fun fact
some kinda do since aec is not doing a perfect job
Compared to most games a lot of cannons damage is quite exaggarated, even with .50cals. A burst ripping a wing off like it’s a cannon is quite incredible.
2 Likes
I know but I am sure most of players won’t be happy if they will be forced to use MEC because AEC will be debuffed like in 50% (just imagined number)
well i mean
some countries would suffer more from it than others
ger planes for example would have 0 problem since even without aec you still dont need to do anything
other nations like russia tho?
theyd get hit pretty badly ngl
1 Like
People do tend to complain about engine overheating, and that’s when they usually learn about MEC. Then they get the impression pilots were always on 100% throttle with radiators fully open, which is far from the truth.
Issue is that AEC vs MEC differences is absolutely not so close to current 20mm damage vs what people want (or imagined, never mind)
So AEC must be nerfed even more and something say me most of players will complain about it lol (and I understand them)
It indeed is exaggerated, like many other things in WT are. It’s one of the many cool elements in video games.
Wasn’t punished despite your obvious bad move? Isn’t that the same reason you want to keep cannon damage?
(somehow you could do that)
If I load air targets I recieve the ballistics of the AP-I round
If I load stealth I recieve the ballistics of the Minen round
If I load the tracers I recieve the ballistics of the FI-T round
Why don’t people load the tracer belts? Maybe because the fragmentation isn’t as busted as the overtuned blast damage.
I need to aim close to engines, control surfaces and pilots vs I need to aim at enormous wings and tails.
One comes out as complete ass because the competition is completely overperforming.
Incredible bypass, the same as I don’t need AP-I I just need yellow round with a 20mm caliber and be done with it.
Incredible almost as if number of 50cals makes a difference, and not simply makes headons more in your favour like on 20mm cannons.
You can also move lower with the B-239 with full AP-T belt and see similar results, why? a firerate of 1100 RPM for LKk/42 vs a M2’s 750RPM and all shells have a firechance, yes even a ball round will make a fire. You can also try the Incediary belt and see how you really need to hit exposed radials or fuel tanks to make fires.
Weapon stats actually matter below 20mm, but I can’t take it to those caliber because people think “cannon” is the same as if I shot at the enemy with a 120mm dart.
The 4x LKk/42 are able to keep pace with the 6x M2 because that firerate can close the gap, of course ammo is consumed faster but it has an upside.
There’s actual flavours below 20mm, weapons of the same caliber will come out above each one but there are actual factors, yet when explosives are involved it all needs to be put away in order to make every weapon “fair”?.
once again, point flew over your head, maybe because wings and tails are not that easy to detach and thus armor goes to areas where there are important components.
Im talking when shot at, “damaged plane part” is 90% of the time skipped to “im down!”
And you think structural failures caused by 20mm explosive rounds are common? No it was like skul said (thank you for the correction), either AP or fragmentation reach critical areas.
Maybe you can blame it on spars, never seen such complaint myself, I mostly kill enemies by fires, pilot snipes or simply severe them and wait for them to fall on their own.
Also 7.5mm really needs a full AP belt.
Thus I handicap myself while my opponent just turns me into sushi on 1 burst.
Thread my ass, I talk on my point only and accept 1 or 2 corrections.
how many times does it happen? and is blast damage really severely outclassed there?.
2 Likes
more or less, would make the jump from 20mm to 23mm a bless, and those slow and armored attackers of theirs (love me Il-2) wouldn’t be completely outclassed by fast attackers.
Japanese planes, since I talk so much about armour, aren’t really affected except the most Zeros, some early bombers like g4m1 and the A7M, most japanese planes do have armour and even for example the late A6Ms start to armor up later on.
It’s not a nation completely screwed over, it’s an entire face of aircraft design that makes a return (Armour and AP rounds, self sealing tanks, engine/fuel fire systems, multiple cannons, firerates and explosive fillers.
1 Like
I think it’s the IAI round currently and yes it is actually worse than normal bullet because it tries to deal blast damage only and doesn’t fragmentate a single bit so it acts like a normal incendiary round instead.
2 Likes
It had only explosive like PETN + RDX and showed very good performances in compare to types of ammos. Yes the main goal was modules but it showed more damage to it than I rounds
It should not cut of wings and tails but saying it works worse than normal bullet… lol
Black wing root and damaged engine. That’s pretty bad when we’re already very outnumbered. But obviously still alive.
I also ate some cannon shells from a Yak3P last night - he died to my .50s and I lived.
Because they’re not mineshells and the belt sucks. Almost half of the shells in it being hot ass does not make a good one.
Now, if it was full FI-T or something like FI-T/HEI/APHE, then you’d see it being used.
Find me the belt that is at least 50% Incendiary then
P-51C was working just fine too against basically the same targets.
I was shooting plenty of aircraft with inline engines.
And you think it doesn’t for 20mm?
And in return the B-239 is much higher BR than the other Buffalos. We can see the same effect with 20mm cannons, A6M3 Model 22 and Model 22 Ko are .3BR (used to be .7) apart because one gets longer, higher velocity cannons with no other changes.
As per the survivorship bias infographic, approximately zero aircraft returned to base with hits in the rear fuselage.
And as we saw from the russian testing, f.e. Hispano HE was able to sever the internal wing structure of IL-2 and greatly weakened it.
Better not lose then.
Very outclassed.
cuz they suck?
played the p51c10 and i can tell you 4 are more than enough
why do they suck? Because damage based fragmentation is a lot weaker than the currently insane damage other 20mm explosiver rounds do.
This point started because percu said there’s no difference and thus we should keep the current model, there is a difference, while your opponents split you in half with ease you actually need to hold your advantage and know how to use it.
With the amount of leftover performance the P-51C has it can easily put itself in positions where the enemy will easilt catch fire (from behind).
yea
but performance will always be superior to armament
always
I said to give me several MG151/15s so I can put them on my other planes actually since they’re so good
one of the guns of all time for me
they are not minen rounds or are they somewhat correctly modelled?
Because if they were modelled like the Russian or Japanese FI-T rounds you would see people rocking these tracer belts instead, remember still the same explosive/inert ratio as stealth belt.
No need to add minen rounds, just add the stupid current formula and done.
Yes inlines can catch fire but only with shells with ability to pen the skin.
Load air targets on early swedish 50cals like on J20, see any fires? No? You didn’t pen the skin, try a headon next vs a P-36 or any japanese prop that isn’t a Ki-61 or a D4Y 1 or 2
oh right! every aspect except filler! BECAUSE PEOPLE DON’T WANT TO READ!
BUT MY CANNON IS ALSO 20MM! did you check your filler? did you check if loaded AP? Did you realize that cannon with more filler has worse ballistics and thus needs more load? Did you realize you have access to full explosive belt and they don’t?.
how about you load those FI-Ts on the Type 99 and see how much quicker you enemies come down because AP doesn’t matter, the superior filler of the non tracer hef doesn’t matter.
You read those fillers, picked the better belt with more explosive, less tracers and with AP rounds and yet you were punished because your opponent saw a yellow brick of a belt and chose it instead. But that’s the better belt! it has more filler and even has AP!
handicapped yourself by following logic, is it “alright” in game design since this is apparently for “game design”
It’s like all tanks had their turret/cannon pop off because it looks flashy and it reward mechanical skill, “But what about my Armo-?” Shhhhhhhhhh.
hell
how about you try the ShVAKs? When I made my thread about them I bothered to climb USSR tree for them and confirm it
how long did it take? severely weakened but did it split itself in half in 2 rounds? Was it commonplace?
Just like that? So we can allow Yak-3U at 4.7 because if you pick an off-meta plane it’s your fault!!
Zero to 7.0 because fuck you for picking it instead of a Kikka or F-80
It’s called Fw 190 A-5/U12 with gunpods and full tracer mg151/20 belt since both 15 and 20 are the essentially the same.
But you know it sucks compared to a normal U12 with stealth or air targets belt
you want more performance? Bf 109 F-4/ Bf 109 F-4/trop w gunpods.
Because it just line up with…
The crew perhaps? where you also find control cables? ohhhhhh Maybe it’s AP rounds being given the chance to do it’s work for once!
tell me how space much are does the evil control surface take here?
Can you pinpoint the pilot?
And these angles are in your favour btw, if I tilt the camera downwards even more the tail fins stops obstructing so much and suddendly even more tail is even more exposed. Explosive round and Bye Bye.
And you talk like taking away a control surface is BAD, buddy, you take that rudder off and the enemy can barely aim now, take 1 elevator and the enemy can barely pull for shots now, take 2 and it can’t pitch it’s nose anymore, you tell you can’t work with that?
Take the flaps and that dude can’t try far easier reversals, take one aileron and rollrate is cut into a 1/4 it normally is.
It is bad if…
…Needing to instantly execute an enemy because you made the mistake of dropping too early
“But it’s skill!”
Funny considering this would raise the skill floor by a lot, now you need to know which opponents carry more armor, the penetration and filler of your cannons, need to know positions of important modules or at least know how to identify them (for example: box sticking out of the plane = radiator, round section potruding from the wing = radial engine, gunner positions and fields of fire, identify control surfaces to destroy, enemy systems like EFS or FFS, armor layout and even in extreme cases where is the pilot like on F-82, DB-LK or 109Z).
You need to show this knowledge in a far longer window of time because the yellow funni round won’t give a kill for 2 shells in the vague positions of a wing root or tail
Did you really know A-26 had so much armor the only place you could shoot would be the control surfaces and the outboard fuel tanks before this thread?
Did you know only early japanese planes and the most of the A6M have no armor? with most of them having even above average backseat armor?
Did you know the Me-410 / 210 has not armor plates at the front? meaning the pilot it’s completely exposed from the shoulders and below?
how many people actually know the non tracer hef and the tracer hef from the Type 99 have a difference in filler?
No? well because you just smited them in 1 pass from 2 shells, all for YOUR “gameplay” your little fairy tale of click, boom and look for next opponent.
Because turning for 2 turns is very stimulating for you I suppose.
No, they do not use them because it does not have “mineshell” in the name.
Japan does not have FI-T. There is an FI shell but it’s not in any belt worth using.
None of the benefits of firing shells other players can’t see, with all the downsides of a belt which is almost 50% useless.
How is this relevant when every .50cal belt I use has at most one incendiary round that cannot penetrate things?
Read all you want, didn’t change the fact that the snail decided that other country’s cannon with very similar stats just does good damage and yours doesn’t. Should have read harder!
Given that I now main japan I have tried every belt many times. Universal is better. Especially with fewer guns such as on J1N, and in anything with 4 or more it’s once again better since so many tracers get in the way of aiming and give away exactly where you’re shooting even more.
Which hasn’t been the case for the majority of the game’s existence. Regardless it still does great damage, and RPM and magazine size are also among the best.
It IS the better belt. Ironically it only has a small advantage if you are literally incapable of landing more than one shell on your enemy, which is unlikely to kill them.
Perhaps do a little less reading and a little more playing the game.
This is also the case in-game? lol
this AA truck was taken out via crew kill by machinegunning it with my .30cal and he literally burst into flames
this T95 was taken out with an accurate hit to the cupola from ~800m away (high mechanical skill required); he ALSO burst into flames despite only the crew being taken out
someday when I bother going up russia tree
one hit
making yourself worse to get a more satisfying fight =/= only playing meta or whatever
idk what your point here is, that’s almost the exact opposite of what I said
MG151/15 has much better ballistics and AP, its HEF-T does good damage to a wide area which ensures everything around where you hit gets damaged and provides extremely reliable damage
vs current HE which is unreliable many times and the level of damage done is unnoticeable until they are actually shot down
+109 F4’s gunpods are heavy, draggy, and very inaccurate
Assuming the image is correct:
2/3rds of the rear fuselate are crew-less as this is a B-34. The control surfaces were hit but aircraft still returned. The center section was hit plenty, but a hit to the pilot section was highly deadly. Control linkages are very thin compared to the plane itself and are an unlikely target; they also run through the center fuselage which was hit a lot, and to the control surfaces which were also hit. The fuel tanks were hit very little. Hitting halfway out to the wing was apparently a weakspot.
If AP was more of a factor you’d expect more hits in the rear fuselage since it’s very possible to just come in through one side and out the other, or just miss anything important.
Half the wing is covered up by them.
Just shoot down the middle, it’s that easy. No concerns for your HE shell getting absorbed by a control surface or stabilizer since you also have AP.
But they are alive and capable of returning to base. Vs one or two AP shells into the pilot and he dies right away.
I load a little AP and shoot them in the fuselage
Pretty much no fighters or even attackers truly have enough armor to stop 20mm AP and none can stop .50cal or 15mm
Why are you aiming for radiators when their engine and pilot are right there and readily identifiable? Why do fire extinguishers matter if you can ensure the enemy cannot continue flying?
the thickest armor is just 12.7mm and even MG151/20 can penetrate that
the engines are not armored AT ALL
neither are the big wing tanks because they sit well above the armor
(smaller wing tanks have minor protection from front only, and fuselage tank only benefits from the cockpit armor)
the singular gunner only has protection from the rear
Yes and the worst Zero by far is the one weighed down with armor and self-sealing tanks, ain’t that funny? It’s so heavy it climbs terribly and no longer turns that well, on top of horrible acceleration.
That’s inaccurate btw, there is supposed to be another bulletproof glass pane below this one protecting the bottom half of the pilot
Regardless, you cannot armor an entire plane and there’s plenty to shoot. All its fuel tanks have only minor protection from the front.
Meanwhile with .50cals which have NO explosive shells:
1 Like
While I do understand it’s a video game, with the level of detail given to each indivudal weapon wielded by differen countries, I wouldn’t expect any exceptions to be made in that category. With that argument, I could just say higher vlocity .50 cals should do the damage of a german 20mm cannon… just because.
(As an example) Defeating the purpose of lower velocity cannons, or any attributes or uniqueness each weapon/indivudal shell and it’s effects may have on an aircraft.
2 Likes