Aircraft guns too weak -1 reply

Please wait...

GI_JOEjk

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

13th February 2004

0 Uploads

142 Posts

0 Threads

#1 15 years ago

Come on, either the aircraft are too well armored or the guns are too weak. If your fighter was hit with 10-20 50.cal slugs, your fighter would fall apart (while pulling those Gs)... I was shooting at Stukas with a Sturmovic, and could barley made just one :uhm: smoke. But when I attack a tank I kill it... What do you people think??




Nijo

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

20th August 2003

0 Uploads

140 Posts

0 Threads

#2 15 years ago

Yup, it appears you have to make the enemy plane crash simply by making it become too heavy due to all the lead in it.




[11PzG]matyast

[11PzG] clan leader

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

3,175 Posts

0 Threads

#3 15 years ago

Yes, I agree, aircrafts have way too much armour. I think this is a result of the increase in the effectiveness of the AA guns. Mabe the devs could increase the firepower of the aircraft guns......




Myxlminx

Fearless Leader

50 XP

4th November 2003

0 Uploads

254 Posts

0 Threads

#4 15 years ago

Increase the AA guns firepower? At the moment AAs are killers, that shoot down a plane with 2-3 shots (worth slightly over one second of fire), so I don´t think they should be made even stronger.




Mast3rofPuppets VIP Member

08'aIgnorance is not an excuse

50 XP

28th November 2003

0 Uploads

8,198 Posts

0 Threads

#5 15 years ago
MyxlminxIncrease the AA guns firepower? At the moment AAs are killers, that shoot down a plane with 2-3 shots (worth slightly over one second of fire), so I don´t think they should be made even stronger.

He's not talking about AA's, he's talking about the machineguns and cannons on airplanes.

IMO the bombers should have a shitload of armor but the fighters have a tad too much.




MG42Maniac

A man of dubious moral fibre

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

3,932 Posts

0 Threads

#6 15 years ago

Yeah, the guns are really weak, I've shot down a fairly large number of planes but thats only cos i've been on their 6 hammering them for like 5 minutes only to have them bail and die because of not chute :/ The only plane which has good guns IMO is the P-40 on El Alamein.




shrinerr

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

2nd October 2003

0 Uploads

1,258 Posts

0 Threads

#7 15 years ago

I don't fly much but I'm gonna agree, they are too weak, not against trucks and light vehicles though.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#8 15 years ago

I was on Battle Of Britain and jumped on a Spitfire and kept hammering him and after it seemed like a eternity he finally started smoking. But when he couldnt shake me the Spit nosed down and died in crash so I couldnt get the kill.

Also jumped 2 different Ju-88's and took awhile to get them smoking. By that time they were to England and the FLAK got them.




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#9 15 years ago

Lets put one thing straight : BOMBER armour is fine !!

We do not want to get back to the situation a bomber is shot in 2 seconds again, because then bomber gunners will be once again useless. Now it is just fine.

You are right though that FIGHTER armour when shot by other fighters is rediculous too much. Fighters have other defences then bombers : they can evade when being shot at......at least when they do not fly like boeing 747's anymore....

When their flight physics are returned to usefull in a bf1942 engine again, they really should not take more then 2 secs of fire that is hitting the fighter. Good fighter pilots do not get hit, and need no armour anyway......and bad fighter pilots deserve to explode in 2 seconds because of their skillesness.

Aircraft to groundtarget damage from mg/cannon is also too low. All mg bullets and certainly 20 mm cannonrounds will punch through apc, jeeps and truck so they should explode ( or at least kill all passengers ) in a seconds or 2. I guess you all saw RL footage what happens if a convoy is strafed by aircraft ??

Now an apc almost needs 3 strafing runs of several seconds to be killed. Light tanks the same, even when you are hitting their top armour or engine deck with 20 mm cannons...

Divebomber guns are also notoriously weak.....they are ground attack aircraft and have less guns then fighters, but that should not mean they cannot sink wooden landingcrafts for example, like the torpedo SBD that is completely powerless to do anything against a landingcraft.....that is rediculous. Also Stuka, Sturmovik and Achi Val should be fearsome strafing platforms, although they do not have as many guns as a fighter.

Flak damage is fine.....it is even a little powerfull, now that aircraft fly like boeing 747's. When aircraft would get back reasonable flight physics back for bf1942 game limits flak would be 100% ok.

Gun damage on fighters and groundtargets right now is not RL realistic, these guns were terribly powerfull in RL. Neither are the flight physics when you consider bf1942 dimensions, and the fauilure of certain fighter aircraft to perform RL air combat manouvers. Also ground attack aircraft need better manouverebility to be able to efficently attack ground targets.....again consider the bf1942 dimensions they need to operate in....




MG42Maniac

A man of dubious moral fibre

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

3,932 Posts

0 Threads

#10 15 years ago

Also Some larger caliber guns like the 30mm should tear a fighter plane apart from like a 1/2 sec burst.