Most 20mm cannons back to overperforming while MG151/20 keeps phasing through soviet aircraft

EDIT: It seems Gaijin has rebalanced damage all around and MG151/20 is back to being hardest hitter. However, it still passes through Soviet fighters without dealing damage and same goes for MG131 HEIT. Anyway, thr post below is in large part no longer relevant.

While real shatter initial implementation made cannons way too weak, in the last 10 days or so, the cannons worked pretty good, damage made sense, and 20mm cannons were plenty powerfull.

I tested them today after yet another buff
1 Shvak FI-T shell makes AM-1 gigantic wing root black. Literally 1 shell with 6,36g of HE, set to 1000m to remove any impact from “kinetic energy”.
It weights 90g. It shouldn’t be doing that.
And even better, Shvak (and any other 20mm HE with exception of MG151/20) is able to wreck engines.
MG151/20 does no damage whatsoever as evidenced by screenshots.

I was expecting MG151/20 to be nerfed a bit, to make everything more balanced.
Instead every other 20mm turned into a godhammer, and MG151/20 is actually back to being THE WORST 20mm in game.

Why?
By far worst ballistics for whatever reason and while damage wise it holds a slight advantage vs soft parts, once it hits an engine, the damage is GONE, while other 20mm massacre the engine and leave it smoking wreck.

Furthermore MG151/20 M-geschoss keeps passing through Soviet fighters like they’re not even there.

How is this balanced?

7 Likes

MG151 nerfed & worst is what players want. So its fine I guess.

Well, now 2 shells from Shvak rip tails and wings off. IMO we’ve reached the other end of the spectrum - cannons are simply too strong. While it may sound weird, now they either will have to buff MGs or move a metric ton of planes up in BR. Having 3+ cannons no longer helps much when 2 Shvaks simply click people out of the sky more often than not. I used to be happy about MK108 on my Ta-152H, but now it won’t give me any advantage because everyone can insta-demolish other fighters.
IMO damage should be toned down for most cannons, damn I considered MG151/20 a bit too hard of a hitter even though I landed 8 shells to P-51H wing (4 HE, 4 AP) and it was still attached to fuselage :)

5 Likes

Yeah it makes no sense.

20mm HE are suppose to make some large holes into an aircaft and damage components with fragments, not blow them to pieces like a hit from a 30mm Mineshell.

They worked alright as long as you combined them with AP shells but now we’re back to “why do we even have 20mm AP, I just want 100% HE rounds”.

While AP damage is also very questionable in some instances (IL-2 23mm API), now HE damage makes AP or Incendiary shells completely redundant again. (Not that Incendiary shells ever worked).

Either HE is broken and you have to rely on AP shells or HE is so OP that there’s no point in having AP rounds.
Before the recent change, having a combination of AP and HEI was actually preferable due to HEI not being so broken that they instantly downed an aircraft but having incendiary effect as well as causing damage to a planes flight performance.

Of course kinetic energy still plays no role in the damage from HE shell.
So much for “real” shatter.

3 Likes

Yeah, basically this. The kinetic energy part is super annoying, because it would balance to some.extent the horrible range of MG151/20 ,- yeah, you have bad range, but if you land that shell from 500m away, the damage will be almost the same as if fired from 150m, while everyone else would suffer significant damage losses, with Soviets and Japanese with their Ho-5 getting the worst of it - and they certainly should receive some kind of ballistics nerf, because the absolute superiority of Shvak and Ho-5 over every MG151/20 shell is suspect at best - Germans made a huge mistake of actually testing their shells, while other nations are getting the benefit of the doubt.
But this is kinda beside the point.

Back on topic - heavy bombers can tank a large amount of shells and seem to be less affected. But fighters - it no longer makes a difference who’s on the receiving end. Fw 190 or P-47 wing breaks as easily, as Zero’s so now the smaller fighter wins a lot more simply because one can no longer count on surviving getting hit. Yeah, this doesn’t sound like the best tactic, but it made sense, especially when forced to fight Mk IX LF Spitfire in Fw 190 F8. Now even head-on doesn’t work, because 1 HE shell to armored cowling will damage my engine, while I need to land AP-I shell to make Spitfire’s engine yellow, because MG151/20 does nothing (I get the idea behind it, but it shouldn’t apply just to MG151/20 - while M-geschoss body is thin, the fuse is a substantial piece of steel and impacting engine at 200+ m/s will certainly deliver damage, and explosion itself is probably not healthy to cables/lines either.

2 Likes

don’t use protection analysis because it’s a hoax. I main the Tu-2 and if I goof up enough a BF109’s single MG151 will one click snap my bomber in half. Protection analysis says that GSh23L will leave a yellow wing root when it will actually snap it off. Protection analysis says that Vulcan leaves a black core when it actually buzzsaws your entire plane across and along. MG151 is very inconsistent however, especially when you’re using 109s with 7.7 machine guns.

I only played AP rounds since 2013 (unless gun are unequipped), and damages always were good enough to kill.

When i had HE rounds most of the time they were unable to do damage, as if the system was unable to put DMG on target itself.

Now they have fixed it, but the damages from HE rounds are overwehlming → simply because aiming with mouses are far more accurate than doing it as in real-life.

The german 20mm MG-151 also did recieved buffs, but as Minengeschoss works differently than most other ammunition:

The thinner steel walls are creating more smaller fragments, with Far less kinetic energy, as the round is much more designed to use the more powerful blast from the higher quantity of explosive.

Therefore the 20mm round, being a smaller HE round have not enough blast power (–> that’s why 30mm gun were made), and also have not the fragmentation effect (since Minengeschoss have less destructive power from Fragmentation effect)

→ please go use AP rounds with your 20mm.

Except it won’t.
Tu-2 is notoriously ridiculously tough.
Of course if someone landed 3-4 shells around the same spot, the wing snaps because that’s how the game is set up.
23mm will leave black wing root.

Protection analysis requires you to take a few shots to see the average effect, because it uses the same RNG as the game itself.

MG151/20 has received nerf after nerf for the last 1,5 years:

  • less explosive mass with 0 change to fire chance
  • HUUUGE ballistics nerf compared to everything else - because Germans actually made ballistic tables, so Gaijin used those. USSR and Japan did not - so Gaijin decided they have magically superior ballistics at similar weight and shape
  • absolutely made-up ROF nerf, based on the worst ROF data Gaijin could find.

And M-geschoss has thin walls, yes. But shrapnel going sideways is directly reliant on the bursting charge size. So Shvak, Ho-5 or AN/M3 are not great winners here.
And when it comes to shrapnel going forward - this one is more kinetic energy reliant (along with being reliant on chemical of course). But game 100% ignores HE shell kinetic energy. Now, MG151/20 nose part is as thick as any other shell’s front - fuse is one big piece of steel, so M-geschoss shoots forward some serious fragments at high speed due to huge charge behind them.

Anyway, that’s not the point.
The point is - all 20mm hits too hard, with MG151/20 being the closest to “right” performance, but still overperforming by 20-30% IMO (unless fired at jets that just tank everything like it’s nothing, but that’s Gaijin’s broken code for you)

1 Like

You have no idea of how are made shrapnels ???

The casing is the shrapnel,… if casing is lighter, shrapnels are lighter.

Kinetic energy = mass by speed.
If speed similar, but mass is lighter → less capabilities to do damage.

Therefore, Your explannation is wrong about the Minengeschoss, as it CAN’T do the same Kinetic damage as Russian normal HE, which have far more Thicker walls around the explosive mass.

And this is because explosive power will give both rounds a similar speed to shrapnels, but the lighter shrapnels is less capable to retain energy (kinetic laws)

The blast power alone can’t get through a highly structured area. (Which is the layer steel + structural airframe → aircraft skin)

except it does. The Tu-2 is going to die to a zero’s type 99s within a couple of hits on the tail. The fuel tanks on the wings are self sealing so expect the fires to be put out. GSh23L’s single shell has more TNT than Minengeschoß. Last time i’ve even gotten a pilot knockout from a ju288’s tail gunner from 1.2km away, so the effective range of mg151 has been increased.

Difference between those guns are the ammunitions.

Thats the big weakness of WT in comparison to other WW2 games. The more data or historic informations for weapon systems are accessible, the worse it is in ingame terms.

The less historical informations means alot more guesswork comes into play, which is almost always in favor of the thing in question. This is totally nuts and often is the reason why less researched things and prototypes are better than real units.

Now we have 20mm shells with very similar shape and MV, but one with good historical data has almost tripple the drag values than the ones without any historical infos. As if its alien tech and follows other physical laws than german shells.

I wish someone could tell these to the Devs. What they do often makes no sense and is unfair.

3 Likes

Not about french stuff, but that’s another story.

Except it doesn’t. It’s 17 vs 30g of TNT equivalent.
Bombers should not be tanking dozens upon dozens of shells. And they often do. Tu-2 is WAY stronger than B-17 f.e.

Might be possible that its also a bit dependent on the nation :)

I mean just tell me outright what are the best gun SPAAs? Its the Falcon prototype for non radar ones and the Sgt York for the radar guided gun SPAA’s. Strangely both are prototype units. The Falcon existed as one single unit and gets very favorable ammo belt composition which allows it to rock ground units. While other SPAAs with real informations about their service loadout taken from real existing manuals. Which means they’re far less attractive to play.

The Yorck is another interesting story. Its a failed prototype proect, which was cancelled cause the radar system nerver worked. There are interesting articles online from back then how they tried to atteach radar reflectors to the target drones to somehow make the York lock something for training shots…but it never improved and the whole thing got canceled. Ingame its just working so great that it totally overshadows real combat units like the ZSU or Gepard based SPAAs, which have impressive videos online how they even lock and hit small drones with 2 bursts.

2 Likes

Tu-2 wingspan: 19m // length : 14m
B-17 wingspan: 31.6m // length : 22.6m

Number of destructible area on each wing is similar.

So it’s much more easy to destroy B-17 wing than Tu-2 wing (same for any other part of aircrafts).

That’s why B-17 is easier to destroy in game → because it misses better modeling

For exemple we can seperate all wings at wing root or wing tip, but for aircraft like B17, we can’t see seperation between engine 1 and 2 or 3 and 4,…
So all damage that goes there is calculated on the wing root

Enlarged wing as Damage Model, makes Heavy bomber very weak in comparison to medium bombers.

Dude, did you casually ignore my comment and discussed your own fantasies about it?
Nice. I literally just clarified your comment. Do you SERIOUSLY think I don’t know fragments of the shell are LITERALLY fragments of the steel “shell”? Who do you think am I? Do NOT make assumptions that make absolutely no sense in a civil discussion, and show respect. It’s so simple.

“Layer steel” - don’t know what it is, but planes generally are mostly built from aluminium. And if you strike wing spar (again, aluminium, just thick) with M-geschoss directly, it will get heavily damaged. But it won’t get seriously damaged by overwhelming majority of fragments, be it from Shvak, M-geschoss or even Hispano, unless it explodes really close and the total mass of fragments delivered is… substantial.

And no, kinetic energy is not “mass by speed”, jesus christ :D It’s mass times speed SQUARED and everything divided by 2 (see, I can play this game too).
20% higher speed means 44% higher energy.
20% higher mass means 20% higher energy.
But fragments also lose the energy the faster the lighter they are and the faster they go, as you mentioned. But it wasn’t really that important anyway.
My ENTIRE argument, which you clearly ignored was:

  • fragments going to the sides are strongly affected by chemical energy. M-geschoss has thin walls, but TONS of chemical energy.
  • fragments going forwards are affected by both chemical and kinetic energy, and MG151/20 launches some seriously big chunks of metal forward.
    Of course there are also fragments flying at oblique angles, for each angle the situation is different, but it should be fairly easy to understand, that more kinetic-energy reliant shells will have a way worse performance once they slow down compared to chemical energy powerhouse M-geschoss is.

Now regarding Shvak FI-T vs M-geschoss. Russian HE is 90g heavy, with 4g of explosive. Maybe it has a few grams of incendiary too. But lets assume 2.
A few grams are taken by tracer, lets asume 5 (4 or 6 - won’t make much difference).
So we have 90g of steel - 11,6 = 78,4 gf steel to form fragments. And funny part - there’s a LOT of steel at the back of the shell, which gets NEGATIVE benefit from chemical energy, which COUNTERACTS the kinetic energy.
M-geschoss - 92-95g (lets assume 92). 92 - 18,6g of explosives = 73,4g of steel, and barely anything at the back of the shell, which is very nose-heavy - other than the thick driving band part which will form fairly decent fragments).

You can come to a useful conclusion yourself.
Both shells will launch the most fragments forward. Nose part of M-geschoss has plenty of steel in it too. Shvak will launch some bigger fragments overal, but since it’s heavily kinetic energy reliant, the damage should drop off quite dramatically as the impact velocity decreases (when firing at longer range or at enemy flying much faster). And the advantage in fragmentation damage will only show itself at longer range from explosion, where, guess what, Shvak’s fragments slow down A LOT too. Just slow down less than Mg151/20 fragments, but still their ballistics are mostly kinda bad and 6g of TNT won’t do wonders.
So both shells will be truely effective vs. things in front of them, and the further to the side we go, the less damage we’ll see from both with Shvak having ADVANTAGE here, but not as big as some like to think.

EDIT:
Regarding B-17 vs Tu-2 - do you realise each plane’s modules have HP pool. And this HP pool is arbitrary and Gaijin can EASILY make a plane with same amount of bigger modules that also have way more HP. That’s why F-89B is notoriously hard to kill because its modules have insane amount of HP, allowing it to survive prolonged clobbering from MG151/20, f.e. you can land shots to the fuel tank and not damage it at all. Engines are also notoriously hard to damage on jets.

3 Likes

This, but then Gaijin is using their bad pen formula and ignores real penetration tables of german hvap cannon ammunition like for the FlaK38 and mk103 cannons. Even american tests showed that mk103 hvap penned around 100mm but no let’s take a formula which ignores material like tungsten completely
(I think this affects apcr for tanks aswell)

1 Like

Gaijin created a formula that uses both the weight of the shell as well as the weight of the penetrator.

That’s because Soviet APCR shells use rather light tungsten penetrator and some of the penetration power comes from the steel behind the penetrator.
Kinda how early Soviet APFSDS either were full steel rods or had a tiny tungsten carbide piece in the front, which helped to penetrate thick armor plates.

However because the formula is based on both penetrator and shell weight, rounds which relied on a heavy penetrator with light casing are now underperforming.

Best example is the M41A1s APCR round, which penetratres a mere 206mm while the APDS that was derived from the same APCR round penetrates 300mm.
So despite both rounds having the same tungsten penetrator, the formula for APCR causes the round to be complete trash.

1 Like