This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
8 Likes
HE shells in general should deal far less damage to planes.
If Gajin simply implemented a system where the larger and heavy a plane is the less damage it takes, that would go along way for Warthunder.
Planes like Zero often had wings and control surfaces ripped off with singular .50cals.
20mm mine shells were dnough to 1-tap a Spitfire’s wing at certain angles.
P-47s could tank singular 30mm mineshell hits to the wing.
Just going off that, you could easily start to extrapolate for all other planes and bullets/shells.
Zeros are known for having weak armor thats why they turn so good. The corsair absolute clapped em with thei .50 cals.
1 Like
planes also hit light polls irl and kept flying against all odds but it doesn’t mean it should be implemented in warthunder. and the way a plane is constructed has to do with it’s structural strength so your logic is extremely flawed again.
zeros are know for having very strong airframes outside of having no armor or self sealing fuel tanks so I very much believe he’s making that up
bros just finding out real shatter is op, welcome to props where gaijin stopped caring before you installed the game
I think that should be implemented. Thongs like trees and light poles should deal damage based on the same metric as bullet damage.
Proppelers aswell should be able to destroy certain props and scrape the ground without instabtly exploding.
that sounds like something cool, maybe if gaijin cared about props it could be implemented but we both know they only care about top tier slop because it’s what makes the money. they literally CAN’T stop implementing more and more half baked bllsht and leaving the CORE GAME to DIE.
1 Like
I feel you on this I’ve been using a wide variety of bombers granted I’ve been taking off the airfield looking for fights, but it feels like they take the exact same damage to disable as a fighter while just having larger damage sections, getting hit by one 20mm round is enough to black out your entire hull? (Idk what the hell plane parts are called) despite the fact it really shouldnt do anything since most of it is just empty space a 20mm shell relative to the size of these bombers isnt that large. The amount of times I’ve had even in my g8n1 a wing or something ripped off by a single 20mm api round is insane. Hell the other day I made a pe-8 get put into a flat spin by hitting him like three times in the wing with like 50 cal rounds.
They also suffered from high instability in high G turns…
doubt it, a C-46 crew shot down a Japanese fighter by shooting a BAR from the window. their airframes are sufficiently reinforced for carrier ops (not as much as their American counterparts though since they are lighter) but they were not resistant to combat damage
Yet again, literally untrue claim you pulled from nowhere, and that’s not even how physics work lol how can something be both structurally strong and weak at the same time, please don’t contradict yourself.
look at the properties of carbon fiber you moron. the landing gear/undercarriage are sufficiently reinforced to land on a carrier a lot, if the rest was half as reinforced as you think it would weigh in closer to an F4F-4
yes aluminum and carbon fiber, known for their structural similarities.
you are doing the same thing but worse by thinking reinforcement to the landing gear for the impact of the plane on a carrier deck, is the same as heavy reinforcement to the rest of the plane that makes it more resistant to combat damage.