We never said that, it was a short burstof 4-5 shells that left you like that, which is a complete ridicule of a representation.
I really don’t care
Planes still dropping all wings and break into two with just one hit. Its annoying and boring. Still Gajin probably doesn’t even noticed a problem.
3 Likes
Weird I thought I mentioned how plywood bug 2.0 works literally in the post where I told about the whole situation. Are you illiterate?
3 Likes
Because a lot of players don’t see a problem with it, the “realitic” part of the ad/sponsor they saw never existed to them I suppose.
And even if we don’t realism the current systems completely skews with balance.
1 Like
OH LOOK, plywood bug 2.0 at work, somehow cannons being unreliable vs Soviet aircraft is not even registered as a problem.
Similar shot with same damage profile can be easily replicated in protection analysis.
And that dude broke his wingtip earlier without my help.
I’ve been using mineshell belt, so 100% 3.7cm M-geschoss.
It’s not registered as a problem because it’s something that can happen with any aircraft and isn’t limited to Soviets. Anyone that has played the game for more than 2 hours and uses their eyes can see that.
Well, I had decided to read your comment and of course it was the most idiotic take ever.
Yes, with “any nation” that has several popular plywood aircraft.
Lets see…
…outside Soviets we only have Brits with mostly dogshit Mosquito or Germans who have like 2 semi-popular planes with some plywood parts (K4 and He-162).
Oh wait, it seems only Soviets heavily benefit from this bug.
How surprising!
Also, I named it “plywood bug” because it aftects all plywood covered aircraft. The bug has not been fixed ever since it was first detected (that would be several years by now, possibly it has been in game ever since day 1) and only exacerbated with 2.0 version surely via simple series of mistakes that mostly benefit Soviets just by accident, lmao.
The “bug” is just you coping your brains out that your German cannons don’t 1 shot in random circumstances. It’s the same thing you have done for years which is basically loudly complaining about whatever threatens Axis aircraft.
I still remember you whining about the G.56 being 5.7BR because it was IMPOSSIBLE for it to win a dogfight against a Mk.14 Spitfire. Or when you wanted the F8F to remain broken because of balancing reasons.
Look at the MASSIVE benefit the guy in your clip got. He died in the next shot. He got to live 1/2 second longer. Isn’t your whole complaint that guns do too much damage?
Then you deliberately misunderstand and then throw insults like a spoiled child. Grow up.
I think a 37mm or 30mm or a 20mm shell with 29.76 grams of fucking TNT equivalent would have blown up a plywood plane no matter where it’s from.
The “idiotic” was deserved for you, but now you throw insults and tell him he’s “coping” and he’s a spoiled child.
If anything you are spoiled because a number as important as TNT filler shouldn’t matter but the downsides that come with it should be kept, and then you cope “WT was never a realitic game”.
1 Like
When German planes survive multiple HE 37mm from planes like P-39 etc then it isn’t a problem. When German planes survive ShVAK from odd angle or whatever flavor of the day one-shot cannon of the day you are complaining about then it is cherry picking.
He is coping. That is literally all he has done for the past half a decade. There was a point where he wanted the G.56 to be down tiered to 5.0 because it was worse in a turn fight than the Mk.14 Spitfire. This was years ago at this point.
The reason he tries to insult me as a “duelist bro” is because I schooled him back in the day when he said it was impossible for the G.56 to win against Mk.14.
Ever since the ShVAK was made so it wasn’t a useless nerf gun over 4 years ago he has suffered Russian Derangement Syndrome.
Before that he suffered American Derangement Syndrome. It was the same list of complaints too. It was the same list of grievances too! Overpowered flight models and overpowered machine guns that kill in 1 burst while poor Germany MG.151 suffers.
There was a point where be thought the P-51H would easily win a dogfight with the Mk.24 Spitfire because it has a G-Suit.
You don’t pay attention do you?
He wanted to keep F8F engine overheating because it needs to be bad in order to be balanced and if American players want realism they should just play DCS.
But also ShVAK needs to be bad because realism.
Basically anything that helps Germany is good. Anything that hurts Germany is bad.
Like this is the dudes topic from 5+ years ago.
Waaaa waa boo hoo my MG151 doesn’t kill in 1 pass and I die to single .50 cal with better ballistics blah blah blah. It’s the exact same cope. It will always be the exact same cope.
Yes it is a problem, don’t try to shove words into our mouths
Most planes should survive a lot more from a ShVAK, 6.02g vs +20g of TNT from NS-23 or mg151/20 don’t make a real difference in-game, yet the affected ammo quantities, firerate and ballistics still need to be different?, But then we should model the differences in filler and shell construction? (NS-23 will fragmentate a lot more but also deal similar structural damage as mg151/20)
Im complaining about cannon damage, specifically the mismodeled differences in filler and construction ( hche vs he vs f ).
Yak-9 and Yak-9T are 1.0 BR apart yet only upside of Yak-9T is “funny cannon can kill tank”.
Yak-3P’s improved firerate and triple 20mm mount only sees benefits in the headon deparment and even then it isn’t much since the Yak-3 already just needs 2 shells to blow off a wing section.
La-7B-20 is actually somewhat worse than the La-7, more firerate, less individual ammo counts and an extra cannon for dead weight. Oh wait “BuT IT cAn hEadON BetT-” learn to merge dumbass
oh wait, and the La-9’s QUADRUPLE 23MM MOUNT still has the same kill time as the 4.7 La-7, with the added bonus of a 25% chance of an AP round to shit you over.
The cannon issue affects EVERYBODY, and USSR is specially aflicted because the “better” cannons are downgrades.
Thanks for proving my accusation
Idk man he specifically mentions gunpods, let’s take our 109, 3x mg151/20 shoot a combined TNT equivalent of almost 90g of TNT, MK-108 explosive tracer also has 90g of TNT. Maybe if you…
You would know?
And that’s if I don’t bring our fellow 190s, with the Fw 190 A-5/U12 being able to mount up to SIX of said cannons.
We do agree 30mm should oneshot?
You know since we can throw realism out the window let’s make every plane able to outturn an I-153, it’s only fair! Players love to turn!
1 Like
Maybe we can 1v1 and you can show me how to merge? Surely because I don’t parrot your opinion means I don’t know how to.
Do you actually not understand or know how to read?
A long time ago someone made a report about how the F8F engine should not overheat as quickly as it does. Loofah’s whole response is that it didn’t matter and that it needed to remain that way in spite of clear cut documentation because the game needed to be balanced and that because this is a game and not a simulator. I have already shared the post multiple times in this thread yet you seem to deliberately misunderstand it.
This is a thread that is over 5 years ago. It pre-dates even the very first ShVAK buff. This pre-dates even the ballistics chsnges. This is from a time that the MG.151 was the best cannon in the game by a wide margin.
Guess what? It still wasn’t good enough because he was dying to head in spray from .50 cals and not immediately one-shotting everything.
Why not move every Fw-190 down by a whole entire battle rating while you’re at it? This was also one of the points that he agreed with back in the day. All Fw-190A models are 2.7BR material because the Corsair is faster and turns better. Ta-152H should be 5.0 because air-spawn P-38s are basically better than it at lower battle ratings as well.
You might think I’m being facetious but these are beliefs that he has has at one point or another in the past.
BTW, dude claimed I wanted G.56 at 5.0
I wanted it at 5.7.
Also he claimed Spit will lose a duel, so we tried it and lo and behold, it was an easy win for Spitfire. I mean, it was easy considering he was at the time already a ton better at duels than yours truely anti-duelist head-on/positioning enthusiast, and I was the one flying Spitfire, so even it being “close” meant Spit was substantialy more effective dogfighter…
Of course it would be a bit too good at 5.7, but somehow Mk Ix LF and Yak-3U sat at that BR for years…
I will not reply to him again, because I don’t enjoy getting trolled.
1 Like
But when it’s cannons that are argued to stay as they are for the sake of gameplay…
It was already 5.7 at the time.
No. I said they had similar turn performance and the fight was basically even if you have any idea what you are doing. I won more than lost in the G.56 and then won every round in the Spitfire.
Also I wasn’t even a good duelist.
Largely because guns that did no damage compared to MG.151 and horrendous allied teams.
Like I wonder why there were multiple threads back in the day complaining that Axis was the only side of the matchmaker worth playing.
Why can’t I have Fw 190 having the turnrate of Yak-3U for the sake of the gameplay? It’s equally unrealistic, here we’re just ignoring wing loading as opposed to design of shells.
There is no consistent logic here, seriously.
Realism?
You lose.
Gameplay?
WT is literally the only shooter/air game in existence with such a combo of 1 weapon category being BOTH absurdly overpowered AND inconsistent.
There is nothing special enough in WT to warrant absolute lack of weapon balancing.
Because in gaming we usually have weapons artificially BALANCED because IRL certain categories are simply so mich better for the situations shown in game, that everything else would feel like crap (f.e. SMGs in WW1 shooters - most WW1 shooters have 95% of fighting happening inside 60m,even if there are open sections, there is a lot of cover and various ways to close the distance, at such distances a Mauser pistol with a stock is already superior to all rifles assuming realistic weapon damage and accuracy, so of course devs make pistols and SMGs deal much less damage and harder to aim to kinda balance it out).
And even then - oftentimes some guns in the same category are just better than others because of real life traits - f.e. in Rising Storm 2 M-16 is simply better than AK, due to low recoil and very high muzzle velocity. AK has a bit better cover penetration , which comes in handy less often. And that’s fine, if AK had some real life advantages - tough luck, because the game doesn’t simulate those. But what I’m saying is - devs are not intentionally making things worse for one gun or another. They just implement them the best they can.
In WT we have ANTI-balancing.
Gaijin implemented realistic traits of weapons, that make some guns clearly better than others. Gaijin created an environment, where good ballistics play a much bigger role than IRL, as ARB is almost entirely fighter on fighter and pilots can go -5G and then pull straight to +13Gs with 0 issue and some planes compress much less than IRL, and also you barely ever have a chance to ambush enemy, almost all my targets are actively dodging and being able to land 500-700m shots is often the deciding factor while IRL pilots were not precise enough to be consistent at such distances and neither were their weapons, and also we fight almost exclusively at low alt where bad ballistics play a bigger role than at 6000m.
So, in this environment, MG151/20 is already pretty damn bad and MK108 is almost a meme weapon.
So what does Gaijin do, when introducing the unrealistic balancing factor?
Gives all other guns hammer of god damage (with poor Hoe-5 getting short end of the stick because reasons), making MG151/20 and MK108 and most lower velocity/ROF weapons (like King Cobra’s 37mm) crap tier, while medium velocity 23-45mm weapons are just meh, and the only saving grace of MK103 is ballistics, as it sucks everywhere else.
How does that make any sense?
And it’s not like Gaijin did not try Shvak being damn good pre real shatter 3.0 and US 20mms being mind-blowingly good. So it’s not like they did not know how thay affected balance and how bad are other weapons in comparison.
This whole “but MG151/20 was hitting hard for a long time” argument doesn’t really apply, unless we’re trying to “get revenge” on these pesky Germans who had it “so good” for years.
I am not interested in some payback vs digital pilots. I’m just interested in either more realistic or more balanced weapons. Right now they are both unrealistic AND unbalanced. Oh and once again - extremely inconsistent, because single shell damage varies from instadeath to essentialy nothing with players having little control over it, and then we have wing/tail control edges tanking whole bursts.
6 Likes
To be overpowered, something else must be getting seriously outperformed and not worth using. But every nation eventually switches to cannons and right now they’re all quite close on performance; additionally .50s are also doing incredibly good damage and they have other advantages.
If I remember correctly, the M16 was limited to 20rd magazines. I always preferred the M1 and M2 Carbines.
“realistic”
…Which is why it dominated the meta for years and years?
The “anti-balancing” is so bad that even the Ho-5 does not particularly struggle at shooting down anything. It is a perfectly fine, below average cannon.
MG151/20 is not “crap tier” by any means. It is also a perfectly fine cannon. 37mm M4 and M10 suck for very obvious reasons.
They are certainly far more balanced now than they were some years ago.
1 case, and even then Ta-152 h-1 won’t keep up forever and it will lose the instant that even the 4.7 Yak-3 takes it to the vertical
And so what does this mean? Should every FM, every flap, every ballistic, every belt, every firerate, every powerplant be the same?
Let’s see
23mils are not worth it, 30mm are not worth it (bUt mUh BAlLiStiC?!!, enjoy your sub 100 ammo capacity and 500 RPM), armor is not worth it, AP rounds are not worth it, more than 2 cannons is not worth it (headon my ass, because under such rules a x4 M3 stealth setup would be top tier), firerates past 700 are not worth it, extra filler centered cannons are not worth it (trades ballistics for more filler).
Wow, there’s TWO different options!!!??, come on, So I suppose the A6M5 at 5.7 is completely ok because BF-109 K-4 and F4U-4B are completely at home at 5.7!
Oh man so sad!, IF only fragmentation centered cannons did fragmentate instead of acting like 30mm hche!
37mm suck because the reward for compensating for such enormous drawbacks are given to everybody else
mg151/20 is simply outclassed for the reason of the drawback of reduced ballistics and presence of low pen AP rounds simply exist for no reason now.
Same examples as I put always, yak-3 vs Yak-3P,. What does the Yak-3P even have for it outside of better chance to cash in the kill in the headon? nothing it is the same yak-3 from 4.7 at 5.0.
And what does the Yak-9P’s armament options even help in? none, you could even remove the center 20mm and you wouldn’t notice.
3 Likes
