Jump to content

Comparing HMG Damage, and issues with .50 cals


Sublime

Recommended Posts

QB.Creep
2 hours ago, QB.Rails said:

Do you think anyone will answer this question?

Nope. Righteous defenders of over-performing HE just stirring the pot ad nauseum while ignoring inconvenient facts.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Denum
18 hours ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

I Iet the feeling there are a lot of unqualified comments from people that, with all due respect dont really know what they are talking about.

I generally fly which ever team is lower so I often go Allied. Flights from this quarter on FVP.

 

Sorties I was comparing was from players that have much higher ability then my own.

 

But on average the allied .50 birds had much higher hit ratios then the axis comparisons, the required skill level for the machine guns is much more substantial. 

Screenshot_20210325_143035.jpg

Edited by Denum
Link to post
Share on other sites
JG51_Beazil
1 hour ago, QB.Creep said:

If you agree that AP underperforms / HE overperforms, then why do you come here and stir the pot? People are frustrated because this has been the state of things for almost an entire year now. 1C has said they will look at it (finally), but only after A LOT of discussion and testing that proved there was a problem. Still no admission of a problem or timetable for a fix. You might have a better sense of why people are frustrated if you flew a P47 or P51 once in awhile instead of constantly spamming K4s with your squad mates against a handful of random Allied players during non-peak hours to pad your stats.

This is exactly the same poo flinging reason to stay out of these discussions.

This forum is becoming toxic.  

 

Edit:. Now I feel like a jerk.  Creep is an awesome forum member who contributes tremendously to discussions.  Accept my apology for using your post as THE example. 

 

There are no sides in this discussion.  Let's just one it down so we don't get it locked.  S!

Edited by JG51_Beazil
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac_Messer
40 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

If you agree that AP underperforms / HE overperforms, then why do you come here and stir the pot? People are frustrated because this has been the state of things for almost an entire year now. 1C has said they will look at it (finally), but only after A LOT of discussion and testing that proved there was a problem. Still no admission of a problem or timetable for a fix. You might have a better sense of why people are frustrated if you flew a P47 or P51 once in awhile instead of constantly spamming K4s with your squad mates against a handful of random Allied players during non-peak hours to pad your stats.

So nobody else than ppl complaining here are using USAF planes ingame. Get real.

 

There is no justification for so many disrespectful posts in 50cal spamming threads.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
NIK14

Latest DD.
Funny how even Jason refers to the 109 tail section as "the concrete tail"...unhappy customers seem to be getting through, like I had foreseen.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
JG1_Wittmann

If AP, specifically the 50 cal  is under-performing,  then it should be fixed.  This  is supposed to be  the most accurate  ww2 simulator.   At the same time,   addressing some posts  about  over-performing HE rounds.  I will agree with that,  only in regards to the allied 20mm cannon rounds  being too close to the destructive  power of the german mine rounds,   that had @ twice  the amount  of HE in them.   The 30mm,  to me, seems to be  glaringly underperforming.  I don't know  the exact amount of avg hits  it takes to destroy an allied fighter, or bomber in game.  What I do know is that vs  fighters that  avg rounds required is not 1,   like it was IRL.   And  it does seem to take more cannon rounds, 20mm and 30mm, for a german ac  to take down a bomber  than it actually  did during the war.  So while the 50cal may be under-performing, the mine rounds are  definitely under-performing.  All should be made accurately.

Link to post
Share on other sites
QB.Rails
41 minutes ago, JG1_Wittmann said:

If AP, specifically the 50 cal  is under-performing,  then it should be fixed.  This  is supposed to be  the most accurate  ww2 simulator.   At the same time,   addressing some posts  about  over-performing HE rounds.  I will agree with that,  only in regards to the allied 20mm cannon rounds  being too close to the destructive  power of the german mine rounds,   that had @ twice  the amount  of HE in them.   The 30mm,  to me, seems to be  glaringly underperforming.  I don't know  the exact amount of avg hits  it takes to destroy an allied fighter, or bomber in game.  What I do know is that vs  fighters that  avg rounds required is not 1,   like it was IRL.   And  it does seem to take more cannon rounds, 20mm and 30mm, for a german ac  to take down a bomber  than it actually  did during the war.  So while the 50cal may be under-performing, the mine rounds are  definitely under-performing.  All should be made accurately.

Good points! Do you think the German mine shell should have a blast radius of 5.3 meters? Or the Hispano should have a blast radius of 4.6 meters? Granted the mine shell has 20 grams of explosive compared to the Hispano’s 11. And do you think the UBs should have a blast radius of 2.2 meters and the 131 have a blast radius of 1.3 meters. Both have 2 grams and 1 gram respectively. Also the 108,103,101 all have a blast radius of 10.3 meters does that seem correct too? 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Denum

Ooof

 

Apparently their shells do more damaged then hand grenades. 

 

If I recall 5M is kill radius, 15m is shrapnel radius (some goes further but that's more in the bad luck range) 

 

6.5oz of explosive in M67? I think?

 

(Might be a bad comparison I think)

 

 

Edited by Denum
Link to post
Share on other sites
JLean

For me the biggest challenge in US planes is get right convergence for wing mounted guns. With .50 cals I have not felt any issue in multiplay with P-38....ok it has the 20mm and maybe that is then doing all the damage..but quite often German plane can be set on fire when I have not yet shot a single 20mm shell.

 

Of course this is my subjective feeling.

 

If you want to have a real challenge take a Hurricane with .303 cal or Macchi and try to get Il-2 down.

 

:salute:   

Link to post
Share on other sites
QB.Rails
16 minutes ago, JLean said:

For me the biggest challenge in US planes is get right convergence for wing mounted guns. With .50 cals I have not felt any issue in multiplay with P-38....ok it has the 20mm and maybe that is then doing all the damage..but quite often German plane can be set on fire when I have not yet shot a single 20mm shell.

 

Of course this is my subjective feeling.

 

If you want to have a real challenge take a Hurricane with .303 cal or Macchi and try to get Il-2 down.

 

:salute:   

Yes you can set engine on fire with m2’s but that’s not what’s been discussed for the past 23 pages. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dakpilot
6 hours ago, NIK14 said:

Latest DD.
Funny how even Jason refers to the 109 tail section as "the concrete tail"...unhappy customers seem to be getting through, like I had foreseen.

 

No, am sure the fix was done according to the workflow schedule, 

 

But some people can kid themselves that it was due to their rants, accusations of bias and threatening to withold on buying BoN that got the fix done. LoL

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatata_Time
1 minute ago, Dakpilot said:

No, am sure the fix was done according to the workflow schedule, 

 

But some people can kid themselves that it was due to their rants, accusations of bias and threatening to withold on buying BoN that got the fix done. LoL

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

After testing it: almost one year to fix 50% of the problem ( the so called concrete 109 tail by the devs: this is a very really significant point: they've admited, but not openly, the 109 got a huge problem, but this is one of a chain of problems still, and crossing fingers "work in progress". Now time for the AP 50's: still been peas against 109's.... don't forget it, so the incendiary attribute to the 0.50 cal. bullets would be well received before WW2 100th anniversary. So don't come here few hours later just to be the first to say anything.... even almost bordering the stupidity.

 

Not cheer till the entire problem will be fixed and to be honest it's far away to be completly fixed. 

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mac_Messer
6 hours ago, JLean said:

For me the biggest challenge in US planes is get right convergence for wing mounted guns. With .50 cals I have not felt any issue in multiplay with P-38....ok it has the 20mm and maybe that is then doing all the damage..but quite often German plane can be set on fire when I have not yet shot a single 20mm shell.

 

Of course this is my subjective feeling.

 

If you want to have a real challenge take a Hurricane with .303 cal or Macchi and try to get Il-2 down.

 

:salute:   

It`s a really hard part to set right and even then you end up with just a few good situations to kill. Because the point convergence restricts the user to pretty much </ 30m of the set convergence or you miss with most projectiles fired. And I think this is the biggest part of 50cal modelling. The P38 shows how 50cal are effective when used in configuration meant specifically for the weapon.

 

Well who knew. Both have AP only ammo with set config. I can tell you I shot up all available types of IL2 with this ammo. There is no penetration past rear gunner body, no matter how you place it, be it dead six or 30deg -/+. The IL2 will lose steering surfaces, wheels and weapon racks but the pilot and the engine stays intact. I didn`t even manage to get ammo case / bom direct hit for explosion effect.

Edited by Mac_Messer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Jason_Williams locked this topic
  • 3 weeks later...
=WoVi=AdelWolf

What is wrong with the 50. cals.

I see that there is no API-T rounds in game, will we have it and why don't we have it?

Even though if its AP rounds what is wrong with it? I can literally sit on 6 of 109 at 250m and shoot all 1000 rounds hit them all around the plane and it still keeps flying?

And the German minengeschoß literally wipes you out with single small burst (as it should be)

 

Okay now considering the agility of 109's, nose mounted 20mm minengeschoß this plane is perfect for snap shots, close range shots which is perfectly clear that this plane is for dogfight

 

whereas planes like P-47, P-51 lack the agility, nose mounted 20mm guns thus bad at snap shots and accels at BnZ rather than dogfight.

At dogfight you can sit on the 6 of the enemy and stay there until you shoot him and don't worry about wasting you energy but in the planes like P-47 or P-51 you cannot just sit at the 6 of the enemy rather you have to perform BnZ, slash attacks and disengage without wasting your energy,

 

So If I have to spend 1500 rounds on a single plane to shoot him down how the hell am I supposed to do BnZ?

Slash attacks don't work and you literally have to sit on the 6 of the enemy shoot 5-6 second bursts from close range to hit em all and yet the enemy keeps flying???

 

If the 50 cals were so terrible I bet USAAF would have used 20mm instead of 50.cal everywhere. 

 

Back to the topic what is wrong with the 50.cals in this game?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Geronimo553


Video contains extensive comparison data and begins half way into the video skipping the armor segment. 

 

I also want to note how this video describes how Germans changed their ammo belt configuration at 32:40.


starts at 29:21

 

Edited by Geronimo553
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
BH_Adabadoo_VR

I missed the closing of the last debate by one day!

 

I'm pretty average in skill so far and pretty new.

For months I was concentrating on A2G and had my P-51 convergence set to 400 meters.

 

Last few days before the latest update I was messing with convergence and testing on CombatBoxTraining late war.

 

I set to 180m

That's 200 yards so it's easy to dial in as min on the range.

It is pretty effective from zero to 400 yards.

 

That's 0 to converged at .11 miles to spread back at .22 miles.

Beyond .3 miles it's not very effective at all.

 

I find at .15 miles I'm starting planes on fire, killing the pilot and sawing off wings regularly.

I can kill average about 3 planes before I have to head back for more ammo.

 

The .50 will never be as effective as the cannons.  I don't think it should be.

It seems pretty good to me though and if we get AP-I I think it will be very good.

 

The real problem with the .50 is that you have to set convergence and so are setting a range.

 

Having pattern rather than  point convergence would help.

 

With German cannons you can be a sniper at extremely long ranges and not worry about convergence because they fire from the nose.

 

A few hits are effective with cannon and that seems realistic.

 

A few hits with .50 is not and you can't snipe at long range.

 

So one pass on zoom isn't going to be as effective but you can cause lots of damage on a pass.  I think the cannons will always be better and they should be.

 

The Tempest is way better as it should be.  I can kill upto 10 target / hop 7 average before having to rearm in a tempest on combat box training.

 

I think in addition to convergence once you get below .1 mile you need to yaw to center one wings stream of bullets on the fuselage.

At below .1 if you stay centered both sets of bullets will pass each side of the enemy plane.

 

Used this way they are pretty good can openers

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Denum

You're super late to the party.

 

Half your points we've already made.

 

Our main issue is the lack of aerodynamic penalties from the MGs. 

 

Yes they do work well on AI because 

A-The AI bails out earlier the people B- The AI is uh.. sometime blissfully unaware and won't move

 

 

We aren't arguing they should be as effective as cannons. We are arguing that it shouldn't take 100+ rounds to damage a plane enough for it to go down while we can 1 shot them with a German cannon. The skill gap is pretty insane.

 

Perhaps the issue isn't that .50 is too weak, maybe HE shells are too strong..

 

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

tenor (1).gif

Edited by Denum
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man

@Denum You cannot definitively say one round is too effective or not effective enough until you have all rounds used in a particular aircraft modeled. Until then, you cannot make a correct comparison.

Thus, the only argument I think is valid is the need for the API round. If we had the AP round modeled, then we could say the issue is with a certain round.

Edited by JG7_X-Man
  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Denum
16 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

@Denum You cannot definitively say one round is too effective or not effective enough until you have all rounds used in a particular aircraft modeled. Until then, you cannot make a correct comparison.

Thus, the only argument I think is valid is the need for the API round. If we had the AP round modeled, then we could say the issue is with a certain round.

Well, you can wish all you want.

 

Looking at what's available NOW in game what I said is a reasonable extrapolation.

 

With recent fuel tank changes I seem to making more schnitzel then normal so perhaps we are on our way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
[CPT]Crunch

Maybe YOU can't hit anything at distance.

50 table.jpg

They are a laser out to 1000 feet, that deflection distance must be halved, half above the trajectory, half below "if" you set the distance correct.  Your not even close and that's why you have troubles.

Edited by [CPT]Crunch
Link to post
Share on other sites
=FEW=Hauggy

Nice update, too bad the 50. cal is still rather useless.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...