The original poster thinks that MG.151s are dealing too much damage. Just an FYI.
Well, I agree, although I think they are dealing slightly too much damage, while other 20mm are overperforming HARD.
no - I am saying that cannons in general do too much damage. I used MG151 only because I have a RL pictures for it
1 Like
After I tested a bit with ru, us, brit, ger…I guess russian shvak somehow feels alot, alot better than it used to be in the past. Possibly the best now?
Question: Take say a British Spitfire with 2x 20mm Hispanos. How many rounds “should” it take to down an enemy fighter?
Same question for you @przybysz86
I will have to test. Sadly I might not find time this week but if no-one gives you answer by the time I will be able to play - I will :)
Also - it depends what game mode. I play air SB which makes it easier to score kill with cannons w/o actually ripping wing off as asymmetrical damage is much harder to deal with.
If you play RB then I assume by “take down” you mean wing gone?
Not how many it does currently, but how many you think it should take.
I have seen quite a few comment saying that “cannons do too much damage” since the changes, but none have yet to actually say how many they think it should take to down an enemy fighter. I have asked previously
Personally, I think it shouldnt take much more than 1 second burst to secure a kill. From the Spitfire that is about 20 rounds of cannon fire and I feel this is close to what we have currently.
I am genuinely curious as to what others think it should be taking if its currently wrong (I dont think real shatter is “incorrect” but I do think damage models need a buff/improvements)
“take down” as in the target is dead. Whether that be from a hard kill like taking off a wing, or suffeciently damaged that they’ll slow glide into the ground. With WT damage model, that is hard to tell though sometimes. Yeah, Im an ASB main too, though I have yet to get into props
Cannons are in best state they have been in a long time. Lowering damage hurts variety and you fall back into whoever has the best AP wins (Usually Allies, who also have better performance), this is a terrible game mechanic and not fun to play at all while flying Axis. Many German aircraft only have snapshot potential, and low cannon damage nerfed them into the ground. I have a video in P-38K where I tanked probably 100 rounds from Ki-43 during realshatter and made it back to base. Do you think he had a fun time there? I should have been dead and punished for my mistakes.
3 Likes
Hispano 20mm was based on Orelikon so I’d say it’s comparable to MG FF (not MG FF/M) and therefore it should have lower effectiveness than MG FF/M using m-shells.
Of course that’s assuming you didn’t snipe pilot or engine with AP round or something.
That said - I don’t have solid information right now to share. If I have anything I will share it.
In the meantime I can share the footage for M-61 Vulcan vs F-80/P-80 airframe.
I’d say that Vulcan is closer in effectiveness (per round) to Hispano than MG151 but of course have much higher RoF:
in the meantime WT:
Best reference I’ve found so far is this bit from a video done by the IWM
The narrator of this part is a spitfire pilot who suggests it only took “one hit” to down a german fighter. Im also trying to find some references on it, but its tricky
Pilot memories are often way off - take any case of “claimed kills” in history. You often have to divide them by factor of 4-5.
According to Greg’s video a 20mm M97 HE-I round have 6-12% one-hit-kill probability against P-47 most of which comes from chance to snipe the pilot
source:
EDIT:
if we take highest value of 12% it means on average 8+ hits or 8-16 hits if we take both into account
How are you figuring that it should take 8+ hits of HEI to bring down a P-47?
Repeated hits to the same section of the aircraft will drastically increase the chance of a kill. I’ve already shown P-47 taking 4 rounds to the same area of the wing until failure.
Also if we are taking the chart at complete face value than M20 API-T should be orders of magnitude less effective than it is in-game. Why don’t you make a bug report for that based on the same source?
I personally would rather have guns doing too much damage rather than too little damage. It is better to punish mistakes than reward people that just go full commit head-on with M20 API-T or Mg.151 in random battles.
Though a P-47 is probably the tankiest plane of WW2. That thing should take a lot of fire to go down, a lot more than a spitfire, Bf-109, Zero, etc.
if we take into account the Rate of fire, that twin Hispanos on the Spitfire MkIX have, they can put 20 rounds down range in 1 second. Based upon even a worse case scenario, whether its 3 or 4 rounds, or 20 rounds+, you are still dead with 1 burst of 1-1.5 seconds. Which Is maybe about what I think we have currently. Buts its really hard to tell
Current situation hurts variety waaay more. Right now the only thong that counts is ballistics and maybe ROF. No difference if it’s slow 80g shell with 7g TNT or 130g shell with 12g TNT going way faster - damage is almost the same.
Everyone has “click to delete” firepower now, with exception of Germany and Italy and anyone with .50 cals.
Plane should be judged as a whole. Now all of the sudden we remove the “toughness” and “firepower” from equation and this somehow increases variety because there are less differences between planes? Seriously?
Yeah, agreed there, nothing worse than having to dump half your ammo into a guy and stay on their tail for 5-10 seconds to score a kill, especially in a furball (this is exactly what it was like in the really bad days of real-shatter on most spitfires)
you are right- those are not independent occurances.
anyway - we still know that 1-hit-kill for 20mm allied round is at most 12% vs P-47
yes but it’s something we can test in WT.
I don’t think anyone is asking for early real shatter damage.
Late real shatter damage boosted a tiny bit and with added modifier depending on the kinetic energy would be perfect - damage wise on average.
Of course it is and was not working like I’d like to see - there were barely any differences between different HE shells - it basically made no difference if it was Shvak at 1000m or AN/M3 point blank, while difference should be substantial. Damn, even now MGs with HE filler rip planes apart because Gaijin’s code can’t handle the dkfferences between 1,7g TNT in a 36-40g bullet and proper cannon with 2,5 kinetic energy, 2,5 times the mass and several times bigger filler.
And well - being able to force a head-on is also important. Vs UFO flight models of A6M5 you can basically not bother trying to lure them into v. high speed, because they lock up only above 680 IAS and can get guns on target almost instantly after getting energy trapped.
So what can D9 do? 3rd party, spend half a match trying to bully the guy, or just head on. And IRL it would work just fine. In game 2 hit from Type 99 will rip your wing off.
I think we are entering limitations of WT damage model. Just need to look at bombers and how little fire they take to destroy.
i think what is really needed, is not changing the rounds, but the damage model. I dont think its been updated in forever for planes
2 Likes