Some planes lack belts that are needed to maximize aircraft performance.
MGs like the .50cal have a bad stealth belt that includes 50% useless rounds and it’s even worse on the german 7,92mm that doesn’t include a single API shell.
This change is needed to let players customize their loadout depending on the mission/target and have a more consistent performance.
And then certain bullets will get nerfed as players will make up op belt IMHO
Wtf is an op belt? USA gets full APIT belts but no full API belt. The tracer belt is easier to use and does more damage. Is that balanced?
Having more pen does not always mean they are better. Having HE rounds for shooting planes is way more effective then having AP rounds because most planes are so thin that if you use AP, you would just be going straight through it. That’s why German, Italian, Japanese and Russian guns are so much better is because most of their fighters only use HE rounds.
…that they had actually irl - best example B-17s with AP-I only, no tracer:
If you check the document shown at 4:46 you see that there were no tracer rounds used by the Luftwaffe against the US…
Edit: Based on the provided document in the vid, there were no belts full of minengeschoss used…
lol, I had a commando comic where a Wellington bomber went out of visual range of a ship, and fired tracer in the air to highlight where they were trying to lure the ship away from wher it was headed.
Playing that they were a ship, engaging, to lure the threat.
So you can make full belt of Minengeschoß? Name checks out.
The main thing that bothers me is the insane costs of armored belts for cannon CAS, whilst there are also planes that can get default belts that has the same AP filler or some designated AP belts, but for free.
You realize this would require rebalancing of every plane, right? The German planes would most definitely go up in battle rating because everyone would use the Minengeschoß rounds for every 20/30mm.
Gaijin use beits to balance and other attributes like rate of fire and turrets etc. Every thing is realistic
I know they use them for balance. Custom belts would push German planes up in BR and US planes would stay the same because they already have API-T belts. This guy wants to shoot himself in the foot with this.
Tbh i dont think gaijin wouid be able to make the mechanic work. Just imagine all the combinations. I know in shooters there is a lot of chance to hit, chance to pen, chance to bounce on hit boxes plus what ever else gaijin has going on
I don’t see it being a successful mechanic either. It would just cause complications for balancing and require too much work to be implemented.
Or Gaijin could actually start to fix ammunition so that one singular type isn’t automatically the best shell for every situation.
At the moment all explosive rounds are super broken and outperforming Mineshells for the most part, meaning right now practically nothing would change about the balance of planes by having custom ammo.
Which shell would that be?
Or not, because every belt of Mg FF/M and Mg 151/20 is allready blowted with minenshells, be it the default, Universal, AA and No tracer. The only belt that does not have Minengeschosse is the “Armored Targets Belt” which should really be a ground targets belt, because it doesnt even have a Ap-I round.
High explosive. They make other shells redundant because whats the point of setting fuel on fire or penetrating armor when explosive rounds just tear wings and tails off? Potentially in a single hit.
Right know, all explosive shells perform pretty much the same. Not sure whether 5g or 15g TNT even make a difference, but before realShatter explosive amount was just the only thing that mattered for a explosive round.
Japanese HEFI and HEF-T have practically the same performance stats in the game files, with HEF-T having the same incendiary properties without carrying any incendiary mixture.
From the beginning of the game, the Devs would take one of the best cannon rounds from a nation, put them into the default belt and then make them perform worse than other rounds, based on “they carry less explosives”.
So for HMGs your guns become better when you unlocked more incendiary rounds while for the cannons they become better when you unlocked more explosive rounds or traded your explosive-incendiary rounds for just explosive rounds, which doesn’t make unless you just base the entire damage system on explosive power.
Another quick question for you. What do you think happens to a wing under the stress of flight when a large sudden force is applied to it? I would say it overstresses the airframe similar to the forces under wing rip conditions, but that’s just me.
High Explosive rounds are going to be the most effective because explosions are more powerful than spicy slugs (API). Now the problem you don’t take into account is ballistics. While HE rounds are the most bang for your buck for a single shell, those cannon rounds have much worse ballistic performance than, let’s say, the 12.7mm HMG. Those API-T rounds have better speed, ballistics, and penetration power when compared to cannons (usually 20mm, the most common). There are tradeoffs to consider when you want that large damage per round. Damage is not the only thing that makes a shell worth using because you have to hit your target for that damage to matter. Look at the 30mm Mk103 and to a lesser extent the Mk108. Great damage because of the large HE shells, but absolute trash ballistics and velocity. Great damage, but every other gun will outperform yours because hitting anything is much more difficult.
You are comparing 12.7mm API-T to 30mm Mineshells.
Not to mention that there’s a night and day difference to a 30mm Mineshell with ~90g of explosive compared to a 20mm with at most 10g.
I have a better one for you. Why do you think 20mm and 30mm Incendiary rounds were developed?
Why did Germany plan to cut down the explosive content of the 30mm Mineshell in half to carry an additional incendiary load?
Why did the RAF load their Hispanos with 50:50 HEI and Practice rounds or later SAPI?
Or why did Russia produce 60% more 20mm API rounds compared to Explosives? (Could be because of T-60s but then you still have a 1:1 ratio of AP and HE)
Why did Germany recommend to use a 1:1:1 ratio of Mineshells, Incendiary and AP on the western frontline?
It’s because explosiv amount isn’t the answer alone. Unless you take the German approach and try to hit a target with so much explosves that a single hit is nearly guaranteed to bring it down.
Some targets are more vulnerable to explosives, others to AP and/or incendiary.
Some times just the angle of attack can make one type of round vastly more effective then another.
That one caliber (gun) might be easier or harder to make hits with then others is a complete different topic. (edited)