It allows people to shoot down other planes. That is a good thing. As opposed to old damage system where some cannons did damage and other cannons didn’t.
1 Like
and ignore weakpoints in armament and defense? Which could be learned?
Im not calling a return, I call a remake. FI-T rounds from mg151/15 are merely an example but there’s still room to improve.
Unlike the conformist of percu or you who simply leave WT as it is because yes and I want pew boom because it says “20mm explosive” in the tag
So riddle me this batman…
Is this good damage for ShVAK? Is this the way that they ought to perform?
Conversely would you be satisfied if this was the damage they did instead; where they set your plane on fire and you die from that instead?
They really did this damage model in Il-2 Korea? It looks much greater than pew pew waist of 40 20mm rounds to destroy single engine fighter (as I remember Il-2 GB damage model correctly)
And it really looks like a damage for which you would attach cannon even with just 60 rounds in drum
Yes this is the damage model as it currently is in Il-2 Korea. This is far and away too much damage according to @Irregular23. This is even worse than the current WT damage model.
So where is the floor? What is the “correct” amount of damage that requires skill? It seems that the benchmark he uses is DCS which has notoriously bad .50 cals with abysmal damage.
2 Likes
when you are firing AP ammo at 750rpm x 6, everything tends to die very easily
It is DIFFERENT. If you gave me a choice I would take this damage system over current.
a belt which is almost 50% useless.
yes it’s almost as if i said that
Less useless than IT
Which pictures? Certainly not the ones where a HE shell blew a chunk of skin off a wing.
Ok and how is this relevant when the pure Incendiary round is very rare and only in small numbers in any given belt? The vast majority of hits will be AP, API, and APIT.
How is it lying? At worst the non-tracer shell just does the same damage, which is still quite good. Regardless what you are seeing is only one aspect of a gun’s damage.
Do we? I’ve shown you several times why AP is useful.
Here is the german Tempest MkV which was being really annoying
He has quite significant pilot armor
I shoot him, expending 8 cannon shells. Both his wings and tail are still intact. His pilot however is not, and his engine took some heavy damage.
From an almost straight rear aspect, which shells in my Universal belt do you think caused this?
The fastest cannon, Ho-5, is only 150rpm faster but trades noticeably lower damage.
ShVAK, unsynchronized, is only 100rpm faster. MG151/20 does not change its RPM with synchronization. A synchronzied ShVAK is only 20rpm faster. B-20M is pretty much identical with the only differences really being IRL where it was much cheaper to make than ShVAK.
This is a much smaller difference than MG151/20 to the slowest comparable cannon, a difference of 210rpm.
MG151/20 also has a magazine depth advantage over ShVAK. 109 F-4 gets 200rds at 4.0, Yak-3 gets 120rds at 4.7. La-5FN gets 170rds per gun as it is a larger plane, but then we have the 190As with 250rds per gun.
already made a post in another thread that would result in a huge nerf to Zero maneuverability at high speeds
I’m telling you it will simply not happen. There were plenty of posts in previous BR change threads saying that the Zeros moving up was ridiculous and they went up anyway; they only had an effect now when two of them were going to 6.0 - which got cancelled - but two lower ones still moved up regardless.
You do know that a black wing section doesn’t mean you die, right?
And this is just common damage variance.
never claimed to be
A lot of those are from when I did a series of play sessions in A6M5 Otsu to see how and why it was at 5.7. I got my answers.
show me where there is wing or tail armor
With how many 7.7mm hits?
https://military.wikireading.ru/55992
vs
960m/s vs 720m/s for the whole belt. One has 1/4 non-HE shells, while the other has 2/5 - a straight downgrade, on top of 15mm AP-I having much higher penetration.
So no, it’s not “the exact same”. MG151/20 speed dropoff matters more at long range, if you are just deflection shooting at normal ranges it’s similar to every other cannon.
But MG151/15 has well above-average velocity and for WW2 cannons I think it is the best one. This means even in regular shooting you will need to lead much less and the enemy has a much harder time dodging you.
They are too narrow to provide good protection.
attack from the front =/= head-on
Not from the side. Although A-26 gunner has an ability to dodge incoming fire and not get damaged at all…
He can even dodge 75mm APHE!
There is no armor that can save you when you go from being able to dodge vs unable to dodge, even if you could tank twice as much incoming fire you are dead in the water due to being unable to do anything about it and higher drag+lower lift will make you an even easier target
And the community has repeatedly disagreed and pooled their efforts together to change that.
Mouse aim is extremely unrelistic, it even disables propeller torque effects. Every prop there is already fictional due to this, so it should be removed!
we already have those
Yes, it is much better this way. I can go play nations other than germany and italy, knowing their cannons also do damage. It also means planes that were at too high BRs just because of their firepower might move down in the future when the stats catch up.
It would also make no difference if your wing wasn’t detached and the plane stayed whole, but all lift from it was lost and you were put in a permanent flatspin. It is a sort of artistic option.
1 Like
If the broken damage model didn’t turn bombers into one-shot piñatas and bombing actually had an impact, I’d gladly just tank hits and fly straight to target. Instead, it forces you to throw that out the window and pull off prohibited maneuvers and tactics just to survive and win, which completely ruins the immersion
Always the same argument and I’ll drop the same answer.
So that means we can transition into more fragmentation based damage instead of blast damage? Just what I keep wanting to happen.
Except you know it makes a pretty noticeable difference.
But you will notice how the ballistics are enormosly improved or armor penetration is improved or firerate is improved further or see actual fragmentation at work (remember I said Minen rounds have thin cases that are completely obliterated and make really small fragmentation compared to other 20mm)
Different cannons, different strong points, different weaknesses.
Il-10 has no armor near those spots and the buff is completely artificial, under your justification I can say current bomber fragility doesn’t exist because they had the same treatment.
Also while 23mm has less filler than 20mm minen, it still retains a thick case so it would fragmentate very well, leading to both good blast and fragmentation damage but it has a lot less ammo and is on the lower ends of firerates.
Wow those more powerful cannons always come with more downsides to balance them out, mmmm, how incredible and handy for game balance
Same community that removed dynamic objectives from 90% of maps made defensive guns shake all over the place and made bombers out of paper because they think “aim good and land it somewhere” should be the only skill in WT and maybe learn fields of fire, strategic moves for a win condition and learning your foes can take move under the bridge.
And same community that led to stuff like A6M5s in 5.7 next to Yak-3Us, half the air battles community are actually tank players who come for CAS or want SPAA to smite all planes instead of idk, rework CAS or try to close the skill gap in SPAA vs CAS rivalry
But they are there?, from full back to reach a pilot of an A-26 you must atleast pen 2 armor plates meanwhile the gunner tries to kill you.
Except now I just cut the tail off and reject the entire ordeal.
1 Like
And what does this rework look like?
In comparison to how Il-2 Korea handles damage? In comparison to Il-2 BOS? In comparison to old War Thunder ShVAK damage or realshatter 1.0?
Everything I have seen from your camp is basically that old ShVAK damage where FI-T was the most useless round in the belt was perfectly fine. It wasn’t until fragmentation damage bug was fixed that we saw ShVAK Derangement Syndrome over 4 years ago!
Sim battles:
aka make the game very inaccessible
ehhh ig
but thats not the part that needs to change
just make it not be a glorified team deathmatch
Sim battles:
yea
^^^^
and they are actually very helpful since different aircraft need to be fought different ways
we all loveeee crew lvls
(we dont)
THEN GO TO SIM BATTLES
its called accessibility
THEN GO TO SIM BATTLES AND STOP TRYING TO MAKE ARB SIM
listen then
go play your sim games
but arb is not a sim
stop pretending it should be one
it doesnt
but just nerfing 20mm isnt the solution
if youd just buff DMs it would be way more beneficial
played it and can comfirm this info
but the shVAK gets full FI-T which can snap wings in one hit
the best you can get belt wise out of a 151/20 is 4 HE out of 6 shells
(basic math 2/6=2/3
2/3 times 200 is 400/3 is roundabout 133)
so 133 shots of he while shVAK gets on the yak3 as an example 120
so ehhh
ig kinda true but not that much of an advantage for the 151/20
and the worst flight performance at 4.0 /4.3
(most people that do actually suck)
It’s called not being skilled enough to learn to use mouse joystick and play from cockpit view. Why don’t you like realism? Or is realism only good when it suits you but bad when it doesn’t?
How is having planes die when you hit them with cannons not an accessibility issue? Should someone have to have 10 years of Air RB experience and aim training to make certain guns work?
The less filler a shell has compared to it’s caliber, the less blast damage but more fragmentation it creates.
A russian hef round will produce lots of fragmentation and will probably hit a lot of stuff at once systems, which may include crew, pilots, traction of control surfaces, control surfaces, oil system, engines, fuel tanks, etc . But it won’t make much of a difference to spars or tails.
Stuff it with filler and you end up with worse ballistics to start first, very concentrated damage but now if you want to knock out modules you need to strike directly, however, 1 strike and that is gone, also includes spars. BUT YOU NEED TO CONNECT DIRECTLY OR VERY BUT VERY NEAR.
Both these shells are slowed down a lot or stopped completely by armor or any survival system like EFS or self sealing tanks, say hi to AP, fly in and out and punch a hole into that module with ease to take it out, can reach to juicy insides behind that tail or armor plate.
What? Your plane has more than 2 cannons? No worries! The effects of having multiple cannons are felt! La-7B-20 and Yak-3P are actually +0.3 BR material compared to La-7 and Yak-3, or Spitfires with 4 cannons instead of 2 actually feel different, or Fw-190 As actually somewhat feel incredible firepower, Yak-9T can stop being overtiered ass for a super exact example.
Currently it is “I have 20mm cannons”.
-What model?"
-idk.
-What amount?
-Idk.
-What filler?
idk.
-What pen?
-idk I just have 20’s
-What firerate?
-Oh around 700rpm (it was 850)
-What belts?
-The one with more yellow
Or
-You have decent armor?
-Idk, I don’t really feel it, maybe my airframe is just heavy
This will scale up by caliber, we have 23mm that basically will outperform every 20mm shell no matter the filler it will be a more powerful 20mm, at every relation of Explosive/Case it will fragmentate more and deal more blast damage
And the last step will be +30mm and up which will be complete plane obliteration, deserved because 30mm are very fussy to land.
2 Likes
This is what we already had when ShVAKs were buffed the first time. They made it so it actually produced fragmentation and that the fragments did damage. That was what caused ShVAK to become “wow God mode head on gun” because you couldn’t just ignore them in German fighters.
At the same time the gun was not very good against bombers.
Your system would be too much damage.
So it was a community problem?
See? You can’t take raw community input, which what led to the current model or basically any fancy aspect of Air battles.
“Your system would be too much damage.”
Predictable and reliable is a better word, you see info, process and have an idea what to do.
Currently just you just wing with more yellow and call it a day.
i do
but some stuff doesnt belong into some gamemodes
Why shouldn’t the “Realistic” mode be forced to use “realistic joystick” as it’s default control option and cockpit view?
Having 3rd person view gives ahistorical advantages to planes with long noses and deprives planes with short nose of an advantage they had in real life in terms of deflection shooting. What is the point of taking a performance loss for a bubble canopy, a huge innovation by the way, when you have 360 degree 3rd person view? Do Air RB pilots not want to learn real tactics like approaching planes from their blind spots??
This has been a debate that has been going on since before we even had the new forums. There was never a point in the games history where most people here would have been satisfied with gun damage.
Prior to ShVAK being buffed…the same people were complaining about US 20mm and M2 .50 cal. It was exactly the same debate.
i told you it once and ill tell you it again
GO TO GOD DAMN SIM