 1-2 37mm (depends on the nation and shell type of course.
1 Like
Based on my research/estimation, a 20mm Mineshell with 18.6g HA 41explosive will blow roughly the some sized hole into a wing as a Japanese Navy 30mm shell with 39g Pentolite.
Which gives a pretty good comparison of blast damage of Mineshells, vs the fragmentation damage of regular explosive shells.
Obviously a single hit isn’t going to bring down a fighter from structural damage but it’s going to hamper its performance noticeably.
While the damage effect of the Mineshell stops there, the 30mm will bring around 300g of steel fragments into the target, which have a good chance to cause damage to cooling systems, pilot or fuel tanks, increasing the likelihood to bring down the plane.
2 Likes
In short, mineshells sought to kill by means of structural damage while regular HEs sought to kill by means of damage to the aircraft’s systems?
2 Likes
It is. They do the same or less damage than .50 cals now in my usage.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
It’s not trolling to tell you my experience… grow up.
i wish
If a single 20mm hit turns a wing or tail black, I think that’s pretty much the definition of overperforming.
Doesn’t get any more damaging than that.
20mm explosive rounds will also kill an engine in 1-2 hits.
1 Like
mg151 isnt doing this
The MG 151/20 is the only 20mm that doesn’t use realShatter.
So it’s not part of the „20mm cannons are overperforming“ statement.
1 Like
Also, outside of hitting Soviet flying tanks with stalinwood magical armor, they work decently enough.
1 Like
It does turn things black, they just don’t break. That frustrates me more.
I mean I would argue against that, however I might be saying from a less fair view since all the 109s have just 1 151 which may have caused part of the problem, but I would still say 151s do not perform fine, especially when German planes rely so heavily on short engagements.
I only speak about figther vs fighter,
They way this game works, at least in ARB fights, is that you have lost the moment the enemy put his crosshair on you and pull the correct lead.
I believe, at least from a gameplay perspective
(Something that gaijin seems to hold in random importance, the sturmtiger is allowed to have unrealistic reload time for gameplay purpose, you can land and refuel-arm-repair AND equip bombs in less than a minutes, ect but some other time they’ll implement auto-retracting flaps.)
that getting shot at in a fighter should always result in (at least) a crit, the same way that in a fps shooter you lose ~50% of your PV for a body shot.
From a game design perspective, the hard part is the dogfight and aim, when the player succeed in that, there is not point in giving random damage.
If you pitch up from 2k below, stall out and get shot at, you should not have any chance of being fine because IRL a P-47 came back to base with 40 bullet in it.
The over performing shvack never really annoyed me, because if i’m in a position to get hit, I already lost, it’s a matter of time till I die. But this should apply to everyone. There is nothing more annoying that being in a 1v2, getting a solution on a yak-3 only for it to eat the round like it’s nothing and continue fighting, prolonging a fight you had a chance to win if the dice rolled on 6 instead of 4.
Honestly, I’m rather have 1 shot weapon than 5 shot ones, simply because it favors turn fighter a lot more since they suffer from damage a lot less than others, and because they have on average a lot higher time on target when fighting.
Also, with the amount of camping airfield there is, 1-shot 1-kill would help in the situations where you crit someone at the beginning of the game and after you killed everyone else in the team, you can’t win because some ground-pounder killed 10 target before and the guy is not exiting Airfield nor J-ing-out. Or worse, he came out, you crit him again when he turns back and he get a free get out of jail card.
1 Like
Counter-point:
Certain aircraft tactics rely on the expectation of survivability.
For instance, the method the U.S Navy developed to defeat zeros relies upon one wildcat (or later hellcat) acting as a de facto bait for the japanese aircraft while another acts as the hammer and these two keep switching places to minimize time on target. However, there is still a risk of impact and that’s okay - the Hellcat is an incredibly sturdy plane.
This tactic works with realistic damage modelling. It does not work with magic one hit kill weapons.
Additionally, flying damaged aircraft is fun. Being able to compensate for damage with proper trim, rudder control, engine management is exciting.
Finally, Air Sim and Air Realistic share the same flight and damage models. Control methods do do some weird magic things (Autotrim disables engine effects on handling outright - how to test: cockpit view, full-real. 0% throttle, go into a left-hand turn in 109G14 and pull until only ~200 km/h IAS. Punch throttle to max. Now do this again with Realistic controls (Autotrim yes, instructor no)), but that’s layered on top of inherent outcomes.
Why does this matter? Situational Awareness and Engagement distances and different skillsets being tested. Giving instantenous kill to all weapons affects ASB far more than ARB in my opinion due to removing the ability to initiate defensive flying if your opponent lacks the ability to maintain a consistent stream of fire and just sprayed you by accident.
3 Likes
Counter Counter Point (lol).
you can to an extend dodge the round if fired from a certain distance, I can do it quite well when the enemy chasing me is 600m+ (Tho I’m not sure how applicable this is in SIM).
Those techniques could still be used if the bait stayed at a big enough distance to dodge the attacker rounds.
Further, I’m not totally against the idea of durable planes. Most US plane like the F4F, F6F, F8F, P47 some other like the 190 could (and should) definitely be harder to damage than a spitfire. My problem is when those aircraft can at times ignore the damage despite hitting multiple burst. hitting dead center the engine, pilot, fuselage ect.
I think part of this sturdiness cannot as of now be implemented. Mainly because the modelling of plane parts is horrible.
For example, the only part that matters is the engine and pilot. You could shoot the 20mm gun forever and break the whole wing before the gun stopped to work. I’m quite sure a mechanism such as a automatic 20mm gun would be quite sensible to 30g of explosive bursting on hit. Stuff like electric system, hydraulic lines, controls rods and cable are either not modeled or have absurd pv making damage on them inconsequential.
The only plane in which I ever said “They cut my control rods” is the 162, On other plane a 20mm will do orange damage.
So to improve the damage model you’d have to model (implicitly of explicitly) the inner working of the plane, such that a burst of 12 mm or 30 .50 on the wings cockpit and fuselage make a plane extremely hard to pilot and impossible to fight in.
The fact that you can dump 100 round into a zero and they just become slower and turn slightly worse is absurd, and contribute to at least 50% of the frustration of the damage model.
At the end of the day, I think consistency is key:
-
On light fighters: Zero and most Japanese, Spitfire, Yaks, 109, ect
1 hit - crit, 2 hit - dead. -
Medium fighters: 190, P51, Tempest, ect
-
2 hit - crit, 4 hit - dead.
-
Heavy fighter: 90% of the US tech tree, attackers / twin fighters
-
4 hit crit, 6 dead.
One could of course tweak those values, depending of the average size of the burst in relation to rpm, The cross section of said contact, grouping of gun, ect. But 1 thing should be clear: It should take the same amount of hit to down a fighter, You should never have to gamble and shot 10 times the same P51-H for him to act like “This just a scratch”.
Not gonna lie, I’m quite sure the instructor can magically generate energy on some planes. It really do some funky stuff. One cannot convince me that half the plane in this game can fly relatively fine missing the right side of vert-stabilizer. It’s absurd egregious on good turner which keep 90% of the turning abibly with a missing elevator.
It 100% does, To be fair to me, the discussion is tagged “Realistic Battle Air” but I understand your concern with how gaijin share stuff between game modes.
If possible, SIM guns should be less punishing since the skill being tested are quite different compared to Air-RB.
In ARB if someone get a clear firing solution on you, you lost. You had ample time to try to fight, espace, evade, ect.
So you basically want planes to have hit points…
2 Likes
Just no.
There are several calibers for a reason.
You want to basically remove any viability from all higher caliber cannons.
There is a ton of situations, where random shots can occur. When I’m energy trapping people, reversing them, or smartly dodging head-ons, I oftentimes can be hit.
Thing is, when 1 hit completely ruins my ability to fight, spraying becomes much more viable. As a result, completely random deaths occur way more often.
If you have a firing opportunity and manage to land only 1 hit, why do you think the game should reward your horrible aim?
You have weapons that fire several times a second. If somebody can only aim accurately for a fraction of second - that’s on him, tough luck.
This is not some FPS shooter with rapid respawns. Here you climb for a few minutes before anything happens.
Getting 1-shot by a random/lucky spray is just annoying. Every dogfight essentialy ending with 1 hit is just annoying. Everything above 20mm being useless is just annoying. Plane durability playing no role (if my plane is “only” ruined after 1 shot, and not dead, doesn’t change much, my team relies on me to win in a lot of matches) is annoying.
If you are a good player, you will land a few shots. If you are good at head-ons, you’ll hit the enemy a few times. Right now Fw 190 F8 (heavily armored boy) gets roflstomped in a head-on by Yak-3 and A6M5, as both can effectively 1-shot it while being smaller. This basically means Fw 190 can’t attack succesfully unless the enemy is super low on energy and can no longer turn into head-on. This basically makes it extremely annoying to play, as one has to count on the enemy dodging instead of going for a trade and oftentimes just simply winning. And A6M5 particularly can pull a head-on out of nowhere.
The game currently is more random and boring than ever. There was a time where I played Ta-152C3 - I had tons of armanent which helped against lightly built and armed israeli spitfire horde. Nowadays C3 makes 0 sense, it has a ton of guns, gets 1-shot from 1000m away inna head-on. What’s the point of having 30mm and 4x20 if getting hit by a single shell means you are forced to RTB in best case scenario?
They do already. Each structure (wing root, wing tips, Rudder, vert stab, …) have a definite HP that each fragment from realshatter rounds will damage, that plus the kinetic damage of the round and the explosive damage from the blast.
90% of the 20mm in WT will 2-hit kill a plane relatively often.
As much as like realism, in a game context, the same action should result in the same outcome. The system we currently have is gambling on a extremely high level.
For example: Only the Svack (of course) and the USA 20mm (M3 and AN/M3) get a full belt of the best round, FI-T and HEI.
Meanwhile the other like the Hispanos have to gamble and hope that their HEI hit and not the SAP-P.
because British engineers where so bad during ww2 that they did not realise their HEI did 5 times the damage of the SAP. At least in the stealth belt you have 2 HEI 2 SAP.
Another one: As everyone knows, plywood is 100% immune to explosive round. It’s why we use chainsaw to cut tree because a atomic bomb could not damage to amazing tree.
So when you shoot a yak, you gamble if the round is going to hit the wing spar or the fuel tank to hope having some damage on the thing.
PS:
I don’t want hit point a la BF4 COD per say, I want to have weapon that are consistent, and ultimately feels like hit points.
This can be achieve multiple ways, as I somewhat touched in my earlier comment.
Not really, against bomber and heavier, more armored plane, high caliber cannon like the 30mm or 50mm would have the benefit of a much shorter time to kill.
Which is kind of why they were developed. US planes had to mainly fight 109s and 190s, something they deemed the 6-8 .50 enough to deal with.
Germany had to kill B17, B24 and if war continued B29. They needed for a fighter to kill as many and as fast as possible all bombers.
I think the switch to 20mm, 23, and even 30mm was to first intercept strategic bombers that were getting gigantic, B52 started development in 56. Of course to help in ground strike mission, and lastly with the size the jet fighter were getting you needed something more than .50 could provide.
Tho this is out of the subject.
Against most plane you should not get hit if you read their energy state properly. Tho I agree that stuff like zero take forever to stall out and might get a shot on you.
But this is more a problem about the absurd low speed controllability of some plane than a damage issue.
And I would not call that random. Hitting a enemy when going 250kph takes skills, not just pressing fire and hoping for the best.
And I think it should depend of the plane you are flying.
Don’t get me wrong, I know how RB works and sometime you don’t have the choice. But When someone is on your six, it’s toast 90% of the time if the guy is a good player, 0% throttle key exist, 109 prop pitch trick, airbrakes,
Tanking 30 rounds while reversing someone to kill him is more punishing to the player that got on your six than you.
And I think it should depend of the plane you are flying.
Let me ask you this from the other perspective:
If you get into a situation when someone has a firing solution on you, why should you get a out of jail free card?
Not to mention that I wouldn’t call a hit on a moving target a horrible aim but whatever. And I think it should depend of the plane you are flying.
As as said, if someone is spraying from less than a 1km behind you, you messed up 5 minutes ago. The damage only changes how long you both stay in the game, not the entire engagement. Also, apart from 7.7 and .50 I’m curious which plane can shoot long enough for random/lucky spray to happen. Stuff like the F4U-4B, but then it’s a bonus for those planes. Stuff like the yak-3 doesn’t have enough round to spray without running out of ammo. And I think it should depend of the plane you are flying.
I disagree, The fun part of the fight is getting on the six on the bandit, it’s the turn, the prediction, the circle, ect. With how this game work, you can always die in 1 shot for a pilot snipe anyway. When I or the bandid has a firing solution, the fight has ended. Because I don’t know what he will hit, maybe my engine, my pilot, my rudder, ect.
If I want to have a lot of fights, I ask my squadmates to duel in a custom lobby. It’s very fun (more than RB anyway). When can try multiple things, stragegy, ect.
You didn’t fully read what I wrote. Plane durability of course should play a role. I literally said that a P47 should take at least 3 time as much round/burst to crit that zeros.
At least from a gameplay perspective it 100% makes sense:
light planes are very maneuverable and easier to play (for beginners), further if you know how to dodge, you can drag out a fight to sea level and it can take more than 5 minutes. Dying easily in a light plane balance them in some way, making mistake more punishing.
Heavier more armored plane are more fit to BnZ, bait and switch, and other strategy. Being able to tank hits help them perform those tasks.
Like you mentioned earlier, being able to tank a round while energy trapping someone will help them.
It’s honestly because the 151 are dogwater.
The average player has learned that 151 will do nothing 75% of the time, so they will full commit.
In other plane, when someone full commits you just have to shoot at 2km-1.5km and dodge.
If they dodge they can’t hit you, If they don’t they die.
What happens with the 151 is that they don’t dodge, get light damage, and shoot at you, something 1 shooting you.
Headons would be the number 1 reason I want guys to be deadlier:
If both players can tank the hit from a headon, it becomes suicidal 90% of the time because both player have to full commit as the one who don’t will get hit no matter what.
I honestly don’t want headons to become trade were everyone get 50% damage of the time.
A6M will be balanced the moment zero players accept a slight nerf to make it fight-able by planes that don’t have 150kph faster top seed. because when I does, it will drop down in BR.
Tho what you can do against those is to shoot when you feel they are about to pull this move, more often that not, They’ll explode before pulling their nose on you.
Something more damage would help. Since if the zero could take more damage, they (and other light planes) could pull unfair headons out of nowhere a lot more often.
Did you tried to dodge? I know dakka dakka fun, But wanting to be able to full commit and win 90% of the time is absurd. It’s why gaijin always had a obsession of putting stuff with lot of guns extremly high. Even the 190A8 suffers from this, It has had similar performance to the A5/U2 but more gun thus .7 br higher.
The C3 is absyssal not because of the guns or damage model but because of the absurd BR it sits at. 6.0 was always high but 6.3 is ridiculous. It’s worse than a Doras and sits 1.3 higher.
We might disagree on all that, but the only thing I want is at least to have consistent damage And I think we can both agree on that at least.
The easier way gajijn could improve that is:
- Give EVERY gun a belt full of their best round. It’s absurd and unfair that only the shvack and M3 have this “luxury”. You should never in a game with pvp have paintball randomly firing.
1 Like
Issue:
Hit where?
Planes have damage models with subsections and not all subsections interfere with “flight.”
Also on the earlier discussion about having traction of control surfaces destroyed, I do have a video showing just that. I was intercepting a bomber and it shot out my aileron controls.
In this:
Wing damage that severed my aileron control cables/push rods.
Radiator damage in my engine area
Radiator damage in my wing area.
Damaged pilot armour in the cockpit.
With your rules, I could have never recovered from this shot because I’d have been ruled dead. I used realistic flight control management to overcome the damage that is also possible in DCS and Il2:
When you yaw your plane with a conventional wing shape, you create a rolling momentum. By carefully managing yaw and engine torque, you are perfectly able to fly a gentle descending circuit to the runway while remaining in full control.
Unfortunately did not record the initial spin out and PARE.
Same thing works in Il2 and DCS!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtKV4BEXT_A&pp=ygUbSWwyIGxhbmRpbmcgd2l0aCBubyBhaWxlcm9u
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6IRFEUxqks&t=4s&pp=ygUfRENTIDEwOSBsYW5kaW5nIHdpdGggbm8gYWlsZXJvbg%3D%3D
Now some other “By your rules, I should have died in these scenarios.”
IL2 example of me being a noob and tailsitting a bomber thinking I got Warthunder super guns. I retained ailerons in this case, but uhh... look at how my cockpit looks. My gunsight is broken, my entire armoured glass is cracked. There's oil sputtering everywhere. My heading indicator is broken. My engine is failing. Still landed!
In my second video (Il2), you can even count the number of shots I put inside the Pe-2’s engine pod and then the shots that impacted my nose and armoured glass.
