Why can’t I have Fw 190 having the turnrate of Yak-3U for the sake of the gameplay? It’s equally unrealistic, here we’re just ignoring wing loading as opposed to design of shells.
There is no consistent logic here, seriously.
Realism?
You lose.
Gameplay?
WT is literally the only shooter/air game in existence with such a combo of 1 weapon category being BOTH absurdly overpowered AND inconsistent.
There is nothing special enough in WT to warrant absolute lack of weapon balancing.
Because in gaming we usually have weapons artificially BALANCED because IRL certain categories are simply so mich better for the situations shown in game, that everything else would feel like crap (f.e. SMGs in WW1 shooters - most WW1 shooters have 95% of fighting happening inside 60m,even if there are open sections, there is a lot of cover and various ways to close the distance, at such distances a Mauser pistol with a stock is already superior to all rifles assuming realistic weapon damage and accuracy, so of course devs make pistols and SMGs deal much less damage and harder to aim to kinda balance it out).
And even then - oftentimes some guns in the same category are just better than others because of real life traits - f.e. in Rising Storm 2 M-16 is simply better than AK, due to low recoil and very high muzzle velocity. AK has a bit better cover penetration , which comes in handy less often. And that’s fine, if AK had some real life advantages - tough luck, because the game doesn’t simulate those. But what I’m saying is - devs are not intentionally making things worse for one gun or another. They just implement them the best they can.
In WT we have ANTI-balancing.
Gaijin implemented realistic traits of weapons, that make some guns clearly better than others. Gaijin created an environment, where good ballistics play a much bigger role than IRL, as ARB is almost entirely fighter on fighter and pilots can go -5G and then pull straight to +13Gs with 0 issue and some planes compress much less than IRL, and also you barely ever have a chance to ambush enemy, almost all my targets are actively dodging and being able to land 500-700m shots is often the deciding factor while IRL pilots were not precise enough to be consistent at such distances and neither were their weapons, and also we fight almost exclusively at low alt where bad ballistics play a bigger role than at 6000m.
So, in this environment, MG151/20 is already pretty damn bad and MK108 is almost a meme weapon.
So what does Gaijin do, when introducing the unrealistic balancing factor?
Gives all other guns hammer of god damage (with poor Hoe-5 getting short end of the stick because reasons), making MG151/20 and MK108 and most lower velocity/ROF weapons (like King Cobra’s 37mm) crap tier, while medium velocity 23-45mm weapons are just meh, and the only saving grace of MK103 is ballistics, as it sucks everywhere else.
How does that make any sense?
And it’s not like Gaijin did not try Shvak being damn good pre real shatter 3.0 and US 20mms being mind-blowingly good. So it’s not like they did not know how thay affected balance and how bad are other weapons in comparison.
This whole “but MG151/20 was hitting hard for a long time” argument doesn’t really apply, unless we’re trying to “get revenge” on these pesky Germans who had it “so good” for years.
I am not interested in some payback vs digital pilots. I’m just interested in either more realistic or more balanced weapons. Right now they are both unrealistic AND unbalanced. Oh and once again - extremely inconsistent, because single shell damage varies from instadeath to essentialy nothing with players having little control over it, and then we have wing/tail control edges tanking whole bursts.
