Cannons doing too much damge

[PercussionCap]

@dannaryan-psn

As I’ve said before I’m not just picking on the Shvak’s, Hispano’s are broken as well as are most 20mm’s or anything with explosive filler. I’ve already mentioned what Breda’s are doing.

@PercussionCap

@PercussionCap

That screenshot and the video it is from are the ultimate goals of this topic: MG151/20 must be the best, but it is also doing far too much damage. Therefore other cannons (f.e. Type 99, Hispano) must be below it, and ShVAK even lower.

Therefore, that screenshot is the intended ShVAK damage output.

I am once again vindicated.

@dannaryan-psn

but has zero to do with weapons wickedly overperforming making certain aircraft’s strengths redundant

Yes it does. Loofah earlier in the thread expressed his dissatisfaction with no longer being able to stall in front of people, eat their cannon shells for no significant damage, and then shoot them down.

Current cannon damage forces you to get good and stop being sloppy, or die. Which is great.

@dannaryan-psn

you can add that to every larger/historically tougher aircraft that sacrifices speed for payload or strength.

If only we had some kind of system where aircraft are matched on a scale roughly according to their performance.

Not that lone bombers would be much harder to shoot down. If you can hit them once or twice you can hit them twenty times just as easily.

[FeetPics]

@dannaryan-psn

As I’ve said before I’m not just picking on the Shvak’s, Hispano’s are broken as well as are most 20mm’s or anything with explosive filler. I’ve already mentioned what Breda’s are doing.

And this is far better than the alternative of having damage model similar to Il-2 Great Battles where even having good aim with machine guns still necessitates high volume of fire and presents multiple opportunities for enemy plane to just eat the shells and counter-attack for little risk.

The difference in damage between M2 .50 cal vs MG.151 or any 20mm cannon in that game makes planes like P-47 not even worth flying except as a mud mover. That style of damage model would not work in WarThunder and would just result in Germany winning 90% of the time.

(Which is ironically what the game was at one point.)

[Loofah]

@PercussionCap

s. Loofah earlier in the thread expressed his dissatisfaction with no longer being able to stall in front of people, eat their cannon shells for no significant damage, and then shoot them down.

You lying little piece of shvak.

I can get banned, whatever, my mistake for ever reading your post, as both you and Feetpics make up random lies about me when I’m supposedly not looking.

This is way past “creative interpretation”, this is just lying. And of course it comes from a shitter who can’t even play on the same level as “stalling in your guns” idiot Loofah stat-wise.

Because why the hell discuss actual point, when you can happily go ad persona with a guy you couldn’t beat with arguments.

@PercussionCap

and then shoot them down.

Oh f me.
God FORBID a set up leading to multiple shells landed works while a random spray hitting a single shell doesn’t. The horror, the HORROR!!!
And guess what, that set up worked just fine for Soviet aircraft too as long, as they did not eat well placed M-geschoss and it actually fused, lmao (hitting anyone during any kind of energy trap is way more difficult with MG151/20 due to horrible ballistics, Yak-3 f.e. can very reliably devastate a plane from 1100m away with Berezin, with German aircraft one is mostly safe at 850 as long, as your plane is still moving, I have killed people from further away, but sure as hell I can’d do that reliably dnough).
It’s just like in fighting sports, other computer games, chess, and in real life strategy - you give the enemy a weak opening, to capitalise big time. But again - god forbid this gets used in WT, as surviving even a single shell is PREPOSTEROUS.
But why shell. Maybe a single bullet should be enough???

I love how even your misrepresentation of my argument ends up being some idiotic crap, which is understandable, as your entire position is extremely hard to defend, as you have 0 examples outside of WarThunder of “artificial non-historical unrealistic weapon balancing” deliberately making weapons even less balanced (even writing this hurts my brain).

I can’t even properly insult you, as I simply lack the proper vocabulary.
You are just trolling at this point, you are completely ignoring valid arguments and just repeating your own mantra.

But the absolutely dumbest crap is this whole “but, but, cannons right now don’t 1-shot that reliably” we discussed for 100000 posts. WOW, and it somehow makes it ANY better that on top of damage being ridiculously high, unrealistic, unbalancing the weapons, it’s also unreliable?
Over and out.

[iegaatdao]

@Loofah

"but, but, cannons right now don’t 1-shot that reliably”

under that logic every shell for tanks should pen 3000m because there’s always a random chance for volumetric. Current 20mm damage is simply a lazy fix made by brute force.

[FeetPics]

@Loofah

This is way past “creative interpretation”, this is just lying. And of course it comes from a shitter who can’t even play on the same level as “stalling in your guns” idiot Loofah stat-wise.

My brother in christ nobody gives a crap about your stats.

Like oh boy! Look how good our boy is in the something that is objectively under-tiered. Same exact story as all those years ago with the XP-50. Wow I hate it so much that I just have to spam it out! Now check my stats dad?!

[iegaatdao]

@FeetPics

Like oh boy! Look how good our boy is in the something that is objectively under-tiered. Same exact story as all those years ago with the XP-50. Wow I hate it so much that I just have to spam it out! Now check my stats dad?!

@Loofah

Now, Yak-3 f.e. is insanely underBRed in Air RB, and I mean every version of Yak-3 with maybe exception of Yak-3P.

(When base Yak-3 was 4.3 and Yak-3(e) was 4.0)
Seems like you’ve are quite happy you derailed the conversation to a different topic, since you are so spoiled by the current system you can’t imagine a world where you need to learn to defend your advantage for a larger window of time.

Also love how you accuse him of abusin the Yak-3(e) while your service record really only has the top dogs for each BR with the significant playtime (including Yak-3U for ARB and P-47 D-28 for Sim). Too afraid to play vehicles for fun? Not even once tried to play a little bit of bomber planes to wind down?

[PercussionCap]

@Loofah

You lying little piece of shvak.

[…]

This is way past “creative interpretation”, this is just lying. And of course it comes from a shitter who can’t even play on the same level as “stalling in your guns” idiot Loofah stat-wise.

Let’s scroll up a little.

@Loofah

I have won A LOT of fights in the past where the enemy sprayed at distance, landed 1 hit, and then I used my position to clobber him to death, sometimes in 2-3 passes.
Nowadays if enemy lands a spray, I instantly die. No coming back. If I get nicked while dodging a head-on, it’s just over.

@Loofah

Energy traps got A LOT more risky and require a lot more separation vs things like Spitfire or Yak as you can no longer hope to tank 1 hit and hit the stalling enemy 10 times, now they will also spray a lot more, since they know that 1 hit is all it takes

@Loofah

while in the past my Ta-152 failed spiral climb could give me some more holes, but then I was in a good position to strike

Unless you want to claim you wrote that whole thing while blacked-out drunk and don’t remember it at all.

I think it’s great that players can’t get away with being so careless anymore, and must put a little more effort and thought into how they approach a fight if they want their chances to be better than a coinflip.

@Loofah

God FORBID a set up leading to multiple shells landed works while a random spray hitting a single shell doesn’t. The horror, the HORROR!!!

god forbid you are… punished for your mistakes? If I stall myself out in front of someone I expect to lose.

@Loofah

you give the enemy a weak opening, to capitalise big time.

This involves not actually being hit. The reason players like DEFYN will bait players to pitch up into him from a 3 or 9 o’clock position is so they do not have the speed to pitch up into him and still have the nose authority to aim at him, since such a maneuver will cost them a LOT of speed.

@Loofah

as your entire position is extremely hard to defend

It’s actually very simple, I do not want one of my favorite games to look like this:

@iegaatdao

a world where you need to learn to defend your advantage for a larger window of time

Look at the video I attached above. How long is long enough?

How about this 109?
He had already been hit twice in the engine just before this screenshot, and another four shells just landed dead center on his plane. He has very little airspeed and would have been forced to nose down just after this if he survived. I’m doing approx. twice his speed in a far more agile plane - he cannot get away. How much longer do you think he could or should have survived?

Or this 190?
We are doing the same speed, except he’s ~200m away and right in front of me. Even if 190s took as many hits as a FOUR ENGINE BOMBER to be shot down - he would have still lost here despite how utterly ridiculous such a damage model would be.

Or in the same battle, this Yak-3P?
I’m sure Loofah will say he totally deserved to survive what was definitely more than just one hit, because if I missed this I would have died for sure. The fact that this guy stalled himself 500m in front of my guns should be of ZERO consequence obviously.

Clearly there’s no “being unable to maintain a firing position for longer than it takes to fire one shell” here.

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

(When base Yak-3 was 4.3 and Yak-3(e) was 4.0)
Seems like you’ve are quite happy you derailed the conversation to a different topic, since you are so spoiled by the current system you can’t imagine a world where you need to learn to defend your advantage for a larger window of time.

Yak-3e is still lower than any other Yak-3 while being basically a sidegrade.

@iegaatdao

Also love how you accuse him of abusin the Yak-3(e) while your service record really only has the top dogs for each BR with the significant playtime (including Yak-3U for ARB and P-47 D-28 for Sim). Too afraid to play vehicles for fun? Not even once tried to play a little bit of bomber planes to wind down?

I don’t play RB anymore. The last time I played I was just fooling around with SO.8000.

Also the P-47 D-28 is far from over-powered in Air Sim. There are literally better versions of the same plane at 2 BR steps below it.

[Loofah]

LMAO, seriously, I am also playing B7A2 Homare quite a bit.
Both are unbalanced/OP and using them feels dirty. My tanks are also bushed up.
I am going to use every unfair advantage.
Damn, I’m also BB-1 and Yak-2KABB enjoyer. Oh and I fly Fw 190 A1 in Ground RB and Air RB, so we can get this over with.

But surprisingly I’m the guy asking to move pay2winnin’s Yak-3 to 4.7 (along with normal Yak-3) ever since it was introduced.

It’s funny how these 2 clowns (not going to be nice since they are now 100% dedicated to trolling) are on a crusade against me, because beating me via arguments is apparently beyond their capabilities.

Last time I met FeetPics, he was trying to avoid F8F going head-on in his… Yak-3U. Unfortunately this made him quite vulnerable to AD-2s 20mm cannons with their insane range. Oh look, a BS anecdote that brings literally nothing to the table, but a funny one, because it’s clear the guy is not acitvely avoiding good planes.

Edit: if I wanted to stat pad, I’d just happily fly Fw 190 A1 and B7A2 24/7 instead of having hundreds of games in G.55 S0, AD-2, AD-4 etc., but whatever.

[dannaryan-psn]

@iegaatdao

Also love how you accuse him of abusin the Yak-3(e) while your service record really only has the top dogs for each BR with the significant playtime (including Yak-3U for ARB and P-47 D-28 for Sim). Too afraid to play vehicles for fun? Not even once tried to play a little bit of bomber planes to wind down?

Yeah he tried doing this to me as well which made me chuckle because I fly the apparently overpowered C.202… whilst he frequents the Yak-3’s and F4U4’s. It’s hard to take someone seriously after that.

@PercussionCap

I am once again vindicated.

I’m far from an MG-151 apologist. I was one of the only voices back in the day complaining about how OP they were because they were mental. That Yak with Shvak’s should’ve been extremely crippled or knocked out… but you have to bear in mind that wooden aircraft are somewhat bugged at the moment in regards to damage so it’s not a good representation.

What is a good representation is the video evidence I’ve provided against metal aircraft where literally 2x historically weak Shvak rounds chop tails and wings clean off. It’ll do the same to bombers as I’ve also proven, as will Hispano’s although not quite as reliably in my experience.

I’ve also shown MG-151 shenanigans as well, 7x rounds off memory to chop off a B-17 tail. That said that’s still probably more than what’s required from what should be the weak Shvak.

@PercussionCap

Current cannon damage forces you to get good and stop being sloppy, or die. Which is great.

No it doesn’t. It creates lazy gameplay.

On top of being more realistic (realism is a requirement of all rounds in game hence the need for multiple sources etc) it’ll also remove a ton of the stupid moments that occur in game. Stupid moments like having your entire wing snapped off by one 0.1 second snap shot. Even having an energy advantage and extending can be a disadvantage as Loofah is explaining as I can spray rounds at you even at the point of stalling out and if just one of those rounds hit you’re losing your tail or your entire wing. Despite being so far away at the top of your climb that the enemy tracer rounds have already fizzled out.

Of course you should be punished when shot and no one is saying you shouldn’t be. But this damage model is not just not historical, or accurate… or even balanced, but it’s turning the game into Call of Duty. World of Warplanes has more realistic damage… one 20mm won’t bring your fighter down. Let that sink in.

@PercussionCap

If only we had some kind of system where aircraft are matched on a scale roughly according to their performance.

If only, sadly we have a balancing system where aircraft are balanced based on player performance instead. Hence why Zeroes are fighting aircraft they have no right to be and the Whirlwind etc fights 1944 109G-6’s off memory.

@PercussionCap

Not that lone bombers would be much harder to shoot down. If you can hit them once or twice you can hit them twenty times just as easily.

So lets make all aircraft one-shot kill each other across the board. Yes I hit you with one .303 but lets be fair I’d probably have hit you with hundreds more or whatever. We’ll completely ignore historical weapon power and aircraft strength because dopamine.

Like I’ve said before you’re in support of turning War Thunder into Call of Duty, except even there they have the sense to make different weapons have different levels of power.

@FeetPics

And this is far better than the alternative of having damage model similar to Il-2 Great Battles where even having good aim with machine guns still necessitates high volume of fire and presents multiple opportunities for enemy plane to just eat the shells and counter-attack for little risk.

No one is asking for this, literally no one here has said guns should do almost zero damage and we’ve all said that re-introducing accuracy where damage is concerned would always result in a defending aircraft being damaged or crippled if he isn’t killed… which is common sense.

@FeetPics

The difference in damage between M2 .50 cal vs MG.151 or any 20mm cannon in that game makes planes like P-47 not even worth flying except as a mud mover.

We aren’t using IL2 as a yardstick, and I don’t think anyone has really complained about the .50’s barring the Breda’s which are completely stupid.

@FeetPics

That style of damage model would not work in WarThunder and would just result in Germany winning 90% of the time.

If we had more realistic gun damage Germany absolutely would not win 90% of the time. They still have to deal with superior airframes and the MG-151 wouldn’t be able to one-shot aircraft much like the rest of the cannons wouldn’t be able to. The Yak’s even with historically weaker Shvak’s would still punish German players that don’t fly carefully and the Hispano punches just as hard. It’d be more balanced not less.

Instead we have Yak-3U’s etc with potentially fantasy flight performance one-tapping aircraft that have little chance to fight back. You said yourself you use the F4U4B to counter Yak-3U’s. Be honest there’s been times where that Yak has got a tiny snapshot on you or grazed your wing and it has collapsed immediately. Bullsjit right?

Imagine a world where one-taps with 20mm’s were gone and although somewhat damaged your rugged Corsair actually had a touch more time to create an opening to fight back or call for help, even if just for a short moment?

It’d be more realistic, it’d be more balanced and it’d be far better for gameplay. He has the performance advantage but you have the historical toughness and firepower advantage. I don’t see how that isn’t better than what we have now.

[iegaatdao]

And you tell me you can’t ensure your kill? No worries, those are severes, your kill is ensured and it’s not like you barely recieve money for it.

You also have all of your opponents turning with you

@PercussionCap

if I missed this I would have died for sure. The fact that this guy stalled himself 500m in front of my guns should be of ZERO consequence obviously.

keep pressing the trigger? It stalled in front of you? are you too stupid to know how to catch an opponent who recently stalled?

[FeetPics]

@Loofah

Last time I met FeetPics, he was trying to avoid F8F going head-on in his… Yak-3U. Unfortunately this made him quite vulnerable to AD-2s 20mm cannons with their insane range. Oh look, a BS anecdote that brings literally nothing to the table, but a funny one, because it’s clear the guy is not acitvely avoiding good planes.

Edit: if I wanted to stat pad, I’d just happily fly Fw 190 A1 and B7A2 24/7 instead of having hundreds of games in G.55 S0, AD-2, AD-4 etc., but whatever.

I haven’t played the Yak-3U in Air RB for over 2 years. So this anecdote is purely made up. In fact I have played a grand total of 2 games in any Yak-3 variant since Statshark has been a thing.

@Loofah

LMAO, seriously, I am also playing B7A2 Homare quite a bit.
Both are unbalanced/OP and using them feels dirty. My tanks are also bushed up.
I am going to use every unfair advantage.
Damn, I’m also BB-1 and Yak-2KABB enjoyer. Oh and I fly Fw 190 A1 in Ground RB and Air RB, so we can get this over with.

But surprisingly I’m the guy asking to move pay2winnin’s Yak-3 to 4.7 (along with normal Yak-3) ever since it was introduced.

It’s funny how these 2 clowns (not going to be nice since they are now 100% dedicated to trolling) are on a crusade against me, because beating me via arguments is apparently beyond their capabilities.

The argument isn’t hard to follow.

You have a fixation on playing Germany/Italy and have always thought they were unfairly disadvantaged so you want everything to be “corrected” so that Germany/Italy is OP. It’s not hard to follow. I have shown over and over that is the case for you.

It’s why you were crying about MG.151s on the old forums before anything ever got buffed. Or crying that American planes should be nerfed with ahistorical engine heating problems for balance purposes.

It’s a common theme. Anyone can see it.

[FeetPics]

@dannaryan-psn

No one is asking for this, literally no one here has said guns should do almost zero damage and we’ve all said that re-introducing accuracy where damage is concerned would always result in a defending aircraft being damaged or crippled if he isn’t killed… which is common sense.

“Re-introducing accuracy where damage is concerned” implies that there is a period in the games history where gun damage was accurate. Coincidentally if you follow the principle posters in this thread we can actually pin down when that was.

Loofah has been complaining about ShVAK damage since it was first buffed 5+ years ago.

The threads OP makes complaints about Japanese 20mm that is 3+ years old at this point. The same set of improvements that buffed ShVAK 5+ years ago also applied to Japan 20mm and made them much more reliable. Prior to that they were basically glorified .50 cals.

The MG.151 damage that the OP is complaining about is using the pre-realshatter damage system. This damage level of damage is representative of what MG.151 did at the time that ShVAK and other 20mm cannons were buffed. MG.151 did not become physically worse; but it became relatively worse because the performance gap was narrowed.

So what would be the ideal solution?

Well first you would have to revert the damage to whatever it was over 5+ years ago. This would reintroduce the level of damage disparity that only somewhat satisfied some people here.

But wait…MG.151 is still doing too much damage because nothing about it has been changed from the OPs post. (The OP is upset about MG.151 damage pre-realshatter which is same damage it did 5+ years ago.)

So now MG.151 damage has to be reduced for the sake of historical accuracy. But now that introduces the issue of MG.151 being basically as effective as the other cannons…so now to get back to having the “correct” damage disparity…you have to reduce the damage of all other cannons to even lower levels than at their worst state.

@dannaryan-psn

If we had more realistic gun damage Germany absolutely would not win 90% of the time. They still have to deal with superior airframes and the MG-151 wouldn’t be able to one-shot aircraft much like the rest of the cannons wouldn’t be able to. The Yak’s even with historically weaker Shvak’s would still punish German players that don’t fly carefully and the Hispano punches just as hard. It’d be more balanced not less.

We have already had versions of this in the past. Why do you think some of the longest running and most popular threads in the old forums were lamenting how it was basically pointless to play anything but Axis?

Yak-3 and similar were never anywhere close to relevant in the “good ole” days when people actually climbed more than 2000m and when the guns did so little damage that the average player just gave up on them and decided to ground pound.

@dannaryan-psn

Instead we have Yak-3U’s etc with potentially fantasy flight performance one-tapping aircraft that have little chance to fight back. You said yourself you use the F4U4B to counter Yak-3U’s. Be honest there’s been times where that Yak has got a tiny snapshot on you or grazed your wing and it has collapsed immediately. Bullsjit right?

This is still infinitely better than Yak-3U being at 5.3BR with it’s flight performance and only being there because 2x20mm ShVAK is not a viable armament except for the best-of-the-best players.

@dannaryan-psn

Imagine a world where one-taps with 20mm’s were gone and although somewhat damaged your rugged Corsair actually had a touch more time to create an opening to fight back or call for help, even if just for a short moment?

Old ShVAK damage model wouldn’t give the Corsair a “touch” more time. It was many orders of magnitude more time and any kind of deflection shot was basically just no damage to anything. The closest thing we have to old ShVAK damage would be using just 2xUS .50 cals under the current damage scheme…and even then the 2 x .50 cals are more consistent.

@dannaryan-psn

It’d be more realistic, it’d be more balanced and it’d be far better for gameplay. He has the performance advantage but you have the historical toughness and firepower advantage. I don’t see how that isn’t better than what we have now.

It would be less balanced. The Yak-3U would be a 5.3 airplane again. This is ground that has already been tread. The damage system we have today is a product of the lessons learned from treading that ground.

[PercussionCap]

@iegaatdao

And you tell me you can’t ensure your kill?

@PercussionCap

Clearly there’s no “being unable to maintain a firing position for longer than it takes to fire one shell” here.

I encourage you to read.

@iegaatdao

No worries, those are severes, your kill is ensured and it’s not like you barely recieve money for it.

Severes which only happened this quickly because gun damage is actually good now instead of having a similar effect to sending them strongly-worded letters.

@iegaatdao

You also have all of your opponents turning with you

…Because I put myself in positions that deny my enemies the opportunity to run away before I can shoot them down. That Yak3P was almost an exception but he came at me from above, missed everything, and got reversed at a very close range.

If it was I who had been hit, I should have just dodged better.

@iegaatdao

keep pressing the trigger? It stalled in front of you? are you too stupid to know how to catch an opponent who recently stalled?

Look at the direction he’s flying and where his nose is pointing. At the time of kill, I’m doing… 240kph and still pointed up, so not far from stalling. He would have gotten his nose down and pointing at me before I could turn away and dive down.

And why would I keep shooting if he’s already dead? It makes no difference.

Anyway, you didn’t answer my question:

@PercussionCap

How much longer do you think he could or should have survived?

I’ll be waiting.

@dannaryan-psn

That Yak with Shvak’s should’ve been extremely crippled or knocked out… but you have to bear in mind that wooden aircraft are somewhat bugged at the moment in regards to damage so it’s not a good representation.

This is not a current video. Under current gun damage that enemy would be rightfully dead like 10 times over.

@dannaryan-psn

where literally 2x historically weak Shvak rounds chop tails and wings clean off

Cool, nerf them to current Ho-5 damage levels.

@dannaryan-psn

No it doesn’t. It creates lazy gameplay.

As admitted several times here it forces players to be less lazy when dodging enemy fire.

@dannaryan-psn

On top of being more realistic (realism is a requirement of all rounds in game hence the need for multiple sources etc)

Until gaijin decides they’re changing how gun damage works or just to shake up the then-current meta, that is.

@dannaryan-psn

Even having an energy advantage and extending can be a disadvantage as Loofah is explaining as I can spray rounds at you even at the point of stalling out and if just one of those rounds hit you’re losing your tail or your entire wing. Despite being so far away at the top of your climb that the enemy tracer rounds have already fizzled out.

Sounds like it requires you to be less lazy in your energy traps! How terrible.

@dannaryan-psn

Of course you should be punished when shot and no one is saying you shouldn’t be. But this damage model is not just not historical, or accurate… or even balanced

@dannaryan-psn

No one is asking for this, literally no one here has said guns should do almost zero damage

No, not getting punished at all when shot is basically the argument that has been put forward many times in this thread, and is the very reason this thread was started.

@Irregular23

F6F been hit by good bursts from 4 cannon J2M3, 20mm struck left wing, right wing and fuselage:

The plane was still flying well and manuevrable, and put in a fair fight with 302ku who refused to surrender in the noon of August 15th 1945.

Unless we have a civil war between the various “cannons need nerfs” factions, which would be funny.

@dannaryan-psn

would always result in a defending aircraft being damaged or crippled if he isn’t killed

Currently the only damage state worth respecting is when something important is turned black. Gaijin has a choice between re-tuning every damage model, or simply making it so guns do more damage and you lose the offending part instead of flatspinning due to asymmetric lift.

@dannaryan-psn

Hence why Zeroes are fighting aircraft they have no right to be

The only real outliers are the two 5.7 ones. It is still an outstanding aircraft for teamplay and many still approach it too slowly, carelessly, or just start turning with it.

@dannaryan-psn

We’ll completely ignore historical weapon power and aircraft strength because dopamine.

This is currently the case with .303s which were historically very weak and often unable to cause significant damage to Ju88s and He111s, to the point where they’d just fly away after you unload your entire magazines.

@dannaryan-psn

except even there they have the sense to make different weapons have different levels of power.

So this is the same level of power?

@dannaryan-psn

barring the Breda’s which are completely stupid

Breda-SAFATs are perfectly fine.

@dannaryan-psn

although somewhat damaged your rugged Corsair actually had a touch more time to create an opening to fight back

“somewhat damaged”

Must I post the screenshot again?

[Loofah]

You are entertaining, so I will respond. Yes, might have been 2 years ago and back then Yak-3U was absolutely busted too. I don’t recall meeting you ever again. You seem to be pretty happy with lying or have very selective memory, looking at your recollection of Spit vs G.56, so whatever.

And that little chat you posted - what a gold mine. I especially like that “Focka” guy with double digit IQ.
F8F does not overheat if you follow extremely BASIC MEC.
People were crying about it overheating, so I flew it expecting some calamity.
Turned out it has 0 issues.
Try not overheating in Do-335B2 ,(2 engine RPM tweaking and if you disable manual prop pitch while using separate engine controls and enable it again, it goes to 100% and nukes your engine in like 2s and you may not be fast enough to lower it to safe values) or Ta or Bf 109 F4 or Fw 190 A4, and then we can discuss “overheating”, constantly tweakinf RPM and still having issues with oil temp or losing 20% of power is so fun.
Damn, Mk IX LF overheats 10 times worse than F8F. And then we have J21A…
I even described in detail how do I avoid this “crippling overheating” but Uncle Focka probably has slept through reading comprehension classes.

So if I’m being criticised by clueless idiots - well, I mean, you’re a clown, so it was kinda expected you’ll bring some 'intellectuals" as support.

Edit: I love how you consistently try to get me banned on this forum by acting stupid and you are constantly improving in this regard.

Over and out. From now on I’m willing to respond only to serious commenters, and not clowns, because derailing this thread is not in a good taste.

[Waelse]

At the moment it takes 1 round to get a kill. We want 5 to10.

[FeetPics]

@Loofah

Try not overheating in Do-335B2 ,(2 engine RPM tweaking and if you disable manual prop pitch while using separate engine controls and enable it again, it goes to 100% and nukes your engine in like 2s and you may not be fast enough to lower it to safe values) or Ta or Bf 109 F4 or Fw 190 A4, and then we can discuss “overheating”, constantly tweakinf RPM and still having issues with oil temp or losing 20% of power is so fun.
Damn, Mk IX LF overheats 10 times worse than F8F. And then we have J21A…
I even described in detail how do I avoid this “crippling overheating” but Uncle Focka probably has slept through reading comprehension classes.

The amazing part is you can see your whole entire response to an American aircraft having an ahistorical issue is STILL “but Germany suffers therefore it’s okay”.

The lineage of the F8F bug report is simple; its overheating either matches historical values or it doesn’t. At the time the F8F was missing around 150hp and overheated in 2 minutes on auto-engine controls. This was contrary to historical documents but also contrary to 5 minute WEP limitation in the pilots manual.

In this case you are arguing that the Bf.109 F-4 (1.42 Ata) suffers because it can only run that engine setting for 3 minutes at a time…which is a historical limitation found in pilots manual. The same logic is applied to the Fw-190A4.

Historical accuracy only matters when it benefits Germany. But also gameplay balance only matters when it benefits Germany. That’s the consistent through-line.

Also what is incredibly hilarious is that the 3/4 planes you bring up are ones that I regularly play and have done so for a long time.

[iegaatdao]

@PercussionCap

I encourage you to read.

I encourage you to think for once, because “I can’t pick my filler” also goes for I can’t pick my belts, I can’t pick my armor, I can’t pick my firerate, I can’t pick my armament’s positioning.
Only exception is “I can pick if I want gunpods or not” and even then they are reduced to “better chance to come out with some SL in your hands after a headon in case you die”

We have aircraft with entire doctrines, weaknesses and reputations baked into them made Irrelevant.

@PercussionCap

Severes which only happened this quickly because gun damage is actually good now instead of having a similar effect to sending them strongly-worded letters.

Severes can also happen if you knock out modules like oil systems, powerplants and control cables.

What am I trying to prostest for again? fragmentation instead of blast damage which would specialize in destruction of unarmored modules.

Which would make filler relevant (if a lot of filler is applied on 1 small shell it means less fragmentation but more blast damage), armor relevant, AP relevant because now armor does protect vitals, small firerate differences and cannon quantity relevant because now 4 shells do make a difference unlike now where 2 shells = destruction and the other ones are overkill.

Your screenshots of “sparks” may actually decrease because not only will fragmentation ensure a leak somewhere be it water, oil or blood from the pilot.

Because those sparks are only a bigger issue because it is “now or never”

and sure if aircraft are too tanky we can model the ammo detonations if you want for those flashy deaths and special magazine/belt armors plates to have a purpose.

and then bombers can recieve their own special treatment.

@PercussionCap

…Because I put myself in positions that deny my enemies the opportunity to run away before I can shoot them down.

So then why do you complain? Cannon one shotter or 5 shotter won’t make a difference they will all die anyways.
maybe you can use the fact A6Ms weak filler and firerate to make them drop even to 3.0 BR so they won’t be as miserable thanks to a higher skill floor.

I suppose 3 seconds must be your attention span is that’s how quick you want to end duels

@PercussionCap

Clearly there’s no “being unable to maintain a firing position for longer than it takes to fire one shell” here.

[iegaatdao]

@FeetPics

Historical accuracy only matters when it benefits Germany. But also gameplay balance only matters when it benefits Germany. That’s the consistent through-line.

It benefits Italy(mg151/20 user), germany (mg151/20 user and MK-108/mk-103 will noticeably reward), USSR (NS-23 won’t be a downgrade), Britain (hispanos pack more filler yet their belts are filled with what’s currently crap and also user of the 30mm cannons later on), US (large airframes and plenty of armor), Japan (as it starts to equip armor on it’s planes later on like later A6Ms) and France (same as Brits and also uses a small quantity of mg151/20s)

Wait does it benefit everybody? Yes, because it benefits all of these factors: armor, thickness, AP rounds, size (larger size means easier to nail a stray or two but more spread out modules), self sealing tanks (fragmentation can’t really cause a leak unless it is hit a lot of times) and aircraft that mounted more cannons will feel a difference in kill time.

TT aircraft will actually evolve, unlike now where for example near the russian/german early jets it seems like every doctrine shot itself in the foot for some reason.
Or even better, P-51’s apparently downgrading from x4 20mm to 6x 12.7mm, maybe because in real life 20mm and 12.7mm where a lot closer competitors in those years.
Or maybe La-7 and La-7B20, where the “better” one just eats ammo faster and has less ammo per cannon.

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

It benefits Italy(mg151/20 user), germany (mg151/20 user and MK-108/mk-103 will noticeably reward), USSR (NS-23 won’t be a downgrade), Britain (hispanos pack more filler yet their belts are filled with what’s currently crap and also user of the 30mm cannons later on), US (large airframes and plenty of armor), Japan (as it starts to equip armor on it’s planes later on like later A6Ms) and France (same as Brits and also uses a small quantity of mg151/20s)

Literally every gun gets nerfed to being worse than it was 5 years ago. NS-23 in quad arrangement would go back to being the only viable Soviet prop armament. Hispano goes back to being Hisparko. US 20mm get nerfed to doing no damage.

Ask yourself why was it a big deal 5 years ago? Big enough that developers had to address it?