Gun Question...

[MindWerks]

So I unlocked the .50x2 Mk3 however it does a lot less dmg then the .303x4 Mk4 it might replace. Besides weight is there any other advantage to the .50x2 Mk3? Like maybe a bit more range or accuracy? I'm guess it could be just a harder hitting light weight gun, but just curious if there are any potential other benifits than that.

[Kourgath223]

So first you are doing an unfair comparison, you are comparing a .303x4 to a .50x2 so obviously the favor is with the .303x4 since it has twice the guns. For a more fair comparison do a .50x2 to a .303x2 of the same Mk you should find that the .50 is lighter weight and does more damage but has less ammo per belt. In the end though the .50 becomes the best once you unlock the .50x4 Mk4 which is lighter, does more damage, and has more ammo per belt compared to the .303x4 Mk4.

[FreedomFighter]

Two guns ain't gonna be better than four. However, 303x4 is bloody heavy. Both eat up ammo almost at same rate since 303x4 use 4 rounds per salvo. 50x2 is enough for most job. You can leave 303x4 + Belt for tail turret but that is super heavy.

[Jeeves]

Honestly saying two guns ain't gonna be better than four doesn't make sense. I realize this is an arcade game but I feel guns should be better explained. Realistically speaking .50's would have far more "punch-through" than .303's.

Historically speaking there are several cases of fighters being upgraded from .303 to .50 to deal with heavy targets. In-game it would make sense to me if the .50 are better vs heavy fighters due to the heavier round. This would make sense in mid to late game with .50's vs 262's whereas "filling the sky with led" with .303 vs 163's could seem viable.

Right now the .50 seems to only be a weight-saving option. I will say this though - vs light fighters .303's with incindiary melts them. I hope .50s do more damage vs heavy fighters but tbh I'm too busy microing during missions to tell...

[Ath3lwulf]

Originally posted by Jeeves:

Honestly saying two guns ain't gonna beat four doesn't make sense. I realize this is an arcade game but I feel guns should be better explained. Realistically speaking .50's would have far more "punch-through" than .303's.

Historically speaking there are several cases of fighters being upgraded from .303 to .50 to deal with heavy targets. In-game it would make sense to me if the .50 is better vs heavy fighters due to the heavier round. This would make sense in mid to late game with .50's vs 262's whereas "filling the sky with led" with .303 vs 163's could seem viable.

Right now the .50 seems to only be a weight-saving option. I will say this though - vs light fighters .303's with incindiary melts them. I hope .50s do more damage vs heavy fighters but tbh I'm too busy microing during missions to tell...

50 cals are the best guns to get in the game, more damage peer hit is what counts in the end not the damage per second imo

the 30s only advantage is the belt size and rate of fire

[Jeeves]

Originally posted by Merlin:

50 cals are the best guns to get in the game, more damage peer hit is what counts in the end not the damage per second imo

the 30s only advantage is the belt size and rate of fire

Well I don't see your reply adding anything considering the initial question.

Yes the .50 cal SHOULD do more damage per hit and thus be a better option at least vs heavy fighters, but we don't know this, neither do we know anything about ROF. What we do know looking at in-game stats is this:

MK3 for both guns
.303x4: DPS 373, Mag size: 1200, Weight: 900
.50x4 : DPS 589, Mag size:900, Weight: 750

So all we really know is that .50 cals have more dps, less weight and less ammo. We know nothing about rate of fire and nothing about armour values or other modifiers. This game is not a sim and therefore it's hard to assume anything. Most likely gunner accuracy will be based on stats, DPS is a hard stat and there are no ROF or any resistances. In other words - what we see on the screen are just animations, not simulated hits, and all damage calculations are stats-based running in the background.

What is strange to me is that equal tier 50's are lighter than .303's. The guns should be a lot heavier with the ammo-belt possibly evening out considering that it is a thicker belt holding a larger round. I could understand dual 50's being lighter than quad .303 but 4 vs 4? It's a little strange to me.

Subjectively to me the .50's run out of ammo faster than the .303 indicating that ROF is equal. But I haven't measured this properly. I haven't unlocket the 50x4MK4 but it they have a higher ammo count, then they are pretty guaranteed the best guns in the game.

Still in a simulation setting vs fast fighters like the 163 .303s could still have been a better choice due to higher RPM and possibly better velocity making targets easier to hit...

[Dirt Merchant]

Originally posted by Jeeves:

Subjectively to me the .50's run out of ammo faster than the .303 indicating that ROF is equal. But I haven't measured this properly.

This is also the impression I'm under, that they both have the same rate of fire.

[Malidictus]

I was actually coming to ask the same thing. Do we know if the .50 cals are objectively "better" than the .303 guns of the same Tier, or are they more of a sidegrade? I know this game has a bunch of sidegrade options, such as Light vs. Standard vs. Armoured aircraft parts or the various pieces of kit for the soldiers. If the cannons are sidegrades, though, what are their intended upsides and downsides?

[Wayfare]

Originally posted by Malidictus:

I was actually coming to ask the same thing. Do we know if the .50 cals are objectively "better" than the .303 guns of the same Tier, or are they more of a sidegrade? I know this game has a bunch of sidegrade options, such as Light vs. Standard vs. Armoured aircraft parts or the various pieces of kit for the soldiers. If the cannons are sidegrades, though, what are their intended upsides and downsides?

I prefer the 50 cals until the quad 303s become available. Then it's quad 303s until the quad 50s become available. This is based on raw DPS for the top and bottom turrets, really. They're quick and easy to reload so I just want the best dakka from them.

It's different for the nose and tail guns. These nose gun gets 50s all the way, as it doesn't shoot as much and it's a pain to reload. The tail gun gets whatever the best gun available is with an ammo feed, because it fires all the time and it's an even greater pain to reload!

[Ath3lwulf]

Originally posted by Jeeves:

Originally posted by Merlin:

50 cals are the best guns to get in the game, more damage peer hit is what counts in the end not the damage per second imo

the 30s only advantage is the belt size and rate of fire

Well I don't see your reply adding anything considering the initial question.

Yes the .50 cal SHOULD do more damage per hit and thus be a better option at least vs heavy fighters, but we don't know this, neither do we know anything about ROF. What we do know looking at in-game stats is this:

MK3 for both guns
.303x4: DPS 373, Mag size: 1200, Weight: 900
.50x4 : DPS 589, Mag size:900, Weight: 750

So all we really know is that .50 cals have more dps, less weight and less ammo. We know nothing about rate of fire and nothing about armour values or other modifiers. This game is not a sim and therefore it's hard to assume anything. Most likely gunner accuracy will be based on stats, DPS is a hard stat and there are no ROF or any resistances. In other words - what we see on the screen are just animations, not simulated hits, and all damage calculations are stats-based running in the background.

What is strange to me is that equal tier 50's are lighter than .303's. The guns should be a lot heavier with the ammo-belt possibly evening out considering that it is a thicker belt holding a larger round. I could understand dual 50's being lighter than quad .303 but 4 vs 4? It's a little strange to me.

Subjectively to me the .50's run out of ammo faster than the .303 indicating that ROF is equal. But I haven't measured this properly. I haven't unlocket the 50x4MK4 but it they have a higher ammo count, then they are pretty guaranteed the best guns in the game.

Still in a simulation setting vs fast fighters like the 163 .303s could still have been a better choice due to higher RPM and possibly better velocity making targets easier to hit...

Really isnt much to add, you either want something that hits harder but reloads more often

Or

You want something that doesnt hit as hard but has more ammo.


Only reason why i prefer the 50s over the 30s is simple late stage game i need guns that can take out 3 jets in formation before they make there attack pass at me.

[Jeeves]

Originally posted by Merlin:

Really isnt much to add, you either want something that hits harder but reloads more often

Or

You want something that doesnt hit as hard but has more ammo.


Only reason why i prefer the 50s over the 30s is simple late stage game i need guns that can take out 3 jets in formation before they make there attack pass at me.

Yeah, except I think the mk4 4x.50 might even out the ammo belt size which renders .303 obsolete. AND remember the pilots corksqrew manouver is really good to avoid the 3x262 strafing run. I know it's all about what you have time to do but I found dodging that attack and then ap-spamming them to be very effective.