Why is 12.7mm under-powered?

[schmidty]

America planes mainly consist of using the m2 browning machine gun that uses 12.7mm. I use my mustang a lot in realistic battles and always seem to fall short to other nation's aircraft. (I've tried using every single ammo belt. Had the most luck with Tracers.)

Always blow through too much ammo trying to take people down or I leave them heavily damaged after a head-on. Before you say "get gud" or "mad becuz bad" I'm a decent shot/pilot and I average around 3-4 kills per game.


I've talked a lot about this with my buddies and we all seem to agree that some sort of buff is needed. Please note that I'm not asking for the guns to one shot everything but to atleast give us a 'slight' fighting chance against 20mm's.

Thanks,

Kobin

[Arterion]

Well 12.7 compared to 20mm is a significant difference, infact thats a reason many countries used cannons as anti-air more so than an MG of sorts (Like the M2). The way the .50cal (12.7mm) works is by being smaller than cannons it can fit many, many more rounds but larger than a 7.7-7.92 bullet, it is able to produce a higher damage output. In my opinion, all I can say is aim a little better, for places like the wings, I have my wings shot off all the time by american 12.7's, and its going to take a lot more "Nerfing" for me to beleive they are in need of a buff. Just load ground target ammo, aim good and watch the wings fall. In short, don't expect 12.7's to give you a head-on chance with 20mm. Head-on with america is a bad idea.

[Spaddobird]

There was one patch where all weapons had a serious damage buff, in that patch the .50 cals felt good and were easy to use but the 20mm cannons and upwards were absolute death lasers. Unfortunately, too many people complained about this because it made RB far less forgiving and the guns were changed back. Or at least that's what I observed. I can't remember which patch it was. So basically all the guns do the right amount of damage relative to each other but honestly they still don't do the historical amount of damage. In all likely hood they never will in RB because people don't like being 1 shot by 20mm cannons.

Anyway, the .50 cals now rely on consistent damage so you really need to go for the best shots which are from above the enemy plane. For example if you are chasing someone and they do a flat horizontal turn, you see a very large cross-section and that is the best time to pump rounds in. It's even better if they pull directly up. I think it is okay for the P-51 and other US fighters. They have a lot of ammo to spare anyway. It is problematic for the F8F-1 though.

[schmidty]

Originally posted by PanzerKampfWagen VI Tiger:

Well 12.7 compared to 20mm is a significant difference, infact thats a reason many countries used cannons as anti-air more so than an MG of sorts (Like the M2). The way the .50cal (12.7mm) works is by being smaller than cannons it can fit many, many more rounds but larger than a 7.7-7.92 bullet, it is able to produce a higher damage output. In my opinion, all I can say is aim a little better, for places like the wings, I have my wings shot off all the time by american 12.7's, and its going to take a lot more "Nerfing" for me to beleive they are in need of a buff. Just load ground target ammo, aim good and watch the wings fall. In short, don't expect 12.7's to give you a head-on chance with 20mm. Head-on with america is a bad idea.

I've been trying to aim for vital points but you don't always get the chance. Maybe your in a turn fight and you only get a split second to get a quick burst in. I don't try to head-on fight but sometimes it happens unexpectedly. Someone swoops infront of you (or wherever) and you don't have the time to try and turn away from it and your only option is sit there and wait for your death or try and get a pilot snipe.

I'll try the ground target ammunition and see what I'm come out with.

[PMA]

Originally posted by Spaddobird:

There was one patch where all weapons had a serious damage buff, in that patch the .50 cals felt good and were easy to use but the 20mm cannons and upwards were absolute death lasers. Unfortunately, too many people complained about this because it made RB far less forgiving and the guns were changed back. Or at least that's what I observed. I can't remember which patch it was. So basically all the guns do the right amount of damage relative to each other but honestly they still don't do the historical amount of damage. In all likely hood they never will in RB because people don't like being 1 shot by 20mm cannons.

Anyway, the .50 cals now rely on consistent damage so you really need to go for the best shots which are from above the enemy plane. For example if you are chasing someone and they do a flat horizontal turn, you see a very large cross-section and that is the best time to pump rounds in. It's even better if they pull directly up. I think it is okay for the P-51 and other US fighters. They have a lot of ammo to spare anyway. It is problematic for the F8F-1 though.

that is not realistic then is it?

[WickedestCard]

Personally, never had a problem with the US .50 cals. If you have API-T belts use those and light literally everything on fire. While the 6+ MGs are perfectly able to rip wings or destroy engines, they reliably set things on fire. And being on fire is a death sentence for any fighter.

[Tankfriend]

Originally posted by WickedestCard:

And being on fire is a death sentence for any fighter.

Not necessarily. Unless it's a fire in the fuel tanks, there's a decent chance to put it out before it does too much damage by cutting throttle to 0% and making a steep dive.

[Der Lachende Mann]

If M-20 API-T is available, that's the best ammor for .50. The problem with .50 is that they are usually wing mounted, convergence range is much more important than for nose mounted weapons.

If the distance is too much off from what you set your convergence to, you might be hitting with 1 or 2 mg instead of the 6-8 you usually have mounted.

Also cal .50 is a good weapon to take out up to medium tanks and light pillboxes.