What does this have to do with Warthunder? We are still talking about Warthunder right? This is the game where a BF-110 can disentigrate a B-17 even though there is a pretty well known video of it NOT doing that in real life. As many have pointed out to me before and I now understand; Any real-life information/doctrine means nothing here. In real life, explosives alone aren’t the answer, but Warthunder isn’t real life. When a B-17 can tank 30mm rounds like that in that video, then maybe real-life will matter. Balance is the name of the game here, and why anything was developed means nothing if a 20mm with 10g can take a fighter wing off the same way as a 30mm with 90g. In just about any circumstance, the 20mm cannons are always better than the 30mm because they have better ballistics and carry more ammo. More ammo for similar effect means more kills.
Yes I was comparing them, because in my eyes, the 30mm Mineshells are probably the worst ammu ition type for aircraft in the game. Even the 7.7mm on the earlier British planes are better in my eyes.
I disagree. When speaking about the “best shell” every aspect of that shell must be taken into account, otherwise the best shell is always going to be the 102 mm HEF-T on the P.108A serie 2. See how the argument derails when only damage is taken into account? While the 102mm does have an HE shell, the AP-T could be just as destructive to fighters and pass a shell through the entire fuselage of just about any plane with minimal issue.
That is why when someone claims that something is the “best shell” I will always argue on the entirety of the shells performance, not just on one aspect. High explosive yield means nothing if one can’t hit a target. Lower penetration values can mean the difference between a dead pilot and an alive pilot or a broken engine and a flyable engine. Accuracy of the gun the shells are expelled from can mean the difference between a solid hit and a hopeless miss. Damage is not the only thing that makes a shell good or bad, trying to act like it is just seems like an attempt to skew the facts that matter for an advantageous talking point.
What we need is consistency - belts for same guns like in example german 30mm on Ta 154 A-1 only have limited selection (like anti air only) for one of its 30mm the other one can take all of them including ground belts etc
Because it only has Mk 108, which currently in game dont have any ground targets belt.
Tho i allready made a report, for a ground targets belt with Practice shells, so it is at least somewhat useable against lighter targets and cooling grills. around 20mm should be in. Would mostly help the Me 262s as they only have Mk 108s.
Both MK 108 and the Me 262 were designed for attacking bombers.
What would you even accomplish with 20mm of penetration at point blank range.
Not to mention that you would have to actively trade rounds with very high destrutive power against soft targets for rounds that are not effective against anything really.
Spoiler
Very curious how this shell practice round with 3mm thick dummy fuze would be able to penetrate anything anyway.
That one caliber might be easier or harder to make hits with, is a complete different topic.
Lead to you talking about shell damage?
Let me say it in a different way:
Different guns, have different properties, that’s why talking about those properties is a completely different story then talking about the damage potential between different projectiles.
The topic is “Custom belts for aircraft”.
You said:
And later:
So a 12.7mm API is much weaker than a 30mm Mineshell, but also you get much more hits with the 12.7mm due to better ballistics.
You say you get outperformed with the 30mm but also you said that German planes will go up in BR because of 20/30mm Mineshells.
Yet the MK 108 already gets a full Mineshell belt with the HEI-T rounds which only leaves the MG 151/20 which could go from 66% Mineshells to 100% and the MK 103 going from 75% to 100%.
Same with Hispanos going from 50-66% to 100% HEI, which other 20mm cannons already get.
With the current performance of 20mm Mineshells compared to 20mm realShatter HE, nothing would change, except that players can make ammo belts that make much more sense then what the developers force onto the player.
How is choosing the best ammo belt different then choosing the best rounds?
The main issue is that mixed “historical” belts rarely make sense in the game, because explosive ammo is so overperforming that there’s simply no need for AP or Incendiary rounds.
You talk about balance and then the actual gameplay, as if everything is set in stone and the developer can’t change anything, hence why nothing can ever be changed or the balance of the game would break…
This video is refurbished and the sound is custom made. This combat is part of this video which is uploaded on yt (in countless versions) for at least 15 years, always without sound:
You see this attack at the timestamp 07:10.
If you have watched a lot of these vids you might agree that this looks more than multiple 20mm hits - the explosion pattern looks very familiar to other attacks by planes without having 30mm options or fieldkits (Ruestsaetze).
I have to admit, i saw a much better version of this attack on a very cheap DVD 20 (?) years ago (also without sound), but the overall content was so bad regarding accuracy - i disposed the DVD.
20mm Mineshells against a B-17 are not going to do much against it’s structre other then tickle it.
Of course hitting fuel tanks with them or 20mm Incendiary rounds is going to be a different story.
No offense dude - but imho you tend to overreact. If somebody supports a specific view of you, there is no need trying to educate this guy supporting your points.
