Hey buddy, could you also send me the PDF of this booklet? I’ve scoured the entire internet but couldn’t find it :(
1 Like
One thing caught my attention in the video: the test footage shows shots fired at a stationary target, from the side, and at almost a 90-degree impact angle. However, in-game tests involve a moving aircraft and shots fired at deflection/angled hits. Wouldn’t the target’s movement and non-perpendicular impact angles significantly affect the shell’s performance and detonation/structural damage? What are your thoughts on this?
1 Like
You needed a bot to tell you it was a joke? Maybe it overestimated you 😂
2 Likes
Funny you mention that, I do have its personality set to immitate that, ig it lost its touch after being tasked to read wt forums, dont blame it, poor clanker
1 Like
I would like to mention, that this shell benefits very little from being on the move, as its damage is based on its explosive power almost exclusively, as thin walls shatter into small fragments that would be very harmful to people inside maybe 3m, but not exactly to metal plane, with some other cannons speed of shell might increase lethality due to fragments travelling at higher speed relative to the aircraft that is getting hit (and f.e. 7g explosive filler will not give fragments that much kinetic energy on its own).
Essentialy, the damage in the picture happens because over 100g of TNT (in game we have some kind of worst case scenario shell if I remember right, as Gaijin has weird approach to certain explosives etc., I may remember wrong) explodes inside the tail section.
That’s basically entire story.
For that to not happen, the shell would have to explode outside or after partially penetrating. Only latter scenario is possible basically, and even then, it would blow an absolutely huge hole and still at least partially destroy the tail structure, and Feet hits that bomber several times, even if 1st one did not do the job, the 2nd would.
But thing is - we know, for a fact, that the shells are NOT modelled correctly in game, so real life variables don’t apply anyway. In game we have modules with HP and the way damage is dealt is greatly simplified.
You can just assume that if shell hits something, it should deal X damage to it, and angle is not really that important, and kinetic energy has like 0 impact to HE shells, and since fragments don’t create a proper cone, it’s not even important which way the shell is going, outside of fuse delay which may move the point of detonation of 3cm shell 10cm away from where it touches.
2 Likes
you lobotomised the clanker
1 Like
I did unironically tell it to be unbiased and factual and list off WHY it gave those rankings, which makes it funnier because it unironically came to the conclusion that some people here are actually stupid
1 Like
its correct to assume that
3 Likes
Lmfao, true, anyway thats my trolling urges satisfied, back to the topic at hand, grok did leave a pretty nice summary of what were even talking about ill admit
1 Like
yes it is. you can look at all the ww2 gun camera clips of repeated 30m HE fire not doing much to a b17
3 Likes
We only just got realiatic bomber survivability and the fighter mains are already tryna nerf it again 😭
Of course fighters want bombers to be free kills that get 1 shot but thats not just unrealistic but also not at all enjoyable for bomber mains.
3 Likes
Bombers NEED to be tanky as hell, or there’s no point to this. The engines are large and easy targets. Shoot them.
I hate the noob-friendly “I fire where I want, and it always works cause the game allows it” mentality. It’s the same for APFSDS spall in this game.
3 Likes
I agree!
2 Likes
Me when I fire weak-as-hell 30mm HE at a bomber’s fuselage that’s known to do nothing IRL to it.
Again, there’s VIDEO footage from cannon runs on planes as structurally fragile as the B-24, which don’t cripple from 30mm HE rounds. If you want to kill them, target the engines and cockpit with penetrating rounds, not HE. Learn to aim. You are spraying.
1 Like
I love how you conveniently ignore that this is a historical fact for B-17s. There’s a reason why they would swarm bombers with dozens of fighter aircraft. A single one could not take them out in seconds. Even a dozen aircraft could struggle to take out several promptly.
Not to mention, in this case, as you are using a Japanese aircraft, are you just entirely unfamiliar with the B-17 Ol’ 666?
It came up against EIGHTEEN Japanese Fighter Aircraft ALONE and survived the entire battle with ONE casualty. These planes are THIS durable.
For context, this is the B-17 after the fight.
2 Likes
Its refreshing seeing people waking up after this 700+ message long absolute disaster of a thread lol
1 Like
This is where IRL meets the game.
Because if it takes more than 18 aircraft unloading into it to bring down the target… and there is 12-16 to a team… Well… There is a problem.
Though I dont think these bombers in-game should be this tanky, largely because of how much of the model is actually missing / isnt actually modeled. So with those issues resolved it would be largely fine
My thoughts on what could be done to fix the issue, without actually changing any of the structural side of things
3 Likes
Still, it seems that high explosive alone was not enough by itself to finish off bombers. Otherwise, a 1 HE : 1 Incendiary belt composition wouldn’t have been required.
1 Like
You can play SIM with as little as a console controller and consistently farm lobbies using just that.
“having the wrong setup” is a pretty poor excuse these days