This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
I think all aircraft cannons had their range nerfed at some point. Looking at the difference between the range lines on the Lorainne 155’s main cannon, and its 20mm is pretty insane.
I followed this thread and your exchanges about US 0.50 cals. I do not agree that you need a fire to kill an enemy fighter with US 0.50 cals. I play wt every 2 days and due to the BP challenge (“Set 80 enemy player aircraft on fire”) i kept an eye on this counter.
My observations with the early-war belt in the UK F6F-5 is that currently 3 hits are enough for a kill (long term 4-6) - no matter if you attack a bomber or a fighter. Fires start mainly on (USSR) bombers and fighters and the RNG factor is very high - so you can kill 4 guys in one match without a fire and in in the next match you score 3 kills whilst 2 of your enemies burn with one hit. To be fair: I needed 9 hits on an F4U-4 a few days ago - no fire, I shot a wing off.
I score most kills with deflection shots (i don’t perform head-ons) that might explain these rather low “hit-to-kill” numbers - and US 0.50 cals are imho a powerful weapon. Btw: I stopped playing the Pyoerremski after i scored 11 (!!!) hits with the Akan 0.50 cals on a Yak-3 without killing him - ofc i got 3rd partied by his boyfriend 😒
Edit:
As evidence for my claims: In this replay (link) you see 3 Hellcat (3.3) kills (all Fw 190s) with 2 x 3 hits to kill - and the last guy got a full load with 5 hits. Only the 2nd 190 caught fire.
1 Like
lol, you’re right but I promise he’ll ignore it and just post a wall of text anyway, some people apparently do not understand there are trade-offs and want the best of both worlds
“ignore” - We all have basically just anecdotal (or highly subjective ) evidence for our claims - so my observations are influenced by a lot of factors like daytime or server choice. So it is not impossible that others have deviating experiences.
“wall of text” - If somebody invests time in a longer text (stating and explaining his opinion) i assume passion for a specific topic. And this is imho a positive trait - wt Air RB has way too less passion players.
Have a good one!
Edit: Whilst i agree that some stuff in the referenced thread looks way more than “just” passionate some other stuff (like P-47 nerfs) is quite reasonable. So it depends 😎
1 Like
Whole lot of words to say really nothing, if you’ve read the American .50cal thread you’ll find this person is EXTREMELY OVER “passionate” and perhaps you have time for useless dialogue (repeating the same tried copes) but I personally don’t.
I actually pointed this out to Killakiwi, or I never noted it besides an aside mention, but engine fires are enormously more common than fuel fires. And I find in my testing that engine fires are much more likely to occur than fuel fires and in firing at static target (Bf-110) it supports it.
What you’re quoting is not how I see it in game. Currently in game, you get most of your kills from snapping empennages or snapping wings, which shouldn’t be a thing. What I’m trying to say in the quote is how I believe the dichotomy of the two calibers should be.
A la 2015 War Thunder.
Remove snapping structures and basically have it be replaced with high fire chances like from yesteryear.
British F6F uses mid-war belts. Early-war belts are what’s on the P-40 or P-36. One thing to note is that even regular AP rounds can get engines on fire. As in plain Jane AP but that’s from my experience flying P-40s. I’ll need to do static testing. But it’s something I noticed
But this is also a fair assessment. I’ll run into entire matches where I’m snapping wings or breaking empennages where in a few matches I might get a few fires which can be coin tossy. I mean… Everyone has to admit they look behind themselves to make sure that anybody they caught alight actually burns and doesn’t just set it out.
The problem I have is running into scenarios like these.
By all intents and purposes. He should be dead yet he wouldn’t catch alight and his gunner was being a meatshield against a pilot snipe. Why didn’t he catch alight? Is the discrepancy really that high?
Or like in my static tests with the Bf-110
I think you can understand the concern a bit when you’re having flame chances for .50s vary randomly wildly and nothing is actually consistent.
Sometimes you might light a fire in 2-3 hits other times you literally need to dump your rounds into the guy to actually light him up.
tldr can you post something with less than 200 words, I mean you’re literally just repeating yourself over and over be concise at this point lol, and meat shields aren’t a thing you just aren’t good at aiming for the cockpit I guess, you simply need to get better at aiming and stop writing essays.
You address basically the massive impact of RNG for player actions. Some believe that de-sync or ping/PL might be the root cause - i am convinced that gaijin uses (at least occasionally) RNG to steer player success.
But in any case - i actually don’t care if enemy players die due to (fuel or engine) fires or because they lose a wing - for me the “time to kill” and the ability for “one pass kills” is the relevant & decisive factor.
And, yes, the inconsistency of US AN/M2 0.50 cals is a a pain if you play 1 vs 2 and you have just one chance to turn this in a 1 vs 1 and you score just “hits” - but i have the same effect with cannons (Type 99 mod 2, Hispano, MG 151/20 and MK 108s) so i do not see a specific disadvantage for US 0.50 cals.
The impact angle of your shots and the type of your target is imho the decisive factor - Last year i scored 3 MK 108 hits on a G8N1 without a notably effect - and the year before i set a Lancaster on fire - with US 0.50 cal API-T from 1.6 km…
I recommend to fly the B-18B for a few dozen / hundred matches in order to realize that the plane is (when flown by an experienced player) one of the most difficult targets in Air RB. It is able to fly circles around your P-51 D-30 and has a very strong damage model.
Circling back to the OP:
I recommend to get out of this 0.50 cal discussion. Based on your previous posts you see the F8F-1 armament as insufficient - like here:
But on the other hand you admitt that a good pilot can make this plane work:
If you take a step back you might realize that it is way more important to be able to out-maneuver your enemies in order to bring guns on target than which weapon you use. Just look at the 3.7 C 205 with 2 x 12,7 and 2 x 7,7mm guns.
In any case - it makes imho no sense to continue with this exchange - have a good one!
3 Likes
It can happen with cannons, but it’s much rarer as you do substantially more damage in a single hit and even glancing blows are on average going to do good damage against an enemy.
Having multiple passes where your rounds sail into the enemy and harmlessly pass through multiple times is not the same as getting a single cannon round to hit at an off angle on the aircraft. Many times I’ll have actually gotten a good hit on the target and yet I’m not rewarded for it.
But the enemy can easily get a single snap shot off me and snap my plane in half.
Highly likely you struck with the HEI shell that basically just did the old hitpower bugged explosions. Server desyncs with the explosion and the explosion spawns far away from the aircraft so you get only a small little teeny tiny fragment. This has been changed now recently.
For the lancaster, I wouldn’t put it past it happening dumping your ammo that far away. But I don’t get how a single anecdote of you lighting a fire should sway me when I’m getting the exact opposite. Providing images, and video showing that these fires are simply not happening. Just because it can happen, doesn’t make it the statistical norm.
It’s not just the B-18B
Great performance can support a plane, but even with Italian .50s they still have HE filler,
It’s why you see planes that can have god-tier performance but be undertiered because the armament is completely crap.
He-100 if you shoved it higher would probably be more “Matched” in performance but completely suffer because the armament sucks.
Same with the P-39N. It’s only effectual armament is 2 .50s that have early war belts with only AP, and a 37mm that’s really screwy to get kills with
Same with the F8F. If you shoved it back up to 5.7-6.0 it would be an absolute crapshoot of an aircraft.
looks like I was right and arguing with him was a waste of time lmao
3 Likes
i skimmed thru ur text and it just sum up to u complaining about players using 4.7 F8F to bomb instead of dog fighting and you worded it like it’s as good as yak-3U or something, which it isnt, and yes it can carry bomb and so what? none of the thing you mentioned made a valid point to raise the BR at all
I havent played this plane in a long time and if I remember correctly, it’s an okay plane at best
1 Like
F8F-1 is the same exact plane but with 20mm guns, and it’s doing fine at 6.0 or whatever its BR is.
This babysitting of US players needs to stop, which is why this thread exists. cheerio.
having some of the best 20mms in the game, and having the worst 12.7mm in the game is a massive difference. The F8F-1 is free food for any half competent pilot.
Lmao. U.S. has one of the worst piston air trees in the game, especially in a Yak and Spitfire environment.
1 Like
thats just wrong
not on 4.7 idk if you mean the 6.0 one or not
US piston fighters that are good:P-51C-10 at 3.7, A-36 at 2.7, F4U1-A at 2.7, F4U4 at 4.3 this list goes on and on
4 Likes
name a better one.
Soviet Berezins are better
Italian Bredas are better
German 13mm are better
Japanese Hoe-103 are better
^^^
Every single one of those has HE filler.
The only “worse” 12.7mm is the Swedish one, but it’s literally a renamed Browning anyways. Heck, even then, Sweden has a 13.2mm which is better than the Browning.
Both.
The P-51C-10, P-51, P-51H-5, and F4U-4 are good.
The F4U-1A and A-36 are decent for a major nation low tier. Aside from the four planes listed above, the U.S. piston tree is either mediocre (P-38, F-82, F6F) or just bad (XF5F, P-51D-5, F8F).
In comparison, ARB is highly dominated by USSR, Britain, and Japan with Germany coming close behind. The rest of the nations primarily field copy paste (Israel, China, Italy, Sweden, France), which leaves America in the bottom 5 along with the minor nations.
Now, in all fairness, I do consider the P-47s to be very good planes, but that doesn’t seem to be a popular opinion.
you’re not the guy to comment on how good stuff is, you lack ability to do well in American aircraft ig because they’re solid though out the entire game, American 12.7s are literally some of the best lmao
3 Likes
I have the majority of the Soviet, Germany, and U.S. air piston trees researched, in addition to a handful of British and Italian aircraft. I can assure you, U.S. planes are nowhere near the top.
It’s not even a matter of skill as the big three nations are all roughly equal, however only Germany and Russia require any actual brainpower to fight.
no
is this a 50. cal?
and yea 50. cals are underwhelming rn compared with most (i havent used all 20mms so thats why i say most) 20mm cannons that are just onehit monsters but thats more cuz cannons are overperforming in the dmg department rn
at 4.7 it outruns everything on the deck and most likely outclimbs everything and it isnt a total brick
most of them are okay
my friend have you ever played german props? FW190s are just bad unless its the A-1 and the Bf-109s after the E variants are above average at best and not even all of them are above average (G-14 for example is just a G-6 with some high alt performance)
1 Like
Yes they are. They get HE filler.
iirc, they have same diameter bullet, with the difference in name coming from a difference in how barrel caliber is measured, specifically relating to rifiling.
No, it’s outclimed by most interceptors, especially ones with airspawn. Spitfires and Typhoons both outclimb it.
Yes. The Fw 190 D-9 and Bf 109 G-2 are excellent planes.