Author Topic: JU88A4 with MG-FF/M? (Read 2146 times)

Knegel · « **Reply #15 on:** November 12, 2006, 05:15:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bruno
The MGFF is AH is the weakest cannon in the game - even weaker then the Type 99 MK 1 (A6M2). I can't see how it would be any more useful then the weak forward firing MG.

I doubt you could kill a jeep or M3 with it.

To me this realy sounds like luftwhining.

Today i took a 109E and found the MGFF to be very effective. I mainly fly the FW190A8 or 109G6 and found it more easy to get a kill than with a 109G6. Of course the poor muzzvel dont allow easy long distance kills while a turnfight, but thats pretty ok.
Nevertheless iam sure it would be a BIG improvement while groundattacks!! 3 x Ju88´s = 3 x MGFF!

E25280 · « **Reply #16 on:** November 12, 2006, 05:25:25 PM »

Even though it is only two posts down, seems appropriate to link this into this discussion.

Hitech on ammo modeling

Hitech must be using something for his "hybrid of a mixed belt," and I wouldn't be surprised if "one in five" was posted somewhere before.

Bruno · « **Reply #17 on:** November 12, 2006, 10:30:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by E25280
Even though it is only two posts down, seems appropriate to link this into this discussion.

Hitech on ammo modeling

Hitech must be using something for his "hybrid of a mixed belt," and I wouldn't be surprised if "one in five" was posted somewhere before.

HT is talking about the fact that a in real life a belt maybe 2 x HE, 1 AP, 1 API. All of those have different m/v, different velocities over range, as well as pentration values. This is real data he can average over a belt in AH. With rounds whose lethality is mostly contained in their HE content (chemical energy) its much more harder to come up with a solid 'damage value' for a game like this. He's not averaging a known value for the M'geschoss round over the entire belt. There is no M'geshoss.

Whatever the reason the MGFF is the weakest cannon in the game (that's not 'luftwhining' Knegel, that's fact).

Quote

I mainly fly the FW190A8 or 109G6 and found it more easy to get a kill than with a 109G6.

The G-6 has an MG151/2cm and its just as effective as any other MG151/2cm in AH. Its certainly more lethal then an MGFF. The reason the the G-6 is more 'difficult' to get kills with for you is the planes it is matched up against in the mid-war verses the E-4 in the early. That has nothing to do with ammo lethality.

Knegel · « **Reply #18 on:** November 13, 2006, 12:25:28 AM »

I was shooting down 2 F4U-4´s, 1 x 109K, 1 x P51D, 1 x SpitIXc and N1k´s yesterday.

I was very content with the MGFF.

Btw, this isnt a lethality theatre, here someone did offer wish regarding the Ju88 front weapon! Your comment that a MGFF dont would bring much simply is absolut nonsens.

All cannons in AH are powerfull enough to get a fast kill, the different is mainly caused by the different hitprobability due to a different muzzvel and the resulting trajectory.

Bruno · « **Reply #19 on:** November 13, 2006, 09:29:33 AM »

The MGFF is the weakest in the game. Nothing you or that other guy posted disproves that. For ground attack or de-acking a field a Ju-88 is and would be better off using its SC 50s rather then strafing with 1 or 3 MGFF. Having a MGFF in the nose of a Ju-88 or a 7.9 mm gun won't make the Ju-88 any more usefull then it is now.

In AH it takes 100lbs of ordnance to destroy 1 ack gun in AH. It takes 857 cannon rounds to kill a fighter hanger (3000lbs default). Thats 3.5 lbs per round. To kill a single ack gun would take 29 rounds. Go off line and test the E-4 verses a jeep or M3 / M16 etc... Its easier to kill those with the SC 50s as well. Adding the MGFF to the Ju-88 would make no difference at all.

Nothing in your little anecdote about 'I once killed a... with MGFF' changes any of that. I shot down 3 Lancaster's with breda 12.7s in a .202. That doesn't change the fact that the breda in AH is significantly less lethal then the US .50 cal or LW 13mm in AH. In AH lethality is largely based on range/speed. The MGFF is still the weakest cannon in the game and adding one to the Ju-88 would make no difference at all.

Making accussations of 'luftwhining' and/or building ridiculous strawmam arguments doesn't change anything I have written. This isn't the first post to request the MGFF for the Ju-88, and it won't be the last. It hasn't been added yet and I don't imagine it will get added any time soon.

Krusty · « **Reply #20 on:** November 13, 2006, 11:07:36 AM »

Bruno, your conclusion is wrong. It only has ever taken a single cannon round right next to any ack gun to kill it. Just 1 round. I think you can take out ack guns with the weakest of rockets and the weakest of bombs, yes, but that doesn't mean you "need" that much to kill them. They go down with much less, we just lack smaller ord to test the limits with.

EDIT: As for Ju88s: I'd rather have the C or the G with cannon, and leave the A-4 as-is.

Bruno · « **Reply #21 on:** November 13, 2006, 01:15:56 PM »

Krusty an ack gun requires 100lbs of ordnance (any type) to kill:

Right from the HTC website:

Strategy Guide: Ground Target Values

It required 100lbs since I played the AH1 betas,

A Fighter Hangar requires 3000lbs of ordnance (default) to kill. Both Jazz and the netaces site show how many rounds to kill ground objects:

Relative round power

It took 857 MGFF rounds to kill a Fighter Hangar. (3000/857 = 3.5 then 100/3.5 = 29)

Do you even know the ordnance value of all the AH rocket types?

The amount of damage caused by cannon and mg rounds is different verses ground targets and aircraft. No matter at what range you hit a ground object at the damage value is the same. An MGFF hitting a hangar at 600 yards is the same as hitting it at 1000 yards. Completely different then range/speed values in regards to damage against aircraft.

You just don't know wtf you are talking about as usual. Do you just make things up?

There's no reason for this thread to go on. I said the MGFF is the weakest in the game and a single nose fired MGFF in the Ju-88A-4 wouldn't make it any more useful then it is now. Unless any of you can make an argument based on what I said then just just let the thread die.

Bruno · « **Reply #22 on:** November 13, 2006, 01:27:02 PM »

fyi: If you want o argue over MGFF then get HTC to add the 90 round drum to the A-5. It fit into the same space as the 60 round drum. Not that I fly the A-5 with MGFF - they are just as useless in the A-5 as they would be in the Ju-88. 2 x MG151/2cm is fine for all the 190s - including the A-8.

Krusty · « **Reply #23 on:** November 13, 2006, 02:18:33 PM »

Hey Bruno, when was the last time you flew AH? Just curious, because that info is wrong on 100lbs. It takes 1 cannon round. It's only ever take that much. You might fire a short burst of 3-5 to get the "1" to land on target, but it only takes the one then "Poof!" "SYSTEM: Soft Auto Gun Destroyed"

Ask anybody that's deacked a field. I don't think the numbers on that page have been updates since AH1 went public. Look at the amount required for hangars, and for the HQ. 250lbs for a barracks? Well I know an la7 can strafe them down with 100 20mm rounds, that's nowhere near 250lbs.

So those numbers don't apply anymore

As for the weakness of the MGFF, yes we all know they're the worst of the 20mm. But they are still 20mm. I think that was the original point.

EDIT: Oh, P.S. about the 190A5: I know! Ugh! I wish we had the 90-round drums. I requested it a long time ago (years ago, I think) but alas, no response.

Bruno · « **Reply #24 on:** November 13, 2006, 02:32:12 PM »

I have more time in AH then you - by far both AH1 and AH2. An ack gun is default 100lbs. You can check the setting yourself.

Krusty you don't know what you are talking about - yet again...

Bronk · « **Reply #25 on:** November 13, 2006, 02:40:56 PM »

WOW
Just tried 109e fired 2 count em 2 rounds into a field gun. Guess what ... gun went poof. So by your figures Bruno thats 50lbs per round.

NERF THE MGFF way over modeled at 50lbs per round.

Just admit you made a mistake already sheesh.

Bronk

Krusty · « **Reply #26 on:** November 13, 2006, 02:41:22 PM »

Bruno, dude... I've been playing as long as you have. Okay? I started when AH1 came out of beta. So quit saying "you don't know what you're talking about" when in fact 100% of every player in any arena will tell you the default ack guns on any field go down with a single cannon round. I don't care what the chart tells ya, 1 cannon round does not nearly equal 100 lbs. The ack guns go down with 1 cannon round, therefore they take less than 100lbs to go down.

If you don't believe me try it offline. I know you've done it before. Why you're arguing this is beyond me. Why you start flinging insults is further beyond me. It's a fact, undeniable, that in this game it only takes 1 cannon round to kill an ack gun. Anybody who's done it knows this. You've done it (having flown for so long, right?) so therefore YOU know this. You KNOW this but you still argue against it. It makes no logical sense.

The chart is wrong.

Bruno · « **Reply #27 on:** November 13, 2006, 03:47:24 PM »

I will check it when I get home but make sure your object settings are set to arena default which is based on 1000lbs...

You set it to what ever you want - even so ack dies to the chute .45...

Bronk · « **Reply #28 on:** November 13, 2006, 04:00:21 PM »

Well i tried it online next excuse..

Bronk

E25280 · « **Reply #29 on:** November 13, 2006, 07:25:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bruno
I will check it when I get home but make sure your object settings are set to arena default which is based on 1000lbs...

You set it to what ever you want - even so ack dies to the chute .45...

Any Main arena online - one cannon round inside the circle kills the ack. I usually fire 4-5 to make sure I hit it. *Poof* every time. No where near your 29 rounds.

Colt .45 will kill a soft gun or puffy ack with 10 direct hits. Never "lived" long enough close to an auto-ack to test them.

Sorry, Bruno, you are just wrong on this one.