good for him? not really relevant
You’re also, again, forgetting the argument here. Its against bombers falling apart like legos
You should have replaced said with the word generated. It would be more accurate.
“falling apart like legos” bombers can on occasion (just like how in real life they would SOMETIMES survive crazy shit) survive alot of damage and “falling apart like legos” is far better than what we have on the dev server in terms of gameplay
Ok, lets assume all 10 bombers lost over vietnam were lego incidents. SO that leaves us 5 bombers that didnt lego and limped back home (cant limp a lego), and 9-12 (im gonna assume 9 to be nice) bombers that MADE it all the way home. Thats 10-14. That is a 71% chance of bombers NOT legoing when pounded by a god damn SA-2. That seems like most of the time they’re surviving crazy shit
refer to:
Also… “OnHitChanceMultFire” sounds more like a multiplier to a base fire chance (likely gotten from the fuel tank itself) than the fire chance of the shell itself.
The name of this variable itself is something like Fire Chance Multiplier On Hit if we un-shorten it.
refer to
yeah i looked through it and it never says if these were direct hits or how far away the missile was when it detonated
also im sure pilots would never overstate shit in their reports ever that would never happen
humans overstating can literally effect any report ever, if you wanna go that route, fine, all the reports previously posted are lies and all thats left is guncam footage and math, which paint a very ugly picture for the result the fighter mains are going for
Inshallah the great bomber era shall begin
Was referring to the B-29
The B-29 has the fuel tank so close to it’s engine it might not have an emitter there
Shoot the other fuel tanks. Or have someone with a B-29 get shot.
Which fuel tank exactly do you want me to shoot?
i am taking what is said at face value
my question of how close the missiles were when they detonated isnt answered because it cant be.
so like this happened yeah but its kinda not really that useful for us
If we’re taking things at face value then this B25 tanked 6 105mm shells
(footpics is about to have a stroke)
“you have decided to believe the source i have posted so now im going to completely misinterpret a different source checkmate liberal”
ok?
Stick dragger cant parse information
See this entire argument already happened earlier in the thread, literally about wether we take info at face value or not, either way, its just not looking good for the results the fighter mains want
Either we take it at face value and we got b52s tanking missiles semi consistently and bombers being extremely resistant to cannonfire, or we dont take anything at face value and now the reports placed AGAINST those junctures are suddenly losing what traction they had because “it couldve been a piece of a more fragile plane” (it was anyway)
There is simply no winning at this point
is there a gas leak in ur house?
Shoot between the first and second engine (Unless it snaps)
I have two possibilities.
The HP amount is so high, that no round is ever reaching a damage threshold to light a fire.
The other is that the interior fuel tank to the root shares the same fire emitter as the engine.
it multiplies to the fuel tank flame chance based on the damage you do to the tank.
It explains why .50’s in my test did piss all to catch things alight.
The way gaijin calculates component damage with AP rounds is all screwed up.
After much more testing. I’ve worked out the most reliable way to bring down the AI B29s at least.
Aiming directly for the rear tail section here will relatively consistently cause the tail section to detach and give you an instant destroyed message. If not, you will likely knock out the control surfaces meaning it will eventually crash. (especially if it was actually a player)
BUT you need 30mms or larger. And it still takes a significant number of rounds, sitting on target for an extended period with a bomber that will definitely be shooting back at you.
Aiming at wings or engines is a waste of time and ineffective. You won’t snap a wing, and engine fires don’t really do any damage unless you sit there inside their defensive fire and try to whack all 4 of them.
Anything lower than 30mms are almost entirely ineffective, from any angle and aiming at any part of the aircraft unless you can get a pilot snipe. a full load of 20mms will not do enough damage that it either couldn’t glide back to base with, or just stay up flying until the game ends in a live warthunder game. So Nations that aren’t germany that get a decent number of Mk108/Mk103 armed fighters, or Japan which get the Ho-155/Type 5 30mms, Most nations are pretty narrow on options for killing bombers if this makes it to live. Some Aircobras/Kingcobras or the Yak-9s are the best real options for those nations.
Meanwhile. “realism blah blah blah.”
Wikipedia:
In Furious Skies: Flying with Hitler’s Luftwaffe in the Second World War By tim Heath - Chapter 19:
So between 15 and 25 for an MG-151/20.
that definitely is more than 25 rounds. (it did not die)
