And still missing historic accurate fuel tank automatic fire extinguishers on late Navy and some Army planes…
1 Like
Even if added it won’t matter since even planes will explode from 1 bad look from a 20mm
There is pretty often enemies with 12.7mm which randomly burn you from one shot just because yes
Where’s my full yellow belt on hispano 404? what about hispano Mk.V? Mk.II? Oerlikon FF? mg FF? ho-5? and the list continues
And filler percentage can’t be a sidegrade? more filler in a 20mm shell means less fragmentation, more blast and worse ballistics (concentrated damage and requires more precision)
so then why do you oppose so hard pal? maybe because you lie in here because there is a difference, you do need to hold a position with them for a set amount of time and armor does stop them in a noticeable way.
I Said many times mg151/20 and Mg151/15 FI-T rounds are example to follow
Load more AP, take into consideration and make tactics around it.
Much like how a P-51 plans around low speed control
NS-23 was made for fighter on fighter action, made to replace the B-20s and hVAKs
said better shell is redundant since there is a belt made entirely of rounds with 6g of TNT eq
What about Mk-103, im sure ho-229 would appreciate 2 mg151/20s instead
Maybe because armor stops fragmentation or are actually r*tarded? Just think pal, think
You could literally wipe more bombers with an I-225 in a frontal attack unlike a S.O.8000 with 6 20mm cannons.
So then use the weak 20mm cannon as an excuse to tick the BRs down? Maybe?
And? So then that means the Japanese one must be worth 3 because it is also not in a folder
Which now apparently you care about realism, means that the photos at the start of the post are proof that 20mm cannons don’t split planes in half.
Look at the mg151/20 which apparently will become super broken and the only which can oneshot!
Also the soviet testing just said “came down” and aircraft can come down if you shred the powerplant or control systems too, not only structural failure.
I can tell since you only have 3 planes on it, it’s M.B.175T, S.O.8000 Narval and NC.900.
Much I suppose you don’t really care about balance if that means your clicker training on “target destroyed” keep kickin in
No it was actually because later aircraft started to become harder to shoot down not only thanks to more armor but also because they became larger, more numerous and practically 100% made of better alloys instead of wood or y’know wartime steel of the “im losing the war” type of quality, big plane requiere more gun to shoot down, which is why most anti bombers have x4 30mm cannons or one overkill +37mm cannon, but bomber damage models can now.
I suppose because you can’t live outside of furballs? Would explain your point since inside furballs kill stealing is very common and shorter kill time would help prevent it or be more likely to steal if you are the thief.
so then Type 99 can be shit because that’s what it is and I can tell you to fuck off and don’t complain.
It’s not like im totally trying to make the positives like being able to use it as an extra leverage tool to move japanese props down (raising skill floor) and support addition of the firerate upgrades to the Type 99 Mark 2 to make it the Type 99 Mark 2 model 5
1 Like
Lel
It doesn’t work so.
A6M always had high BR even at the time when Type 99 had shit damage.
A6M5 Otsu had like 40k repair cost only because good statistic
And its BR increasing started only recently while it has good damage long time
I mean that nerfs won’t decrease BRs already
So if you want it must be shit just because you imagined it - so no.
And don’t try to pass it off as something good.
1 Like
“choosing belts” =/= choosing what is in the belts, which has been my point all along
Two opposing things cannot be true at the same time. Either damage is heavily nerfed, OR they are changed to the sidegrade MG151/15-like system.
There are already benefits to bringing a small number of AP rounds.
Pretty brave to introduce a cannon primarily to fight fighters with worse velocity and RoF than the one it is replacing.
What better shell? MG151/20 mineshell is very light and as evidenced earlier in the thread it is completely stopped even by relatively fragile Spitfire wing structure.
Ho 229 would appreciate having a rudder far more; MK103s are way better than MG151/20s.
I hit an enemy on the wing root (very common). The pilot is protected by armor behind him, and not to the side. Fragmentation kills him in 2-3 shots since there is a clear path to him through unarmored, thin aluminum skin.
SO8000 has 1500rds of MG151/20 which is still a great cannon. I-225 only has 400rds.
You say they’re weak but any Zero is packing more firepower than a Bf109 without gunpods, even under “realistic” damage.
cool
What was the ammo load in each plane? What guns were firing? Which shell hit?
Yes, and? It’s already well known that if you shoot the engine out, the plane will eventually land or crash.
Almost every plane in the western theatre was all-metal or used only small portions of wood. The same planes were in service from beginning to end of the war.
The Hispano cannons were notoriously unreliable, american-produced models even more so.
What are you even talking about?
A duel is a 1v1 match with no other players involved where both players start at equal speed and energy, and often with equal aircraft.
Where does Air RB fit into this description?
Why would Type 99s be bad? MK108 sucks because even if its shells destroyed the enemy with any hit anywhere, its velocity would still make it worse than using 20mm cannons.
Even the low tier Type 99 Model 1 has better velocity than MK108, and Model 2 is similar to all other good 20mm cannons.
They are not moving down. Ever. Regardless of what changes happen.
“b-b-but the type 99s are good!!!” does not make such bad aircraft superior to a Yak-3U or F4U-4B. It would just be a double nerf.
point you use when it is only useful to you, because the only belts with full explosive have low filler explosive variants (Type 99 or shvak(late)/B-20) or no tracers (AN/M2 and M3), But I every other cannon can eat sh*t and rot.
Type 99’s more powerful shell is left obsolete because there is a full tracer belt of the “weaker” shell.
Russian FI round has 8g too, but it’s obscure as fuck because the tracer belt does all the work.
And I suppose the german planes can also cry because the 1 fi-t shell (which has respectable ballistics) they have fragmentate, but I suppose I should see you play all day play with the tracer belt on a K-4 because since the fragmentation effect is just as powerful, it even has 20mm IT, which just acts as 12.7mm API-T.
They way you oppose it makes it seems as they are both the same, maybe because the sidegrade does tick down damage considerably compared to today.
Made redundant because the enemy is just killed before that, even from the rear a shell just needs to hit the tail and it breaks, or simply move the side a little and blow off the wing.
Maybe because the damage and penetration were dogshit and wasn’t helped by smalls clips, better to take a few less rounds and make them do their job efficiently.
And then the japanese are more stupid because they tanked their firerate to 490rpm just like that and just later on they went “mmm a little more firerate wouldn’t be so bad”
Which is how I can tell you barely played because the main downside is the horrendous rollrate + bad firerate (450rpm) combo which makes deflections shots a little more difficult.
Which makes armor more relevant and which in turn makes AP more relevant
And also the TOP of a wing is a smaller targer and fragmentation scales poorly with distance.
Currently you hit the bottom, top and the tail of the enemy to make it come down in the blink of an eye.
I-225 outranges it by a lot.
MG151/20 is a 20mm cannon, we said 20mm are overperforming but the change it is still a near a bottom tier cannon that it is also very common.
The 109 past the E-4 model has the mineshell with x2.48 times the filler. Completely nullified advantage because of some whine because it’s not fair germany can trade filler for ballistics, and people conviniently hover over the “reduced ballistics” part.
The enormous flashes already show the mine shell at work, but your blind ass can’t even read properly.
Maybe because the fuckin thread on japanese props are on a standstill and people don’t bother to talk.
Since I only enjoy the Japanese interceptors in any way I can’t provide helpful info on those threads.
…Which you can use as an argument, can’t you plan past 2 steps or what? Raise the skill floor, Japanese newbies stop clubbin on American newbies, SL earned comes down, planes come down.
Where both Type 99s lose on firerate and even the Mark 2 losing the early mg FF in terms of firerate and the mark 1 barely beating it in ballistics.
The damage merging of all fillers and the tracer belts are the only 2 factors carrying it now.
We have bullshit like the Mk-108/Mk-103 simply being able to black out 2 sections instead of 1 being seen as an “enormous upgrade”, both cases the wing falls off pal.
And armor is barely relevant
I’ll tell you a difference, shoot at a bomber’s wing and You’ll see ALL but I mean ALL 20mm cannons leave a red section from cannons the Russian hef shell to the german mine round, while 23mm and up leave it black, what an upgrade I suppose.
Almost as if damage is now simulated based on caliber instead of filler, you can’t see different doctrines and different constructions, just caliber, can’t await for the Kv-1’s 76mm pen the same as the sherman’s 76mm because “it’s not fair”, “I reacted first”, “I shoot at him first”, “I have to aim at weakspots while he doesn’t”.
Wow a bomber MAY survive ONE stray 20mm shell
2 Likes
Air RB is more popular than Ground RB. This characterization of the player base is likely inaccurate and is just your own projection.
You were not here when bombers were “relevant”…the only time they were relevant is when some bomber with overly large payload and generous top speed was added to lower BR. The last relevant bomber was the Me.264 and it was an automatic loss for allied teams if Axis side had 4 of them. There wasn’t any counter unless your team had 4x air-spawn fighters…and guess what…prior to it’s introduction any decent air spawn fighter like P-47 had them removed. The P-38 didn’t even have air spawn.
5+ years ago the La-7 was completely irrelevant in the game due to ShVAK lack of damage. The only relevant USSR fighter in the bracket was the Yak-3 and that was because the Berezin had high fire chance. Taking more ShVAK compared to Berezin was actually a downgrade.
Japanese planes were an equally bad spot; the J2M2 used to be 3.7BR in spite of having climb and turn performance similar to an LF IX Spitfire.
Why? It’s completely relevant when we can look at past instances of “realistic” damage and see how things actually went. It’s also important to understand that this theoretical new system of damage would be even worse than what we had in the past since old MG.151 damage is still “too much”.
You can go earlier in thread and see worst case ShVAK damage where it does NOTHING to Fw-190 D-13 and one of the advocates here saying that is perfectly reasonable.
Okay and I have said in this thread I want to see a custom belt option be added specifically to avoid this
Which is something they’re FAR more likely to do than to redo every damage model of every prop in the game
I played 109 F2 with just one of such cannons and it was extremely easy to shoot anything down. Extremely reliable firepower. As I said at the time: I’ll take ten of these cannons to put on my own aircraft.
Control surfaces will eat shells easily.
The cannon’s original firerate was just that low, as designed by Oerlikon. Hispano wasn’t much faster at ~600rpm. Both did their job.
The rollrate is not as much of a downside as the nonexistent rudder. It is trivial to dodge 229 just by moving a little to the side. 450rpm is also not THAT bad considering the R2Y2 I played recently is a similar BR with 500rpm guns.
Yes, armor will protect the pilot.
But you will most likely be aiming dead center anyway:
And even from a low rear aspect like this the wings present a MASSIVE target to hit, even if by accident.
Why does range matter that much? You should engage bombers from the front hemisphere, just get closer.
A shell that is 90g in total and unable to pierce through internal wing structure, as we saw with the Spitfire testing. Filler matters very little when your blast is deflected by an internal bulkhead and is entirely unable to damage anything beyond it.
Which I have said, in this thread, that it was an unfair and onesided nerf.
There were at least 2 different mineshells, with different filler and explosive type. Which one was it And the IT shell with a large filling of incendiary and flash powder is capable of making that effect as well.
Threads don’t really matter when player statistics still show the Zeros doing great and far better than most others.
Ki-43-III Otsu’s engine was nerfed from an ahistorical 1500hp down to ~1100hp years back. Its climb rate and sustained maneuverability were gutted.
Guess what? It’s still 4.0, just like it was back then.
This will never stop because japanese aircraft are simply better suited to newbies. Turning is the most intuitive form of air combat.
All MK108 shells are 500m/s. All Type 99 Model 1 shells are 600m/s - a huge improvement.
Why would a Type 99-1 have the same velocity as Type 99-2? That’s basically what you’re saying.