50cal vs osty (50 cal vs armor BS part 2)

[humble]

Hmmm, do we have any true marksmen around. I seriously doubt you have anywhere near that kind of drop on a .50 cal round at that range. I'm limited to firing rifles (mostly 22's) at shorter ranges but I'd guess that the drop on a .50 at 1000 yds is about 2 ft or so.

[AKDejaVu]

You don't need a marksman.  500 yards or 1000 yards... one is .18 seconds travel time the other is .32.  How far does any object drop in that ammount of time?

Besides... its a moot point.  The only thing the armor protects is the operator... not the guns.

AKDejaVu

[brady]

Just how vunerable do you think that round tapered hardend barel is, which is pointed right at you, any thing not going right down the barel( ya right) is going to hit that taperd tube and bounce off into the gun shield.

[brady]

One thing I forgot to mention It was Fester in that LVT, he could put one down the osty tube, so I gues this whole argument is now pointless?

[AKDejaVu]

Originally posted by brady
Just how vunerable do you think that round tapered hardend barel is, which is pointed right at you, any thing not going right down the barel( ya right) is going to hit that taperd tube and bounce off into the gun shield.

Any barrel is vunerable to a .50.  The steel just isn't that thick.  And barrels do not armor make.  It doesn't have to penetrate anything... only distort in that situation.

My money says that there is an area that accounts for turret gun damage... and its not a mere 2" in diameter.

I also find it difficult to believe this much effort is going into the Ostwind's damage model.  Seems you'd have better luck arguing about the M16's damage model.  .50s should tear one of those apart... but they seem relatively impervious.  An M3 should go down with only a couple of hits... yet they can take as many as 40 before exploding.  Go for the obvious... give up on the not so obvious.  It just isn't working for  you.

AKDejaVu

[brady]

Personaly I think the Idea of taking out the MA on the osty is prety far fetched with any MG unless it is from an aspect that can kill the crew throught the open top. I realy do not by the gun damage Idea no mater how well it is deleavered, I would be more apt to beleave the sight took damage befoe the gun did.

 In so much as I can tell the osty turet is just as vunerable from fire provided it is brought to bear for long enough from any angle, not just the top, and that is what I am realy geting at hear, and from MG(rifle calliber or 50 cal) this should be adreased.

 I know the M3 and M16 used to be way porked but they are a bit easer to kill now, see my new thread on the M16 and HE in this forum, I just took some screan shots I will post in their.

 The only reasion It may not be working for me is the preception in the comunity that the osty is tough enough as it is, and any argument trying point to the contrary is going to be an up hill battle no matter how good the facts are.

[Samm]

Brady is to gv armor as Mandoble is to 190d9 .

I don't know if you've noticed but you're straight trippin, you should take a break bud .

[brady]

I would but these post's just don't seam to be dying.....It seams I have created a monster, maybe somthing good will come of it all.

[john9001]

brady , go explan to samm how he can put 125% fuel into his airplane

[Samm]

Originally posted by john9001
brady , go explan to samm how he can put 125% fuel into his airplane

The same way you can put 1250cc into a liter jar .

[brady]

Look if you two can't along I am going to seperate you.

 

[Samm]

Suave is to base fuel supply as brady is to gv armor

[eddiek]

But sheesh, when you make a statement like this:

"The whole point of this thread is to further illustrate the OVER effectivenns of the 50 cal in AH. I personaly feal the 50 cal's uberness in terms of it's general effectivenns vs every thing in AH is simply a game play function to enhance the usefullness of US aircraft/ vehicals. "

The .50 cal was a potent powerful weapon in RL, just as in AH.  I mentioned the bias based upon your above statement, plus your NOT mentioning that Hortlund's tests indicated the 7.92mm was capable of the same damage as the .50 cal.......
Likely just me misreading you, but you stated the "whole point of this thread", not me.
BTW, give it a rest.  Likely nothing is gonna be done about the GV damage model until the next release.  I can understand your frustrations, but guy, the Ostwind is way overmodeled in the amount of havoc it can wreak, ya know?  Making the most capable vehicle in the GV set (and it would appear your favorite)more durable and less susceptible to damage only helps you, not anyone else.

[brady]

Yes eddiek, I too am going werey of responding to these threads, on the armor Issue, and I can see how that statement of mine could be construed as a biased one. espichaly if you missed my coments on the other threads about those other weapons you sighted. Howeaver after ponderring the evidance and beieng aware that gameplay is an issue for HTC, I in frustration ( years of it)  punched out that comment.

 I do agree that somthing neads to be done to the ostys effectivness aganst buildings,but a larger issue is the overal GV armore model and the airplanes effectiveness aganst them, people dont take tanks into battle because every plane in AH can damage them. In an osty you have a fighting chance. Thats why you see so many of them, like the spits, the Georges the La-7's it is comaprtively easy to get kills and survive. The problem with the osty is that their are no other vehicals to take in it's stead curently. Since aircraft in AH have unhistoricaly over effectiveness aganst armor, so to does the osty aganst the aircraft and the enviourment, fixing the osty is not the issue the whole thing neads to be looked at.

   I use the osty as much as i do out of necesity, since I play for rank I prety much have to, in order to compeat, same with the use of allied Jabo's I nead to use them to compeat, german Jabo's are bad for rank.

    I would gladely take a pause from this topic, I sincerly hope somthing is done with this issue, howeaver years of frustration over HTC's aproach to it have not given me cause for hope on this front.