Cannons doing too much damge

[iegaatdao]

@FeetPics

A game mode where bots count as kills

That they flash the same texts on your Screen when you kill doesn’t mean they count as kills.

Some tasks require you to kill only players
They have a completely separate counter, both in leaderboard and in profiles ( they are grouped with stuff like pillboxes)

Reduced rewards, they provide reduced rewards, 2 AI planes = 1 assist for a player in terms of rewards

@FeetPics

where the average player skill is below the floor

how does that connect with this? oh wait, maybe it was those people who didn’t bother to read a statcard that sent us down to this current system made for people with barely any sapience and are just satisfied by a text of “target destroyed”?

@FeetPics

experienced just shop lobbies to find noobs to farm more often than not?

The shopping doesn’t exist outside of sim, where you shop for lobbies that actually show playercounts and not 1-2 zombers ready to leave at any second.

@FeetPics

Sim is a hug box. It shouldn’t even be considered a real game mode.

What are you trying to achieve? Removal of Sim? Just in case I am not touchin Aces of Thunder with a 10 foot pole.

@FeetPics

Do you know the difference between Indicated Air Speed and True Air Speed?

VDM reached 720kpj Indicated Air Speed according to German test pilot. That means it’s true air speed would have been far higher than a simple 720kph.

If you apply Gaijins standard correction for altitude and assume that the top.air speed was at nearly the same alitu as the Re.2005 prior to the new prop and MW-50…then it would be effectively the first

They literally told where the fuck did you recieve such info from? You dumped in here in 1 second and expected for it to work. No source
By your rule I could say F4F was bad because A6M, while it simply just came across a zero which is kind of a weirdo in terms of approach to aircraft design at the time and the air doctrine wasn’t made for them.

So I repeat

@FeetPics

VDM reached 720kpj Indicated Air Speed according to German test pilot. That means it’s true air speed would have been far higher than a simple 720kph.

Who was the pilot? at what altitude did it see such speed? Because drag is lower depending on your altitude and even the temperature of the air.

@FeetPics

In what way was I punished for being hit with guns multiple times in this case?

It was completely negligible.

Both skill issues due to opponents taking a P-47 on a downwards spiral, where it’s mass will keep the speed it need to keep a good rate.

Which also happened to be the weakest 20mils? Video takes place before damage was merged into the mess it is today.

I could die to gladiator on a F-16 after trying to drop it with an AIM-120 and then try to justify that the blast radius and proxy fuse on it are too weak.

[RunaDacino]

@dannaryan-psn

“Ki-84 OP PLZ NERF”

To be devil’s advocate - there’s nerfing by BR and there’s nerfing by flight performance.

I personally advocate for nerfing both Lf Mk IX and Ki-84 in ASB by moving them to 5.7. Not 6.0 because Ju 288 ruins 6.0

[dannaryan-psn]

@FeetPics

In what way was I punished for being hit with guns multiple times in this case?

It was completely negligible.

What seems better to you:

One scenario where an aircraft known for its toughness can withstand battle damage with a drop in performance (we both know that you weren’t pulling like you could).

Or the other scenario where that second aircraft dissected your historically very strong aircraft in that one tiny burst he hit you with as per what happens today?

@FeetPics

A game mode where bots count as kills and where the average player skill is below the floor and where experienced just shop lobbies to find noobs to farm more often than not?

Sim is a hug box. It shouldn’t even be considered a real game mode.

I love how you keep attempting to troll with this despite how utterly ridiculous and completely bullshit your stance is.

Using the logic you used before Ace Combat players are far superior to both of us.

@FeetPics

Do you know the difference between Indicated Air Speed and True Air Speed?

VDM reached 720kpj Indicated Air Speed according to German test pilot. That means it’s true air speed would have been far higher than a simple 720kph.

Can you show me the documentation where it states the aircraft did 720km/h IAS? Because even the thread itself complaining about the VDM’s performance has stated the aircraft couldn’t do 720km/h TAS let alone IAS. The only source stating “720km/h” is an anecdote. Not an actual official datasheet etc.

War Thunder doesn’t allow anecdotal evidence…

@RunaDacino

I personally advocate for nerfing both Lf Mk IX and Ki-84 in ASB by moving them to 5.7. Not 6.0 because Ju 288 ruins 6.0

I agree. Balancing by BR I don’t have an issue with at all. For whatever reason FeetPics has a terrible habit of throwing multiple different subjects at the wall seeing if anything sticks instead of debating the actual issue at hand. At no point here has anyone mentioned having historical BR’s.

Despite mainly flying for Britain I’d also put the Hornet at 6.0. It’s the best aircraft in the game when flown right.

[iegaatdao]

@FeetPics

Air bots are not separated as their own kills in player stat cards. They are only separated in the game scoreboard. There are people who’s whole schtick in sim is basically farming bots for KD ratio

They are

@FeetPics

There are people who’s whole schtick in sim is basically farming bots for KD ratio.

Sim issue, not cannon Issue

@FeetPics

There is this idea amongst sim players that they are more “skilled” than RH players. This is a game mode where there are no such things as down tiers and planes like the LF IX Spitfire are at 5.0 BR.

The average sim player is just a skill-less as a brand new RB player. Most “high skill” sim players are only as good as an above average RB player. The mode is just inherently easier to be good in.

argument doesn’t relate with sim at all, just with certain part of the playerbase that is numerous and very loud.

@FeetPics

Other game modes don’t allow you to cherry pick lobbies, teams, or battle ratings ranges. Hence they are more skill based.

Another Sim issue not related to cannons

@FeetPics

Not using the hug box game mode as some kind of indicator of skill. That is the extent. You could replace sim players with named bots and the skill level would not change.

Sim = alien world to most players, as naval battles is alien to tank and air players.

I don’t know what you are trying to do here. uhhhh. remove sim?

@FeetPics

They then took all of the data and decided to never produce the fighter.

Also the wiki literally states
By 1941, Italy was deeply involved in World War II, and its air force was quickly becoming outdated. While liquid-cooled inline engines were gaining widespread popularity across Europe, the Italian aviation industry relied primarily on air-cooled radial engines. Recognizing this shift, Reggiane decided to design a new aircraft from scratch. On May 9, 1942, the first prototype of the future Re.2005 fighter, powered by a DB605A engine, took to the skies. An order for 750 aircraft soon followed. However, by the end of the war, only 48 production models and two prototypes had been built.
Italy didn’t have the capacity to produce such an advanced aircraft in such numbers.
Oh yeah and also they did produce more, it wasn’t a one-off, it was production aircraft that failed in the assembly line.

germany mass produced a round which sacrificed ballistics and fragmentation. But in WT a 6.46g of TNT deals the same amount of blast damage, compared to our almost 30g of TNT equivalent. So why did they produce them much? Why bother with mk-108s? If a firecraker which I could easily throw down my toilet can leave a spitfire’s wing dangling on a prayer?
Why just ignore an almost x3 times TNT equivalent? But I have to read your banters about sim?

Can you Kindly at least shut up, throwing shit like this only makes your side look bad. Make room someone that we can atleast talk with and exchange in how to rework cannon damage

[RunaDacino]

@iegaatdao

They are

They aren’t.

I barely play jets, yet…

Do you think I got these by killing enemy players?

I got these when I was grinding the Kfir c10 shooting bots, attacker/bomber spawns and the occasional zomber.

[iegaatdao]

I see, I was confused by the “battle hardened” option in the profile section.
It does separate K/d (players) and K/d (AI), came to the conclusion AI planes also went there, since I barely kill them and daily task / special task do separate AI from Players.

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

That they flash the same texts on your Screen when you kill doesn’t mean they count as kills.

Some tasks require you to kill only players
They have a completely separate counter, both in leaderboard and in profiles ( they are grouped with stuff like pillboxes)

Reduced rewards, they provide reduced rewards, 2 AI planes = 1 assist for a player in terms of rewards

Air bots are not separated as their own kills in player stat cards. They are only separated in the game scoreboard. There are people who’s whole schtick in sim is basically farming bots for KD ratio.

@iegaatdao

how does that connect with this? oh wait, maybe it was those people who didn’t bother to read a statcard that sent us down to this current system made for people with barely any sapience and are just satisfied by a text of “target destroyed”?

There is this idea amongst sim players that they are more “skilled” than RH players. This is a game mode where there are no such things as down tiers and planes like the LF IX Spitfire are at 5.0 BR.

The average sim player is just a skill-less as a brand new RB player. Most “high skill” sim players are only as good as an above average RB player. The mode is just inherently easier to be good in.

@iegaatdao

The shopping doesn’t exist outside of sim, where you shop for lobbies that actually show playercounts and not 1-2 zombers ready to leave at any second.

Other game modes don’t allow you to cherry pick lobbies, teams, or battle ratings ranges. Hence they are more skill based.

@iegaatdao

What are you trying to achieve? Removal of Sim? Just in case I am not touchin Aces of Thunder with a 10 foot pole.

Not using the hug box game mode as some kind of indicator of skill. That is the extent. You could replace sim players with named bots and the skill level would not change.

@iegaatdao

They literally told where the fuck did you recieve such info from? You dumped in here in 1 second and expected for it to work. No source
By your rule I could say F4F was bad because A6M, while it simply just came across a zero which is kind of a weirdo in terms of approach to aircraft design at the time and the air doctrine wasn’t made for them.

So I repeat

Sergio Govi – Dal Re.2002 al Re.2005 – Storia degli aerei Reggiane – Gruppo Caponi, Giorgio Apostolo Editore, 1984.

720kph Indicated Air Speed. This is the same book they used to give it an MW-50 system that the Germans would not implement or test on their own aircraft until late-1943 / early-1944.

@iegaatdao

Both skill issues due to opponents taking a P-47 on a downwards spiral, where it’s mass will keep the speed it need to keep a good rate.

And yet I still won the 2v1 purely because damage to my plane had negligible impact on my ability to continue fighting. Both the Yak-3 and J2M2 are far more maneuverable at this altitude. But they got bad damage RNG and I got good damage RNG.

@iegaatdao

By 1941, Italy was deeply involved in World War II, and its air force was quickly becoming outdated. While liquid-cooled inline engines were gaining widespread popularity across Europe, the Italian aviation industry relied primarily on air-cooled radial engines. Recognizing this shift, Reggiane decided to design a new aircraft from scratch. On May 9, 1942, the first prototype of the future Re.2005 fighter, powered by a DB605A engine, took to the skies. An order for 750 aircraft soon followed. However, by the end of the war, only 48 production models and two prototypes had been built.
Italy didn’t have the capacity to produce such an advanced aircraft in such numbers.
Oh yeah and also they did produce more, it wasn’t a one-off, it production aircraft that was a failure in the assembly line.

Italy license produced DB.605 engines during the war and they had problems that were even more extensive than German produced variants.

If the DB.605 MW-50 equipped Re.2005 existed and was as good as the sources claim then it would have been immediately mass produced by the Germans.

How was a plane that was heavier and had significantly larger wings (and consequently higher drag) much faster than even the 1.98 ATA boosted Bf.109 K-4? And 2 years prior to it as well?

The answer is simple. It didn’t happen. The flight model we have in the game is basically a loose interpretation of something that could have existed but almost certainly did not.

[iegaatdao]

Uh yeah, I already replied on these.

Again
Any mention of cannon damage, except for vague connection with your P-47 match?
no?
gtfo

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

Any mention of cannon damage, except for vague connection with your P-47 match?
no?

The connection is that I took multiple cannon rounds and was able to fly just fine to the point that I was able to out-dogfight two experienced players who were both in more maneuverable planes.

The fact you and others in the thread see no issue with this and the complete lack of effect it has on relevant flight performance proves my point that most of what you want is just for planes to be damage sponges / basically hit point based damage.

[iegaatdao]

2 aircraft armed with 2 of the weakest 20mm cannons vs 1 aircraft which was know for it’s incredible durability ends with said aircraft needing multiple passes.

@FeetPics

out-dogfight two experienced players

Those 2 “experienced players” took on a P-47 while having an energy advantage on not only a turnfight, which means to sacrifice more position, BUT ALSO, take it into a downwards spiral, where the mass of your P-47 allows it to keep the speed needed to cash into a countinous sharp turn.
Instead of upwards where P-47’s mass starts to cripple it.

A complete foolish mistake, which hopefully they learned from since 2 years

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

2 aircraft armed with 2 of the weakest 20mm cannons vs 1 aircraft which was know for it’s incredible durability ends with said aircraft needing multiple passes.

This was from a time when the thread was still new and people were still saying ShVAK were far too powerful. So by that estimation I should have been even LESS damaged if people that started the thread had gotten their idea damage modifiers.

@iegaatdao

Those 2 “experienced players” took on a P-47 while having an energy advantage on not only a turnfight, which means to sacrifice more position, BUT ALSO, take it into a downwards spiral, where the mass of your P-47 allows it to keep the speed needed to cash into a countinous sharp turn.
Instead of upwards where P-47’s mass starts to cripple it.

The Yak-3 tried to go vertically and I still was able to follow him. And he is one of the more experienced Yak-3 players in Sim.

The J2M5 was also an experienced player.

I was able to get both kills on them purely because the damage that was inflicted on me had no noticeable effect on my flight performance. No significant issues controlling the plane. No significant increase in stall speed. No reduction in critical AoA.

The only thing the damage that I received would have an effect on is top speed and high end acceleration.

[iegaatdao]

@FeetPics

The Yak-3 tried to go vertically and I still was able to follow him. And he is one of the more experienced Yak-3 players in Sim.

Yak-3 did a vertical loop, not as much separation time that you would need. It wanted the duel to end NOW, even when the advantage would be far as time went on and on.

2 years ago is when I first started ARB. I was a tank player until then.

I went from the P-26 doing turns with Ju-87s and losing, to the ju-87 who won vs an I-15.

There far more room for improvement over 2 years than you think.

Oh yeah and also, those are not only the weakest 20mil interms of explosive power, they are fragmentation, able to start leaks hit a lot of stuff at once. Unlike currently which is just a 20mm mine round jacked up to 11 and sent on it’s merry way to chop apart a plane.

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

Yak-3 did a vertical loop, not as much separation time that you would need. It wanted the duel to end NOW, even when the advantage would be far as time went on and on.

Except he went for a deflection shot on an already damaged plane and he rolled bad damage RNG and I was able to capitalize because damage was negligible.

@iegaatdao

Oh yeah and also, those are not only the weakest 20mil interms of explosive power, they are fragmentation, able to start leaks hit a lot of stuff at once. Unlike currently which is just a 20mm mine round jacked up to 11 and sent on it’s merry way to chop apart a plane.

Except this thread is 3 years old and the same people have been making the same complaints since then.

Literally the second reply in the thread is about Japanese 20mm cannons being overpowered. In fact I think this thread was started shortly after I killed the OP in a head-on with the J2M2 in a head on. This was a time when he was bragging about his KD in the P-47 in Air Sim.

All of the points that @PercussionCap made were applicable in that situation. His whole strategy was to use the airfield AA to force people to break off of him.

[RedEye_ツ]

@dannaryan-psn

But you are and always were punished for it. If you carelessly fly in front of someone’s guns you’re either going down or you’re crippled to such an extent that you’re either crashing or dead in the second burst. As I’ve mentioned before the Yak’s etc were always considered “OP” even when Shvak’s behaved more realistically. We had no problems shooting people down back then so it isn’t an issue now.

That doesn’t look like it at all. This is the damage you advocate for.
Surely in our current Air RB environment that’s very fun and healthy gameplay, having to spend your entire ammo to not even finish 1 enemy out of 16. Yeah am obviously against this, I don’t see how that’s fun.

@dannaryan-psn

You’ve basically just proven my point, you’re fine with unrealistic changes (current gun damage) right until it doesn’t benefit you (190A overheat) at which point all of the documentation comes out. Yet when we rightfully say “gun damage is nonsensical, ruining gameplay” the answer is “Nah”.

What a surprise. I’ve stated that am perfectly fine with the current mix of realism and game a couple times so yeah. I have my preferences and you have yours.

You are fine with the many artificial mechanics of the game while advocating for a nerf to all cannons, that cannot be properly implemented with our current very limited damage model without making many nations miserable to play with.
The weak cannons in our current damage model + formula for HE aren’t any more realistic than the strong ones, it’s just a trade. That most players have not been a fan of, therefore Gaijin changed according to the feedback.

We’d need another overhaul on everything related to instructor, fm’s, dm’s, drag values and HE in order to have a more faithful model that has a detailed damage system where a hole in your left wing could be more punishing, tail damage, etc. That way Gaijin wouldn’t have to compensate the damage by ripping wings and tails off and weaker guns would still be useful and damage scaling would be more relevant.

@dannaryan-psn

No what you’re doing is “rules for thee, not for me”. You’ve just highlighted that above.

You’re fine with gun damage making certain vehicles OP and an entire style of gameplay useless (bombers/heavy fighters) yet when a 190A gets nerfed in regards to overheating you’re up in arms trying to get it fixed… despite the aircraft being changed for “balanced gameplay” purposes apparently.

You do it too, just like everyone else—especially Gaijin. They only care about realism when it’s convenient. They’ll slap in artificial changes without a 2nd thought, no report needed. But if you ask for a buff or nerf on that, they will deny it cuz it’s not historical.
If we have to ask for a change, we have to play by Gajin’s rules. And double standards are part of it.

The Fw190A5 was already a sad plane when it didn’t have the cooling issues and its fm updated.
It was doomed by an artificial nerf cooling on top of it, the fm update was completely random and unrelated to any report or balancing decision. Of course I want it to be fixed, I want it to be playable. I will sacrifice some of the realism for a better gameplay experience anytime.

The game is not fully realistic and the damage of cannons is just 1 out of the countless unrealistic features we have.
For you it’s absurd, game breaking and ultimately the worst damage we ever had in the game, for the majority of the players it’s the opposite, the best damage we had in years cuz it’s rewarding and fun to play with any nation.

Bombers have been useless in RB for over 7 years now, they were useless in the old hitpower system, realshatter 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and they are useless now and they will continue being useless cuz Air RB is not designed properly for them. Bombers need a proper game mode for them.
Heavy fighters have air spawn and still are relevant to the game, fighters are still ahead due to the nature of Air RB regardless of the damage of the cannons.

[PercussionCap]

@dannaryan-psn

I’m willing to bet you weren’t too happy about that

It is what it is. I just play them far less now.

@dannaryan-psn

It means a lot. Because if people are not willing to learn how to realistically counter an aircraft Gaijin absolutely will artificially nerf it in some way once people scream enough.

People have been writing cope posts about the Zero for over a decade now.

@dannaryan-psn

But with the current state of the game the Shvak arguably is the strongest cannon out there.

AN/M3 exists lol

And since we’re on the topic of ahistorical performance, how come AN/M2 and M3 cannons don’t constantly jam? Shouldn’t that also be represented? Or some shortcomings are fair game while others aren’t?

@dannaryan-psn

“Gun tax” as it used to be called is a completely stupid way of balancing aircraft anyways. We’ve been complaining about this for years. As well as some aircraft have too low of a B.R due to a lack of firepower we also have aircraft sitting way too high considering their actual performance.

And which approach do you think would make the gun tax worse? Changing gun damage so having four cannons is the only way to kill any fighter quickly? Or making it so even a single one is more than enough to get kills if you can aim okay?

You are suggesting guns should not impact BR, which is ridiculous.

@dannaryan-psn

Yes I believe it got nerfed a while back. I’m sure robbing it of some of its manoeuvrability instead of learning how to combat them really helped gameplay. See my point?

There have been no changes to the Ki-84. The issue is that in RB it has always flown like it’s on rails, and I don’t enjoy aircraft like that anymore. In Sim the cockpit is of low quality. And in both modes, there is too little trigger time. I am actually looking forward to the Ho-5 RPM nerf.

@dannaryan-psn

If you carelessly fly in front of someone’s guns you’re either going down or you’re crippled to such an extent that you’re either crashing or dead in the second burst.

Which is why… we have seen a plane with no armor at all tank many hits and fly off?

@dannaryan-psn

No more getting one-tap eviscerated by a Yak-3U etc and no more .50cal Breda’s annihilating bombers in a single pass.

Yak-3U is only at its current BR because its guns sucked for a long time. And I’d like to have your Breda-SAFATs, because mine aren’t doing that.

@dannaryan-psn

You’ve basically just proven my point, you’re fine with unrealistic changes (current gun damage) right until it doesn’t benefit you (190A overheat) at which point all of the documentation comes out. Yet when we rightfully say “gun damage is nonsensical, ruining gameplay” the answer is “Nah”.

Did Klimb Afterburner make more aircraft playable? Did Klimb Afterburner improve the overall balance between nations?

@dannaryan-psn

However if I made some posts on the forum and maybe a few YouTube videos I’ve no doubt they could be pressured into adjusting the FM’s as they have caved in before.

Uh huh. How many posts and videos have people done over the years on various aircraft? How many cope posts about Yaks, Zeros, and whatever else have people made? Even just on this ‘new’ forum we can find an endless amount of them.

@dannaryan-psn

If the VDM was capable of 447mph it’d no doubt have a 6.0br where it’d fight considerably more equal aircraft.

@dannaryan-psn

I’m quite confident I killed people even before guns went full on stupid like they are now.

This has no meaning.

@dannaryan-psn

with extended bursts/multiple passes wings could still detach

Imagine going through all this trouble when you could go play a nation with guns that actually work and will just atomize the enemy on the first pass.

@Loofah

Ho-5 were largely ineffective.

Oh really?

- YouTube

248 shells in the magazines.

242 shells in the magazines. Tail detached. Huge fire.

Later against an XP-50, from 242 shells to 234. The pilot even died.

Firecrest. 198 shells to 186. Did not survive.

Yak-3, 186 shells to 176. Instant kill.

Tell me how this is “largely ineffective”? They are arguably doing even better than now, since the old fragmentation system means they could/would cut your tail off, AND set you on fire, AND kill your pilot.
What we have now simply removes your wing instead. Zero change gameplay-wise, as your enemy still dies in just a few shells, the only difference being how the damage is done.

@iegaatdao

Who was the pilot? at what altitude did it see such speed? Because drag is lower depending on your altitude and even the temperature of the air.

This betrays the fact that you don’t know how IAS and TAS are related. Go enable TAS+IAS in the WT settings and see for yourself.

@RunaDacino

I personally advocate for nerfing both Lf Mk IX and Ki-84 in ASB by moving them to 5.7. Not 6.0 because Ju 288 ruins 6.0

6.0 even for those two, Ki-84 Otsu is 6.0 with a small firepower upgrade over Ko model, and seems to do just fine. Just as a little punishment to those two for ruining 5.0 for so many years. 288 belongs at 6.7 in both RB and SB.

@RedEye_ツ

Bombers have been useless in RB for over 7 years now, they were useless in the old hitpower system, realshatter 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and they are useless now and they will continue being useless cuz Air RB is not designed properly for them. Bombers need a proper game mode for them.

The only time bombers were “useful” is when they had aimbot gunners and could end a match in one sortie by pressing spacebar a few times. Which really shouldn’t make a return outside of a dedicated NT-like mode.

[RedEye_ツ]

@PercussionCap

The only time bombers were “useful” is when they had aimbot gunners and could end a match in one sortie by pressing spacebar a few times. Which really shouldn’t make a return outside of a dedicated NT-like mode.

Yeah I heard ab it, sponging infinite amounts of ammo while having aimbot gunners. Must’ve been interesting times lol.

[iegaatdao]

And that justifies removing depth and make null any advantages rounds designed to pack more filler had, and nullify cons cannon with poor filler are supposed to have.
Nullify calibers above 20mm because, they are technically better since the kill chance goes from 90% to 99% so they better! so smart!

Cannons are simply ranked by:
1-Ballistics
2-Belts
get a cannon with good ballistics and a lot of explosive rounds and that’s jackpot! Wow!

What about mg151/20? Who sacrifices fragmentation, ballistics and full explosive belts?
mg FF? Not one upside, bad belts and bad ballistics
hispano 404? Incredible ballistics and a little more explosive filler, but only 50% explosive rounds at most with no AP-I even.
NS-23?! Made to improve on the B-20 and ShVAKs with more filler and ballistics, but lower ammo counts and firerate, ONLY BALLISTICS LEFT!

Because another layer of balance is too hard! Sorry I only use colors like toddler to see my round’s effects!

because I can’t read a number or a simply designation of “Fragmentation” or “high explosive”

Only saw “20mm” and went with it!

At this point what’s next? Unify all ballistics, belts and firerates because it’s not fair my opponent’s cannon fly better?

I do not want to revert to realshatter, I want a new system where differences in filler equivalents and case thickness are taken into account.

Because the current system you oh so appreciate is simply the laziest fix know to man, just pure brute force.

It is so hard to comprehend a third route apart from “keep cannon damage” and “Real shatter must come back!”

[PercussionCap]

@iegaatdao

Cannons are simply ranked by:
1-Ballistics
2-Belts
get a cannon with good ballistics and a lot of explosive rounds and that’s jackpot! Wow!

Old ShVAK used to have both and yet it still sucked lol

@iegaatdao

Only saw “20mm” and went with it!

At this point what’s next? Unify all ballistics, belts and firerates because it’s not fair my opponent’s cannon fly better?

Nobody said this. The point is to not have half the cannons do this:

@RedEye_ツ

https://forum-en-cdn.warthunder.com/original/4X/f/9/1/f91c13e113dcd8a780510b620a626658b5deac7c.mp4

(the video from before)

While the other half delete you on the first hit.

@iegaatdao

I do not want to revert to realshatter

What do you mean “revert”? We have RealShatter right now.

[iegaatdao]

@PercussionCap

Old ShVAK used to have both and yet it still sucked lol

And now it has all 3
Ballistics
Belts
And structural damage

@PercussionCap

Nobody said this. The point is to not have half the cannons do this:

It is what you are advocating for, nullify all differences besides ballistics and belts

@PercussionCap

What do you mean “revert”? We have RealShatter right now.

I meant realshatter 1.0 and 2.0
3.0 is more like no shatter because fragmentation is only simulated on larger calibers.

And I repeat myself

@iegaatdao

I do not want to revert to realshatter, I want a new system where differences in filler equivalents and case thickness are taken into account.

[FeetPics]

@iegaatdao

I do not want to revert to realshatter, I want a new system where differences in filler equivalents and case thickness are taken into account.

Realshatter was never reverted.

There was a period where realshatter was bugged following the first update where it was a downgrade over legacy damage. Then it was fixed. Then it was broken again when Gaijin somehow made missiles not do damage. Now its fixed again.

If you read the posts here you will see that most advocates for reduced damage want something that is to the effect of reverting to something even worse than the legacy damage system. Note that the thread started 3 years ago which was right around the roll-out of realshatter for aircraft cannons.

This video is from approximately two months before this video was created.

- YouTube

Basically the OP and friends want to take probably the 2nd worst version of realshatter that we had…and then index everything in the game to actually be even worse than that. For “realism”.