You mean the modular damage that already exists? The module damage that the OP was complaining about when MG.151 was comparatively at its lowest point with the legacy damage calculation system? Because losing too much lift from black wing root made it impossible for him to fly the plane.
Why wouldn’t it effectively be that?
Structural damage needs to be reduced to get rid of wings falling off.
Wing module damage has to be reduced so that black wing root and similar damage takes more shots. Or the effects of black wing root needs to be reduced.
Fire chance has to be reduced by significant margins according to Kiwi interpretation of GUNVAL study. The other poster thinks that the fire chance should be greater based on reading the same document.
Engine modules also need to be buffed because losing the engine from 1-2 shots is unrealistic as well.
All of this adds up to basically nerf damage across board. And if isn’t even just to Pre-Real shatter 1.0 levels either. The original post was in reaction to MG.151 damage before even real shatter damage was implemented.
The net effect is to increase time to kill to a point that has never really been seen in the history of the game. At least on any consistent basis. One can argue that time to kill with bugged HE / realshatter was close to what is being argued here.
And for what purpose? The edification of a few players who quit the game as soon as someone shoots them down? Basically we should implement a damage system that would be extremely unpopular because it would lead to more of the frustrating situations where you saddle behind a guy and your guns don’t actually cause any significant damage?
I point out the new Growling Sidewinder video because a large part of his praise for IL-2 Korea is that .50 cals actually cause more damage and more consistently than the other simulator games that he plays; i.e DCS and IL-2.
Modular damage made irrelevant due to exaggerated structural damage?
Who cares I suppose. What was the last time you went down because your elevators were cut loose with your tails still attached? What was the last time you saw a cut aileron with an attached wing?
wings will fall off, but not from a 0.5sec trigger squeeze of weak 20mil fire, i.e fragmentation shells with 6g of TNT equivalent.
It will depend on the cannon, you will need to plan with your ammo in mind.
Your cannon has poor explosive power which may complicate the takedown of heavily armored targets? Load some AP my guy.
People don’t like to add an extra layer of “think”, you can always look at the aphe poll, rejected because people couldn’t think of adapting to new tactics.
Where did it end? aphe outclasses every other shell type, everyone looks for the aphe shell and only in rare cases it is prefered over other shell types.
Im pretty sure that actually dependant on the aircraft itself, you can look at Italian powerplants and how easy they are one shotted by stray 50cal fire.
Why was it at the lowest point? Because they pulled a “math.random(0,10)”, where a dice roll could literally nullify a shell, while every other shell was moved onto the new system of “super reliability via brute force”.
You could simply add a 1/5 chance to the super duper 37mil round to just evaporate and it would simulate the same scenario.
The modular damage was relevant enough at the start of the the thread for the OP to complain about it.
Also those two scenarios happen often enough. Just yesterday I had shot ailerons off of a 109 and he was able to fly away and then come back and still boom and zoom me because I was in a 2 v 1.
They have always fallen off to weak 20mm cannons. Even under the “bad” damage of the past it was still possible. I have included instances of it happening all the way back to basically the infancy of the game.
Even bad ShVAK would sometimes get a good damage roll and pop the tail off in a shot or detonate wings. More often than not though they would do minor skin damage which did absolutely nothing.
There is no thinking here and there never has been. Even under low damage and bugged guns of the past players would still just figure out the belt with the best time to kill and use that.
People rejected the APHE change because it would have just made the round much less effective and have eliminated cupola shots as an effective counter to tanks like the Tiger I.
Why would an Italian inline V-12 be less durable than anyone else’s V-12? You’re agreeing that engine damage models need to be buffed since getting 1 shot by a .50 cal is unrealistic.
Gaijin kept MG.151 on the legacy system. This post was made in reaction to MG.151 overperforming on that system when it was comparatively the least powerful that it has ever been. This is arguably when it should be one of the best per round 20mm cannons in the game.
That means MG.151 damage has to be nerfed to be lower than it already was. And in order to preserve it’s rightful place at the top that the damage of every other gun would have to be scaled in relation to it.
This isn’t hard to understand. LARPers (that won’t play the game anyways) just want damage sponge flight models more than anything and screw the rest of the players that want guns that do meaningful damage.
There are already other games that cater to hardcore sim players and LARPers. Why don’t they go play those games instead?
That often is making a lot of work there, today it is practically irrelevant.
VB.10-02 dares to cross 800m meters away from a stalling yak-3U and loses because yak-3u would cry the little mini grenades didn’t blow up a 7.7 ton beast of a plane.
I never said they shouldn’t, but the time of kill of 6g of TNT is no different that a +25g of TNT.
Even if the later one had to sacrifice firerate (NS-23) or Ballistics (mg151/20).
And those +25g have no difference to a + 35g round.
But there should be, this mentality of “no think” is what leads to people crashing the stadistics of an aircraft which requires the “think” to be a powerhouse.
^^^^ origin story for undertiered/overtiered aircraft ^^^^
Ended in 90% of shell types becoming irrelevant most of the time, because there is almost always a second weakspot, not to insta kill, but even to simply disable the ability to shoot back would already seal a fate or allow for an escape.
In your example it wouldn’t, unless that bullet just so happens to snap the crankshaft. But im dead serious, Alfa Romeos really don’t like even the smallest bullet to touch it, the moment they are they practically move from yellow to red in seconds and from red to black in an instant.
Maybe you can separate engine in their own modules, blow a piston and lose a nice chunk of power.
yeah? 20mils just made higher calibers irrelevant and even some canibalized each other.
You are calling me a fake? You only think “meaningful damage” is just an instant smite? Or is it proof you can’t hold a superior position for more than 5 seconds?
Because WT patented mouse aim + intructor combo is unique and allows for manouvers that are incredibly hard to do to be made in just a keypress and even sometime by just looking in a direction. Sometimes it’s maybe the unparallaled awareness of a third person view helps a bit.
Spoiler
Yeah nice one on just calling people just larpers and have them fuck off somewhere else at the last part pal.
At least I tried to keep 1 bit of respect on you for being the one person with a lot perspective into simulator battles.
Then they can go play reserve where everyone has crappy .30cal MGs and, with the exception of pilot snipes, even aiming well will still require a long time on target.
You are the one that asked when is the last time I saw it happen. It happens quite frequently.
If the Yak-3U is stalling then it is not hitting the VB.10-02.
Multiple people in this thread have said that 20mm should not be able to remove wings. Heck the OP also said that an MG.151 round should not even cause a wing to lose effective 1/3 of it’s lift if it hits nearly dead center.
No. This is just simply the reality of a PvP game. People are going to gravitate to whatever belt gives the lowest time to kill or highest chance of success. Even before real shatter or when damage was bugged people still gravitated towards HE belts for MG.151. The only difference is in some cases there was a different belt that was best on a different plane; i.e running armored targets on ShVAK because every other round did basically no damage.
Aircraft are tiered on their average performance. They always have been and they always will be. There isn’t anything particularly surprising about aircraft with guns that cause no damage being moved down in BR until their performance provides a big enough margin to make up for having crap guns.
Pretty much anyone with half a brain realized that the APHE rework would have made cupola shots useless and that the counter-play against Tiger I etc would be basically non-existent. So one player basically gets to just aim vaguely at the center of a tank for a kill and the other guy has to individual snipe the crew members through the cupola since it is basically the only weak spot in many cases. Yeah it is no surprise that the damage change was voted down.
I am mainly talking about the OP and similar types of sim players who will never have enough realism in the game to be satisfied and even if they got exactly what they wanted they still would not play it unless it.
This is the OP’s prop games for the past year. 25 deaths in an entire year for 38 games. I have played in the same games as he has before; he plays super passively, runs to the airfield if you tail him, and leaves the game if he gets shot down.
What happens if everyone decides to play like this? What if everyone wants to get 18:1 KD or whatever he was bragging about a few years ago? What if everyone stops playing as soon as anyone has the ability to shoot them down? The game mode just dies and nobody plays it.
Never had a problem with them but also I don’t play super low tier props so I don’t have an opinion.
Except this little bit of logic was precisely the same logic that was used in the past by some of the damage nerf supporters.
Actually he didn’t, some rounds hit my fuselage and right wing off memory. Not many but enough to make my Zero crab in the air.
So he used his speed advantage to get away, possibly the only advantage a Corsair has against a G.56 especially if he made a mistake?
I’m sure this quote is hilarious to those that commonly see me flopping about online.
No Feet, what happens is that I’m just the best pilot here by far, I never ever get shot down which is why I fly my LaGG-3’s in 3.7-4.7 matches and my C.202 in 5.0-6.3 matches. It’s not because it’s fun but because it’s the only way any of you have a chance and you still never shoot me down… apparently.
I’m so good at the game that I’m due to see King Charles soon, he’s going to knight me as Sir War Thunderton, knight of the realm!
The difference is I can guarantee multiple people here can vouch for me intentionally up-tiering myself for fun. I’m sure you can even find multiple threads I’ve created literally telling people to try it for themselves.
You are a walking contradiction.
“The only time I’ve seen you in a game is in the Sea Fury”.
So you haven’t barely seen me in a game then, yet apparently you know for a fact that I don’t play for fun up-tiering myself? Despite all of the videos I’ve provided etc.
Wait a minute, didn’t you yourself literally say the C.202 was one of my most flown planes when you rather comedically said I only abuse OP aircraft?
Come on Feet… just give up. You’re embarrassing yourself at this point.
Pretty common in RB too.
I remember the engagement you were talking about, I attacked from an energy disadvantage (again, for fun) and then after I was damaged I used my speed to get away… which I’ve no idea why you let me do this when there was plenty of time to shoot me down as my engine was damaged.
Lets see a show of hands, who would dogfight a late 109 in a Sea Fury with engine damage? Yep, no one. If using my one potential advantage against you is “bad gameplay” then I give up.
Yeah because this doesn’t happen in RB at all…
Bad/good players exist in every game mode. What would you suggest, we go full on dictator mode and ban “bad players” from playing SB and RB? People need to learn and get experience, despite your non stop slandering the SB community is arguably the friendliest of all of them. If you can’t work something out then mention it in the chat and you will usually get help from your team or the other team.
Even as we speak there’s a post on the SB section of the website where a player is asking for a sparring partner and they’ve shared discord information etc.
If you’re having issues and this is why you hate SB then just ask for help. Despite all of the crap you’ve been slinging (and lets be honest… it IS crap) I’d be more than happy to help you if you’re stuck.
And yet you were able to easily shoot him as he flew past you. It is almost like the “damage” he did was actually insignificant.
He came in with total energy advantage and then ran to the airfield to get AA to play the game for him. This is against plane with the most powerful 20mm in the game and I somehow dodged him with a plane like G.56.
It was an honest question and based on the snark I am going to assume I touched a nerve. No surprises here.
The one time I saw you it was when Sea Fury was down-tiered for the day and I caught you zooming with the Re.2005. Pretty sure you left after that too.
Odd recollection because the only game I recall is some random dover straight game and I was in an Re.2005 and you were just boom and zooming people near the bots mid-map.
It is something that doesn’t happen by design in RB due to the matchmaker being de-facto random. Sim on the other hand it is very common to see all of the same groups of people on the same team and curb stomping a bunch of randoms who have 1/10th the experience.
Do you know how math works?
If I play 8 games in the Bf.109…and I died 6 times…what are the odds that I left the games that I ended up dying in after a single death?
Let’s just never mind the fact that I have seen him leave after single death. It is what he did after I shot him with J2M2 a few days before this thread was created.
Spoilers: He overshot and then practically stalled himself out in front of ole dannyboy. It still took around 3-4 bursts for danny to find the proper lead and connect on practically stationary airplane. He got maybe the lightest cosmetic hit on the wing tip with a single .50 cal bullet.
If he had tried the same setup against any experienced player he also would have died. The Buffalo missed pretty easy shot at 400m on basically stationary zero. Someone like IdahoBookworm who routinely uses B-239 as counter-japanese turn fighter would have easily won.
And no…the reduced damage would not have made the engagement better for the B-239 in this case. The grid square where the fight took place was 1 square away from dannyboys airfield. However that isn’t his fault since that is where the cap point was.
He flew in a perfectly straight line climbing away and a microscopic burst dissected his tail as I was beginning to outclimb him. You’ll soon see when my Type 99 video is ready as that scene will be included.
It’s almost like cannons are overpowered as per the title of this thread…
The G.56 is a superb aircraft and extremely agile, I’m not stunned you dodged him.
Then he extended away using his speed advantage to get to safety. It’s almost as though the phrase “speed is life”, a phrase quoted by actual pilots makes sense.
No it was a completely disingenuous question which is why you got a sarcastic response. You’ve already looked at my stats, you can see how many deaths I’ve had. Is this genuinely the mark of a player that abuses OP aircraft and cheeses the game? You’ve seen my most flown aircraft and you’ve admitted yourself I fly the Sea Fury which many consider a crap aircraft. When we had our fun two minute tussle it was actually me, bored out of my brain that climbed up to you.
So we both know I don’t just float in the stratosphere because if I do then you’re worse judging by our encounter.
As a side note if I’m flying an aircraft that relies on speed I’m absolutely going to try to be as high up as I can be without bordering on ridiculous levels. That’s just common sense survival tactics. In the C.202 I’m going to be fighting against LF IX’s and late Corsairs, I’m sure as hell not going to fight them on their terms!
We’re getting our encounters mixed up, I’m recalling when we fought at winter Stalingrad. You were in a 109G with the altitude advantage.
So I’m defending the objective then, just to clarify, or do you let people kill your AI’s?
Because people don’t join squads over discord and stomp on RB? Or do the YouTube videos from “pro’s!” not count? Because I can share quite a few. What you’re talking about is something that’s completely common on PVP type games. Have you ever played a shooter before?
There’s times you’ve no doubt left over a single death as well, me too. I’ve left because I’ve had things to do, or someone is knocking at my door etc etc…
This essentially is going to boil down to “my anecdote is better than your anecdote about player because…”
What does this have to do with cannon damage?
You’ll see soon enough as I have the footage saved. It wasn’t a “single bullet” and it caused the aircraft to pull as once again you’ll also see in the video. That said we’re complaining about cannon damage (and .303’s) not so much the .50cal. So I don’t understand the “win” you think you have here, once again you’ve just landed flat on your face.
“It took Danny multiple bursts…”
You mean the Danny that says himself he’s far from the best pilot… the Danny that says unlike many he plays the game for fun and who doesn’t barely fly for Japan whilst also using stealth belts with cannons that are tricky to aim (as they should be?).
“Idaho would’ve won!”
No because I don’t die like your previous post said remember?
So considering my aim is terrible so it should be even harder for me to kill people has anyone else here noticed that Feet has very uniquely omitted the important part of the encounter?
The part where the pilot with bad aim with a wounded aircraft managed to chop the tail clean off of a Buffalo in a microscopic burst.
I do love these discussions Feet as despite the fact you’re against changing broken cannon damage you always find a fantastic way of proving our point.
Just make sure that you include the first three bursts that you completely missed on a plane that is stalling out. And then make sure to include that you have a hundred plus days of time flying fighters in Sim.
Somehow when I play the F4U-4b I don’t have to rely on the airfield AA to force people to break off their pursuits. Not even against the g56.
If we take this playstyle to its logical conclusion, then everyone should just fly the fastest plane for the day and play the game within one grid square of their airfields.
Most people that consider it a crap aircraft are not Sim players. The same can be said for the mb.5.
In Sim you have the luxury of climbing and not trying to make any kind of immediate contributions to the team. It doesn’t matter if your teammates die because they can just respond. So it means that planes like the mb5 or the Sea Fury, especially in downtiers, are pretty good. This is especially true if you combine it with someone who is willing to climb over their airfield, hit one target and then run straight back to the airfield to then execute their climb again. Doing this means that you can basically be invulnerable if you choose to be.
Okay. Just make sure the guys on the other team are lvl.20s and you’ll be fine
Where did I say that you were doing something wrong?
I just pointed out that you left as soon as you got caught one time.
So what happens to the game when everyone plays that way?
Random matchmaking in RB means you don’t have a choice whether or not you fight against a squad and the system still only limits player squads to 4 players.
This is different than SB where you can form a much larger team, can scout the scoreboard before joining the game, and deliberately cherry pick games to have the easiest possible matchups and avoid hard ones.
You can check my stats. You’ll see that pretty much most planes will have more than 1 death per game.
The argument is that cannons need to do insignificant damage because this guy missed all of his shots and then stalled out in front of you. In spite of having 100+ days in sim…it took you at least 3 bursts to connect with him.
Now imagine how much more difficulty people that haven’t been playing the game for 10+ years have.
I watched the server replay. It sure looked like a single bullet to me.
It’s easy to not die to him if you just make sure to not join lobbies that he is in or join on his team.
You might want to read the post again. I did include the fact that you got hit on the wing tip by a single .50 cal and the photo included is after you had already been shot. So do you think single .50 cal is some kind of grievous injury?
How many times have I said already that I’m a sh*t shot? In my own videos I literally state “even with my bad aim”. I’ve got no issues at all showing me spraying rounds everywhere, I even joke about it.
…It also highlights the point that certain weapons are OP when I can split an aircraft in half with a poorly aimed burst where barely any rounds connect. You know… the point of this thread before you attempted to derail it multiple times with nonsensical arguments that if anything actually proved our point further.
Well done, give yourself a pat on the back.
But if you’re asking should players keep fast planes fast and avoid fights that could result in their death my answer is absolutely yes, do you want to know why? Because 1: it’s the smartest thing to do when at times it’s literally your aircraft’s only strength and 2: because it’s idiots that turn fight in Mustang’s etc vs Zeroes that unfairly drive BR’s up where they have no right to be.
Something that I’m sure you’ve complained about before as well…
Because side climbing isn’t a thing in RB.
So using the aircraft to its strengths? You’ve just defined a literal tactic known as “Boom and run”. If it frustrates you then it’s doing its job. Smart 190A pilots do the same thing to Spitfires etc.
Hahaha like I said above! Petty.
You do realise that level has zero to do with player skill, right? I’m sure we’ve both been killed by level 20’s before.
I’ll be brutally honest I can’t even remember if that was even my first death or why I left. Considering I can easily prove by my not particularly brilliant KDR I’m far from a “one death leaver” hanging on to this point much like some of your others is somewhat… well… pointless.
As I’ve said already I don’t give a crap about padding stats and I’m willing to bet most Sim flyers have not only seen me flying outdated aircraft but having rather more than a single death…
Also as a side note does everyone here remember when Feet tried to slander me by saying I “only flew OP aircraft” and the best he could manage was a C.202 (far from OP) and a Mk IX Spitfire (not LF) which is also far from OP?
I took a look at your most flown WW2 aircraft Feet. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Number 1 is the P-47D-28, an aircraft long known for being OP.
Then of course the 109F-4, granted not wickedly OP but it’s hilarious that you even attempted to call me out for the C.202 of all things. I’d bet my C.202 has seen more 5.0-6.3 battles than your 109 has ever seen.
Then of course it’s the F4U-4B, a criminally low BR’d aircraft that couldn’t even stall for the longest time and hits with the one-tap insta-kill cannons.
Then as we go further down there’s also of course the Ki-84 and the Yak-3.
I’ve sieved through my most played vehicles and I’ve flown every single LaGG-3 more than I have the Yak. Yet you tried calling me out for flying “OP” aircraft?
I know this is anecdotal but I’ve never ever seen a squad of four people steamrolling a team in SB, and if they do then so what? War Thunder isn’t just about the solo experience just like how with almost literally every other game out there you can squad up etc. As you’ve mentioned yourself you can create 4 man squads in RB too…
Really now?
I notice you didn’t fly this again… and there’s a handful of others showing one game and one death too…
You ragequitting Feet?
Also to further call out BS do you remember when you said “You quit when you die once!111” for god knows what reason in regards to the A6M2-N? Here’s my actual “amazing” stats from the supposed stat padder that you seem to imply.
Come on man.
What does my terrible aim have to do with cannons being OP? If anything as mentioned multiple times now this proves my point… I am a terrible shot, yet when I did get my aim down his tail is instantly severed isn’t it?
Simulator mode is Simulator mode. It’s supposed to somewhat simulate reality. If guns did the damage they were supposed to they wouldn’t complain as that’s literally the entire point of the game mode. In RB it also isn’t a problem as you have mouse aim stabilised/instructor assisted aiming.
You don’t seem to care at all about realism or balance… as others have called you out for you just want easy mode/your hand held. Like I said WoWP is currently more realistic than WT in regards to aircraft durability and that’s sad.
You’ll find out when I upload the actual video, I haven’t had much time to play as of late unfortunately.
Goalpost moving again I see. I don’t give a crap who I fly against, I fly for fun. If you’re friends with Idaho then ask him if he’s ever seen me fly in an F4U-4… or a Ki-84… or a P-51H/D-30…
Why the hell are we even talking about Idaho? No disrespect to him but this is childish, this is like “my dad would beat up your dad”.
You’ll see when I get enough footage for the Type-99 video. I must say to only land one hit with a rapid firing HMG is extremely talented. Sometimes it’s difficult to just fire one round from cannons for my videos…
Finally I’m not going to continue this p*ssing match with you. It’s childish and I think I’ve exposed you pretty well for what you are. You can have the final word but from now on lets do our best to have a gentleman’s agreement to not derail this thread any more and stick to the topic at hand shall we?
100+ days in sim and you struggle to hit a target that is stalling out and in one the most arcade-like flight models in the game. Presumably with a HOTAS setup as well.
Most players will have less experience and aim that is even worse.
I don’t see why you think this engagement would have improved if you had shot him and did no damage? He would not have gotten away as he was stalled out and you would just glue yourself to his tail and kept shooting.
Conversely because of low damage his chances of getting kills is extremely low.
I think that camping your own airfield is bad and using it as a crutch to clear your tail is ultimately a bad move. You think it’s a good idea because it is the “smartest” thing to do.
You fundamentally do not know how RB works. If you spend too much time sideclimbing in a game then your team will likely have evaporated by the time you get to your desired altitude. The decision to turn in and fight is always a compromise of trying to save yourself and save your team.
You do not have any reason to save your team in Sim.
You aren’t using the strengths of the airplane though; you are using the presence of a “death bubble” that forces other players to either die or not engage you.
Do you think that a guy with basically no experience in the game is likely to be as skilled as a guy with 100+ days playing it?
I agree. This is rather pointless.
Note how you have a whole list of planes that encompasses hundreds of sim games in the last 3 years…and yet I have only somehow only seen you in maybe around 5 games at the tier you claim to play with your C.202…and never in a C.202.
Also note that you have been playing sim for 10+ years and you have never seen a pub-stomp squad. This is very funny because it is immediately one of the first things that I noticed when I started playing the game mode.
It is odd that you say you flew with przybysz86 but not once in your 10 years of gameplay have you ran into a WoVi pub stomp squad? This issue even pre-dates me starting sim. This is from a feud between WoVi and some other players who left the lobby as a group to avoid their squad of players.
Like the whole reason they existed was basically to collect all of the best sim players under one roof and pubstomp.
Okay…what? In sim? Really? At 4.3?
Italy and China both have versions of the exact same plane but two BR steps below it.
Ahh yes…my second most played prop is also the most popular prop in the game…and is basically the median for performance at it’s battle rating range. Also it probably has seen plenty of 5.0-6.0 battles from when I was new because it turns better than the K-4. It is not uncommon for experienced players to bring this one to higher tiers.
The plane that I fly mainly at 6.0 and above to blow up Yak-3U? Or use to farm event points on Ju-288 spam. But also I did fly it a lot when I was newer at the game mode.
Yes really. If you understood basic English you would read the original statement.
In what world does “pretty much most my planes will have more than 1 death per game” mean that “All of my planes will have more than 1 death per game” ?
No. If gun damage levels were adjusted to the preference levels that people in this thread wanted then most of the player-base would complain about not being able to get kills or about damage sponge flight models.
IL-2 Great Battles is right there for sim players and another game that I play. It is very funny to see the damage in that game and the complaints about how guns do basically no damage in many cases and how flight models can tank a ridiculous number of shells.
The goalposts haven’t moved. One of my key points is that in sim you typically do not see teams that are evenly matched in terms of experience. Most of the older players recognize each other and know who to fight with and who to avoid fighting against.
Hence you have never seen a pubstomp squad in 10+ years since it appears you know how to avoid them.
You are the one treating it as a pissing match. I keep tying my criticisms back to the core premise of the thread.
Reducing gun damage to the levels that people want in this thread for the sake of “realism” only serves the purpose of making the game worse for the majority of players. This is why every time it has happened by accident in the past that there has been a massive outcry over it.
Realism for the sake of itself is not a good game design decision and War-Thunder is fundamentally a game first and not a flight simulator.
Cannon damage and fragmentation are completely misrepresented and that affects balance and gameplay by removing variety (so much for improved gameplay if we just merged all weapons in an effort to obtain “fairness”)
Let’s start
1st
6g of TNT will turn a wing black 90% of the time, leaves basically any cannon that flies worse but packs more filler is outclassed, and will easily extend to damage if the weaker cannon has a better firerate (NS-23 vs B-20/ShVAK)
2nd
Every shell acts like Mine round, instead of dealing spread out damage via producing a lot fragmentation, in reality only shells with super thin cases would see this concentrated blast damage but weakened fragmentation.
3rd
Wing spars are too fragile and structural damage is exaggerated, leaves factors like AP rounds redundant one can simply split a plane in half, no need to punch armor, and removal of significant fragmentation means that armor simply never comes into play.
4th
Cannons that sacrificed ammo counts/firerate for more filler are obsolete (Mk-108, NS-37, N-37D), with ballistics coming to save a cannon from mediocrity if lucky (Mk-103 or Type 5)
5th
Cannons that had belts with a lot more explosive rounds (Type 99 and ShVAK/B-20) are lifted of the balancing factor made to compensate for weak fillers, cannons that had belts with much more AP are outclassed due to their negated upside over previously mentioned weaker cannons.
6th
Aircraft with multiple 20mil cannons (Fw-190 A4/A5/A8, Do-17 NF model, I-185s, I-225s, Yak-3P, etc) are left with dead weight and are merely left with accuracy by volume as their only upside
7th
Larger sized aircraft such as heavy fighters are only reduced to accuracy by volume and an airspawn as upsides
8th
Aircraft that swapped 20mil cannons for another weapon with more filler are almost always obsolete
Fragmentation for thicker cased shells and reduced blast damage on all of them (mg151/20 too, it is no wonder weapon after all)
The lower the filler compared to the size of the round, the more fragmentation.
Applies viceversa, more filler = lower fragmentation
In general, lower blast damage to 20mils, red should be the most you get on one hit.
20mils will still have their places as all rounders, but it will no longer simply outclass other types of weapons in 90% of regards.
In this one specific scenario yes. If you shoot elsewhere there is a difference.
This changes nothing.
An intentional choice by the devs, where wings will detach if they’ve taken enough damage to emulate total loss of lift.
AP is still very much useful.
None of these were designed for use against fighters, and all of them suck at it.
Just take a different belt.
…Which is why 190 A-8 just went up in BR? Why Yak-3P has always been higher than regular Yak-3? And the 217s are just irredeemably bad.
Very often they get much higher performance in at least one area.
Hei is .3 higher (than Tei model) because it is ~300kg lighter, on an aircraft that is only ~2800kg (Tei is ~3100kg) with a typical WT combat load.
Yak-9P is 5.0 because it gets VK107 engine.
All of these have or can have at least one VERY EFFECTIVE 20mm cannon.
So turn every cannon into a Ho-5? I don’t know if you’ve looked around, but it’s not like that one’s struggling to shoot down aircraft. The complaints about overperforming cannons would 100% continue.
In what? Caliber, Firerate and ballistics?
There’s still more factor to differentiate cannons
The most common scenario, the other ones don’t see much of a difference, tails still fall off and wing still fall off in almost equal amounts of time.
1st
It does, 1 FI-T round would produce damage to oil systems, water systems, engines, pilots (via spall) (side armor isn’t very common too so extra vulnerable if you land it in a wing root), control surface traction systems and of course drag everywhere.
A mine round will leave en enormous hole and a very damaged spar.
But if you want to kill a pilot you need to land it in it’s canopy to kill it via overpressure
2nd
If it “doesn’t make a difference”, why do you oppose so eagerly? Maybe because IT DOES make a difference?
losing lift on the section near the body shouldn’t nullify the lift provided by outer sections of the wing.
There are plenty of aircraft that can fly with a blacked out wing root, but the moment that little bit of the lift of the tips are taken they fall down like a brick.
It is not because I can simply amputate the tail/wing of an aircraft in one go with cannons, they are currently filth in an otherwise fully yellow belt.
Read yourself a little bit and think about it.
Thank you dumbass, let me take my fully explosive belt on my NS-23, oh wait it doesn’t exist since it is supposed to balance the improved damage of it, which given away to everyone.
“Is better in headons” shouldn’t be a justification,
geez maybe thats why we should send the SM.91 to 4.3 since it better than the SM.92 in a head-on thank to more volume of fire
Or even better Fw 190 A-5/U12 to 5.7 since it is even better than the A-8 in a headon!
Which is accuracy by volume, I sure love to gamble my head, let’s ask Sakeen or Beaufighter Mk 21 players if headons are a reliable way to play an aircraft.
The moment someone remember those planes have the only upside of “kills opponents in headons by brute force” It will take one small turn and a vertical manouver to nullify them.
Very similar to the A6M’s current state.
I talked about mods here, why bother with a NS-23 or N-37? B-20 already saws off aircraft parts like a butcher. Which surprise surprise is why I also believe a 4.7 yak-3 would perform equally to it’s 5.0 counterpart, specially with those 50cals with better ballistics and full API-T load.
Which also deals the same amount of damage to a section? The Mk-108 literally has no reason except that it can splash to other areas.
mg151/20 would end as a ho-5, but every other 20mm cannon would fragmentate, different ways to deal damage than the current “blast off” to one area?
Yes, like placement, ammo count, accuracy, belt composition, tracers…
Except when they don’t because the control surfaces will eat them, or you just detach a stabilizer. I’ve shown several times that having AP greatly reduces your kill time in very common situations.
Who is firing one single FI-T shell? These are automatic cannons. MG151/15 has this damage pattern and doesn’t struggle at all.
Because we’d be changing cannons again, adding an opportunity for gaijin to break damage on some of them again, just for nothing to actually change and having to listen to complaints about cannon damage again.
From a deflection shot. From behind you most likely will not.
Think about what? The only reason the MiG-15 had a 37mm was to better shoot down american nuclear bombers. That’s the N-37D you mentioned.
75% HE is more than enough. You know, for someone who claimed players like me were unable or unwilling to get in a position to shoot an enemy more than once, you sure seem to struggle more with non-full HE belts.
I have used fighters with NS-23s and they were fantastic guns, with the only demerit being relatively slow shells.
But it is. Head-ons are a part of the game. If I have four cannons and can put >2x shells in the air than my opponent, I have a big advantage before any kind of maneuvering begins.
Hornets, Ki-83, P-38s are accuracy by volume since when? And those are probably the most well-regarded heavy fighters.
Even the Mosquitos can be quite competent.
abysmal vantablack coal planes only held up by firepower lol
You keep two B-20s regardless of which armament setup you choose.
The MK108 has no reason to be there because it will just miss. It could literally atomize any enemy on the first shot regardless of where you hit them, and 20mm cannons would still be more useful.
So like the MG151/15 does right now? Which I’ve shown is extremely deadly.
