PDA

View Full Version : If... patch 4.0 fixes Mg 151 ammo loadout



mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 05:59 AM
If you do a test in QMB to test the power of the Mg151 properly loaded it is scary. Take a Bf 109 G2 load out with gondolas and set up four P47 D10's Average Skill (this is so you can land hits under test circumstances)and shoot only with the wing Mg 151's. Then take the same setup and fly in a Spit VIII using only Hispannos. The Mg151 (with minengeschloss) can sever Jugs fuselages in half with only a few hits. It is even marginally more effective than the Hispanno!

Now imagine the Fw 190 armed with up to 4x these weapons it will be so much more formidable than it is now. If in the current ammo loadout situation the Fw heads most servers kill to death ratio charts imagine what it will be like with effective non Mk 108/ Mg FF gun load out. As it stands I find the Mg 151 to be an accurate weapon, my gunnery has become tailored to it specifically. I can achieve plenty kills of with guns that are below par - most Fw fliers especially those who prefer the D9 have become accustomed to this.

If the developers correct the ammo loadout error for the Mg151 the Red fliers be they Mustang ,Spitfire or more importantly P47 or Concrete La 3/5/7 jockeys they will not know what has hit them. This unfortunately makes me very pessimistic. Gun charts that report the strength of varoius WW2 cannons and machine guns and aircraft that carry them show that the Fw 190 had effectively twice the chemical fire power of the P47 armed with 8 x .50's


This is why I think they will not change the Mg151 loadout in the new patch. In WW2 German pilots faced nummercially superior opponents. For the last two years of the war their opponents AVERAGE skill level was superior. This was offset in part by Experten, the fact that tactical supremacy was often achieved though strategic supremacy never was and the fact that Luftwaffe planes generally carried more firepower than their enemies. What I mean specifically is that (if you hit a plane) a 1 or a 1/2 sec burst from a plane with cannons is much more effective than a similar burst using machineguns. This factor is multiplied when you consider the Bf 109 latterly carried centrally mounted weapons and the Fw carried four cannons( in normal air to air loadout). When we fly online we will never recreate the strategic circumstances.

If the Mg151 was given proper ammo load out Blue side would have planes with no performance hit and with very destructive weapons. This would alter the balance of online play so that it favours Blues even more. So for the sake of a level playing field ( even if it means the most important German cannon of WW2 is hamstrung and inaccurately modeled ) I think patch 4.0 will bring great things but not a realistic ammo component for the Mg151 when installed in anything other than underwing gondolas on one type of plane ...

Id love to be proved wrong but I think im safe to say thats unlikely to happen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Boemher

Cpt_Rio
04-13-2005, 06:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
This would alter the balance of online play so that it favours Blues even more. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You kidding right?? LOL

Good one man!!! ROFLMAO!!!

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 06:44 AM
You dont? dont suppose you had your *** handed to you by all those Fw and Bf 109 jocks then? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Badsight.
04-13-2005, 06:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
As it stands I find the Mg 151 to be an accurate weapon, my gunnery has become tailored to it specifically. I can achieve plenty kills of with guns that are below par - most Fw fliers especially those who prefer the D9 have become accustomed to this.

If the developers correct the ammo loadout error for the Mg151 the Red fliers be they Mustang ,Spitfire or more importantly P47 or Concrete La 3/5/7 jockeys they will not know what has hit them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>every single kill you ever made using non-MG shell MG151s should have been eaiser than it is now

you had to make more hits than is necessary to make all those kills due to the MG shells being left out of the ammo load

fly a A4 & then fly a A8 (MG151) there is the amazing difference your trying to get across , its noticable , but hardly night & day

Badsight.
04-13-2005, 06:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
If the developers correct the ammo loadout error for the Mg151 the Red fliers be they Mustang ,Spitfire or more importantly P47 or Concrete La 3/5/7 jockeys they will not know what has hit them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>what will hit them will be historical accuracy , instead of the weaker than RL german 20mm that is in the Bf109 & Doras & 190A5+ right now

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 06:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
As it stands I find the Mg 151 to be an accurate weapon, my gunnery has become tailored to it specifically. I can achieve plenty kills of with guns that are below par - most Fw fliers especially those who prefer the D9 have become accustomed to this.

If the developers correct the ammo loadout error for the Mg151 the Red fliers be they Mustang ,Spitfire or more importantly P47 or Concrete La 3/5/7 jockeys they will not know what has hit them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>every single kill you ever made using non-MG shell MG151s should have been eaiser than it is now

you had to make more hits than is necessary to make all those kills due to the MG shells being left out of the ammo load

fly a A4 & then fly a A8 (MG151) there is the amazing difference your trying to get across , its noticable , but hardly night & day <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you to a point. The A4 Mg FF's are very destructive, the only problem is that they have a low ROF , poorer velocity and the Fw A4 only carriers 80 rounds per gun ? Imagine how it should be with 250 rpg inboard and 110 rpg out board of a much more effctive, accurate and destructive weapon.

Also all those planes you should have killed on the first past only to have mortally wounded them for some 108 armed plane to blow them up would have been taken care of initially.

Hristos
04-13-2005, 07:06 AM
MG rounds missing from MG151/20 loadouts is, IMHO, the greatest gameplay affecting bug at the moment.

But let's wait and see. Oleg has been informed and the bug has been acknowledged by him. I trust him, by his previous record.

All this make it top priority fix for the new patch. And personally, I am 90% sure 4.0 will fix the MG151/20. This is no Fw 190 bar, but a relatively easy fix to do. And if it doesn't get fixed, we still have other games. Until BoB http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 07:27 AM
Hi Hristos I remember the thread about the Loadout and the campaign to get it sorted. I also remebered asking Ivan to forward a pic of the F4 loadout to Oleg which showed the Mg shells. I dont have every day access to UBI forum so I dont know the outcome of that. I assumed that Olegs statement of ' Wait till BOB, as we cannot alter ammo loadouts' still stood.

Has Oleg hinted more recently that he would infact maybe change it?

also great stats , who got you? was it a ram or something like that? On UKD there is a player who reached 104 kills until he died. check out link

http://www.battle-fields.com/stats.php

and enter WVR in the name search bar

Hristos
04-13-2005, 07:47 AM
Oleg stated that you cannot have custom loadouts in PF/FB, not that he won't change MG151/20 loadout.

As for stats, I lost my wing due to overspeed in a high speed dive after being chased by Schlumi. I guess a week of pausing got me a little rusty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 07:56 AM
What concerned me was that Oleg specifically said the the Minengeschloss loadout was not commonly used and that the current ammo loadout was the one that was historically accurate. Then asked us to prove otherwise. Which I believe was done by posting photos which clearly showed the shells in an F4.

Schlumberger is a fellow Fw affectianado and a good pilot too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
04-13-2005, 07:57 AM
I think we've been told on good authority that they have been fixed. I hope so. Thats good news for all. Historical accuracy and such.

The FW190 WAS a killer with its 4 20mm cannons. Its what was always talked about when it is mentioned. One of the first aircraft to carry such a devastating loadout. So I'm looking forward to seeing how it effects things. Probably not by a large margin really...they still have to get to a firing position and its not any worse than having the MK108 equipped birds around so ultimately the situation is the same. Just a bit better http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

jurinko
04-13-2005, 08:04 AM
http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=127;t=001378

http://www.scitech.sk/~jurinko/mauser-ammo.JPG

Oleg got enough information about the ammo composition.
Bored to see planes takin 20 hits from MG151 and still flying.
Allied guys, train the diving away.

tigertalon
04-13-2005, 08:09 AM
Hi roland!

Well, we may be experiencing lack of common interests. You probably want balanced team play. I want historical accuracy...

And numbers for ammo are: MgFF on A4: 60rpg (this weapon was drum-fed, and drums were with 45 or 60 rounds).

inner 151/20: 250 rpg
outer 151/20: 125 rpg

On Fw190D and Ta152 there were sometimes less ammo carried, 175 or 200 rpg for Mg151...

German Mg151/20 was harder weapon to hit with, because of big relative difference between muzzle velocity of different kind of shells, but taked less hits to do same level of damage, compared to ShVAK, Hispano and Oerlikon.

I am sure FrankyBoy would be glad to give you more accurate details.

What we have now is that with Fw weapons it is harder to hit and you need to hit more times. Plus Fw damage model is weird, so sometimes when Fw is running away from spit, the latter one just sprays .303 from 800 m and Fw gets a fuel leak, wing damage and 50kph speed loss!

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 08:16 AM
Hi Icefire

What will effect the sate of play significantly is that 109 pilots wont need to carry gun pods in their G2's. the F4 will be able to get i pass kills and Fw pilots wont need to opt for performance sapping 108 load out to down planes.

I look forward to chasing your P38 on the Normandy map in an Mg151 armed A8 I wont need to close to 100m to ensure a hit with the 108's and I also will be able to achieve better deflections shots rather than trying to litteraly 'land' 108 shells on their target.

For me personally it will have a huge impact. I often fly with only Mg151's loaded and my kills suffer because of the prevalence of 108 armed planes. This is a direct consequence of the current lightweight Mg151 effect. It has a two fold effect on me - 1st I have to spend more ammo and time ensuring a kill landing upwards of 20 hits on and enemy plane ( spits and Mustangs are fine but La's are a joke) 2ndly I often find that my victims are crippled after my first pass only to be downed by a Bf 109 that has spotted an easy kill.

This will no longer happen with proper ammo load out.

What it boils down to is rather than coming up with 3 - 4 firing solutions to down a plane with current Mg 151 you will only need to come up with 1 - 2 firing solutions. this will have an enormour effect on pilots like myself who dislike flying with the Mk 108 unless P38/B25/A20 require it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Boemher

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 08:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jurinko:
http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=127;t=001378

http://www.scitech.sk/~jurinko/mauser-ammo.JPG

Oleg got enough information about the ammo composition.
Bored to see planes takin 20 hits from MG151 and still flying.
Allied guys, train the diving away. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Jurinko this is exactly the pic I was reffering to when I asked Ivan if Olegs team was confused as to whether or not the Minengeschloss round was carried in early war (F4) fighters.


I did not hear if Oleg's team acknowledged the coding issue and say that they would rectify it.
Boemher

VW-IceFire
04-13-2005, 08:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Hi Icefire

What will effect the sate of play significantly is that 109 pilots wont need to carry gun pods in their G2's. the F4 will be able to get i pass kills and Fw pilots wont need to opt for performance sapping 108 load out to down planes.

I look forward to chasing your P38 on the Normandy map in an Mg151 armed A8 I wont need to close to 100m to ensure a hit with the 108's and I also will be able to achieve better deflections shots rather than trying to litteraly 'land' 108 shells on their target.

For me personally it will have a huge impact. I often fly with only Mg151's loaded and my kills suffer because of the prevalence of 108 armed planes. This is a direct consequence of the current lightweight Mg151 effect. It has a two fold effect on me - 1st I have to spend more ammo and time ensuring a kill landing upwards of 20 hits on and enemy plane ( spits and Mustangs are fine but La's are a joke) 2ndly I often find that my victims are crippled after my first pass only to be downed by a Bf 109 that has spotted an easy kill.

This will no longer happen with proper ammo load out.

What it boils down to is rather than coming up with 3 - 4 firing solutions to down a plane with current Mg 151 you will only need to come up with 1 - 2 firing solutions. this will have an enormour effect on pilots like myself who dislike flying with the Mk 108 unless P38/B25/A20 require it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Boemher <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I look forward to it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But I don't think it'll have a huge effect overall balance wise. I've seen you fly, I know you can get on target and down the plane...what will be different is that you'll be less exposed to a counter attack. The guy you were shooting at is going to go down no matter what...its just you might be a little safer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

P-38s are bullet magnets anyways, everyone wants a piece of a twin engined plane when they see one. I should just fly drag and bag http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 08:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hi roland!

Well, we may be experiencing lack of common interests. You probably want balanced team play. I want historical accuracy...

Thanks for the correct ammo info, after flying with the Mg151 so long I find it easy to hit with it. I find the hispanno too accurate ! Im always over correcting for non existant shell drop.

And numbers for ammo are: MgFF on A4: 60rpg (this weapon was drum-fed, and drums were with 45 or 60 rounds).

inner 151/20: 250 rpg
outer 151/20: 125 rpg

On Fw190D and Ta152 there were sometimes less ammo carried, 175 or 200 rpg for Mg151...

German Mg151/20 was harder weapon to hit with, because of big relative difference between muzzle velocity of different kind of shells, but taked less hits to do same level of damage, compared to ShVAK, Hispano and Oerlikon.

I am sure FrankyBoy would be glad to give you more accurate details.

What we have now is that with Fw weapons it is harder to hit and you need to hit more times. Plus Fw damage model is weird, so sometimes when Fw is running away from spit, the latter one just sprays .303 from 800 m and Fw gets a fuel leak, wing damage and 50kph speed loss! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi TigerTalon!

I would love the Mg151 to be historic but my pessimissim stems from the fact that the Mg151 was an awsome Weapon - try out the test with the 109 G2 vs P47. I really do beleive it will alter play if it is implemented correctly.

Remember a couple of nights ago on UKD Winter map you in A8 and me in A6 dogfighting those La 5FN's ? the only reason I didnt take the A8 is because I feel it is like flying a brick compared to a La5 FN at low level.

rgr

Boemher

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Hi Icefire

What will effect the sate of play significantly is that 109 pilots wont need to carry gun pods in their G2's. the F4 will be able to get i pass kills and Fw pilots wont need to opt for performance sapping 108 load out to down planes.

I look forward to chasing your P38 on the Normandy map in an Mg151 armed A8 I wont need to close to 100m to ensure a hit with the 108's and I also will be able to achieve better deflections shots rather than trying to litteraly 'land' 108 shells on their target.

For me personally it will have a huge impact. I often fly with only Mg151's loaded and my kills suffer because of the prevalence of 108 armed planes. This is a direct consequence of the current lightweight Mg151 effect. It has a two fold effect on me - 1st I have to spend more ammo and time ensuring a kill landing upwards of 20 hits on and enemy plane ( spits and Mustangs are fine but La's are a joke) 2ndly I often find that my victims are crippled after my first pass only to be downed by a Bf 109 that has spotted an easy kill.

This will no longer happen with proper ammo load out.

What it boils down to is rather than coming up with 3 - 4 firing solutions to down a plane with current Mg 151 you will only need to come up with 1 - 2 firing solutions. this will have an enormour effect on pilots like myself who dislike flying with the Mk 108 unless P38/B25/A20 require it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Boemher <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I look forward to it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But I don't think it'll have a huge effect overall balance wise. I've seen you fly, I know you can get on target and down the plane...what will be different is that you'll be less exposed to a counter attack. The guy you were shooting at is going to go down no matter what...its just you might be a little safer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

P-38s are bullet magnets anyways, everyone wants a piece of a twin engined plane when they see one. I should just fly drag and bag http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wish you'd jump ship sometimes and fly Blue ! I like teaming up with you. The P38 is a great plane ive been suckered on that map by P38's dropping bombs and ive caught the blast. It would be awesome to fly a pacific map with the P38 It was so effective in that theatre.

I feel like im opting out flying with 108's because it doesnt require as much skill imo that other weapons but it is offset by its impact in plane performance and ammo restrictions.

Im thinking about a few new maps for UKD I've no map building experience but Im sure that there are lots of hints and some good advice out there. Only prob is it needs a Torp carrying plane - I would like to model the Channel Run where the Scharnorst and Gneisenau made the break from Brest running the gauntlet of the RN and the RAF in broad daylight. We could have Beau's carrying torps ( slightly different from Fleet Air Arm Swordfishes) and some great Fw A4 and Spit Vb matchups.

rgr

Boemher

karost
04-13-2005, 08:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hi roland!

Well, we may be experiencing lack of common interests. You probably want balanced team play. I want historical accuracy...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is a major difference

after (if)151/20 was fixed may be DF(history)Server will have a (new) history rule to lock a number of P-51+P-47 = 100 planes and 109G,K + 190D9 = 30 planes ... seem look close to a historical balance ...?


what do you think about my crezy idea ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

S~

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 09:22 AM
Id like to fly uneven odds it would be very rewarding http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But according to some posts the Luftwaffe actually achieved tactial superiority in numbers concentrating lots of planes in one particular place where as the RAF and USAF were more spread out. Although this info is often posted when people ask how the Luftwaffe achieved so many kills ect

So in a way all we are doing when we fly online is constantly replaying those instances where the Luftwaffe was concentrated in one place.

If you fly as a lone wolf you get the scenario of 4 or 5 vs one quite often.

crazyivan1970
04-13-2005, 10:21 AM
Let`s stick to IF part http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hydra444
04-13-2005, 10:25 AM
All this whining about the MG151 is gettin abit old.I haven't ever had any probs taking people down in whenever I hop in an F4.

As far as I can tell,there is no bug.This is just some silly attempt by the Luftwhiners to try to stack the deck in their favor.But thats alright,they need all the help they can get considering all the time the spend filing their silly charts.

I can tell you all how to take people down with the 151,easy....Aim! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Atzebrueck
04-13-2005, 10:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hydra444:
All this whining about the MG151 is gettin abit old.I haven't ever had any probs taking people down in whenever I hop in an F4.

As far as I can tell,there is no bug.This is just some silly attempt by the Luftwhiners to try to stack the deck in their favor.But thats alright,they need all the help they can get considering all the time the spend filing their silly charts.

I can tell you all how to take people down with the 151,easy....Aim! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hohoho

tigertalon
04-13-2005, 10:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Hi TigerTalon!

I would love the Mg151 to be historic but my pessimissim stems from the fact that the Mg151 was an awsome Weapon - try out the test with the 109 G2 vs P47. I really do beleive it will alter play if it is implemented correctly.

Remember a couple of nights ago on UKD Winter map you in A8 and me in A6 dogfighting those La 5FN's ? the only reason I didnt take the A8 is because I feel it is like flying a brick compared to a La5 FN at low level.

rgr

Boemher <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi m8!

Agree with you... Mg151/20 gunpods are devastating. I tested it to death and reported this "bug" or "incacuracy" to Oleg. There was whining about Mg151/20 before. And maybe Oleg just increased power of MG shell a bit - not knowing that those shells are only in gunpods!!! So, now maybe he will downrate them...

He he, I was never using Mk108 (ok, only when hunting bombers), but now until Mg151 gets fixed, I don't realy mind if I am called "30mm noob".

Well, A8 seems to be faster... easier to outrun spits and las...

Looking forward to form devastating Fw team on UKD soon again! S!

mynameisroland
04-13-2005, 03:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hydra444:
All this whining about the MG151 is gettin abit old.I haven't ever had any probs taking people down in whenever I hop in an F4.

As far as I can tell,there is no bug.This is just some silly attempt by the Luftwhiners to try to stack the deck in their favor.But thats alright,they need all the help they can get considering all the time the spend filing their silly charts.

I can tell you all how to take people down with the 151,easy....Aim! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Stop spamming and do the test i outlined then come back and post. Only a Red Whiner would even contemplate such heresey. Also as i posted I can take down planes with Mg 151 too that was never the issue.

NorrisMcWhirter
04-13-2005, 03:48 PM
We can only hope, Roland. I DO hope it is fixed as it might just change my stance on purchasing BoB.

Cheers,
norris

Fehler
04-13-2005, 05:40 PM
Fix the 151's LOL

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Mine%20Rounds.jpg

http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Mine%20Rounds%202.jpg

Sure....

carguy_
04-13-2005, 05:55 PM
We do not aim for something like "game balance".We aim for historical accuracy.And yes,current single Me109 MG151/20 ammobelt is historical...as long as you shoot at Sturmoviks.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Atomic_Marten
04-13-2005, 06:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hydra444:
All this whining about the MG151 is gettin abit old.I haven't ever had any probs taking people down in whenever I hop in an F4.

As far as I can tell,there is no bug.This is just some silly attempt by the Luftwhiners to try to stack the deck in their favor.But thats alright,they need all the help they can get considering all the time the spend filing their silly charts.

I can tell you all how to take people down with the 151,easy....Aim! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree with you. I'm playing DE fighter Crimea campaign *offlin* and currently I'm on G2 (same armament as F4). I have shot down 3 LaGG3S4s (mostly due to fact that the poor AI guys didn't evade at all -- probably rookie level) in one mission and I have some ammo left. *BUT* doing that online.. ?

Well try. If you shot down even one LaGG3 (I mean shot it down in term that you saw off wing, engine fire him or some kind of damage that will directly lead LA3 to earth). Most of my online F4 kills (versus LAGG3) are due to LaGG3 crash in attampt to shake me off his tail.

One online combat occasion just crossed my mind. I was in F4 and dogfighting LaGG3S29, he coulnt shake me at tree- top level, and he execute *sharp climb up*, at distance 270-300m from me. Believe me, there is almost no spot where I didn't hit him with both MG and CN.(yellow baloons of explosion were all over his nose section wings and canopy section). No smoke (unsure about fuel leak tho)... Guy in LaGG just dived after that and buzzed by me. I lost him after that. But he didnt crashed.

So, if I hit him with MGFFs, Hispanos or ShVaks he would most probably disintegrate.

But, with gondollas I can saw off wing of enemy a/c in no time. There is no brains in conclusion why almost every G2 player uses them.
Personally I really dislike gondollas and I'm using them only on G2 out of Bf109 series.

So what is conclusion? There are some visible difference between gondola MG151 and prop.hub 151.

p1ngu666
04-13-2005, 09:42 PM
im hoping they dont have the mg way too powerful...

Badsight.
04-13-2005, 11:14 PM
the MG rounds didnt have equal pingu in hit power

mynameisroland
04-14-2005, 05:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
im hoping they dont have the mg way too powerful... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would they need to ? Correctly loaded out the Mg151 is a fearsome beast with rounds that can tear planes in half. Do the test of firing gondola mounted Mg151's at some Jugs.
I'll be perfectly happy if the gun is historic Luftwhiners dont need a miracle gun we've got the 108 already I just want a 20mm cannon that does more than scratch the paint of enemy fighters.

p1ngu666
04-14-2005, 07:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
im hoping they dont have the mg way too powerful... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would they need to ? Correctly loaded out the Mg151 is a fearsome beast with rounds that can tear planes in half. Do the test of firing gondola mounted Mg151's at some Jugs.
I'll be perfectly happy if the gun is historic Luftwhiners dont need a miracle gun we've got the 108 already I just want a 20mm cannon that does more than scratch the paint of enemy fighters. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep i agree with u, i just dont want them to overcorrect and we end up with mininuke mg151 cannons http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

mynameisroland
04-14-2005, 07:47 AM
yep i agree with u, i just dont want them to overcorrect and we end up with mininuke mg151 cannons http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif[/QUOTE]

Glad we agree ! If you have a Mk 108 as a gauge the Mg151 minengeschloss round is not as destructive , nowhere near so.

But it is by far the most explosive 20mm round to see service and add that to the fact that it is more accurate than the Mk 108 and that the Fw can carry 4 x these guns then it will seem like a mini nuke has hit your plane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif All i want to see is a burst of Mg151's doing the appropriate damage. If I wanted a 1 hit 1 kill gun as I said Id loadup 108's all the time.

BBB_Hyperion
04-14-2005, 09:00 AM
The MX round had 25g tnt thats the most explosive round i can think of now for 20 mm .) That was archived with compressing the tnt .

NorrisMcWhirter
04-14-2005, 10:59 AM
Hi,

As I've said in ORR, I don't think any LW fliers want an overmodelled 151/20 that will be laughable - they just want something historical.

And, while it can be argued that the current loadout _is_ historically correct, it's doesn't represent a common loadout.

If the new 151/20 is able to down fighter aircraft with approximately 5 hits to vital areas then that would bring it in line with other 20mm cannons in the game and that would be more than acceptable.

I'd say that LW fliers would like to get some credibility back from _having_ to fly with 108s just to down aircraft reliably. I don't like to have to do that and I know others don't either - it makes a mockery of history.

Cheers,
Norris

Jetbuff
04-14-2005, 12:41 PM
Achieving game balance is the responsibility of scenario designers. The game's only objectives should be to:

(a) model all game objects as historically as possible within the constraints of current technology

(b) provide the necessary tools to create balanced scenarios

Atomic_Marten
04-14-2005, 02:58 PM
Personally I would prefer MG151 over MK108, for just one reason -- I have more cannon ammo..

If MG151 ammo happen to be destructive like Hispano 20mm cannon ammo, I bet that good percent of the players that choose G6's would also choose to fly with default ammo loadout, instead of MK108. Untill then..

p1ngu666
04-14-2005, 03:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Hi,

As I've said in ORR, I don't think any LW fliers want an overmodelled 151/20 that will be laughable - they just want something historical.

And, while it can be argued that the current loadout _is_ historically correct, it's doesn't represent a common loadout.

If the new 151/20 is able to down fighter aircraft with approximately 5 hits to vital areas then that would bring it in line with other 20mm cannons in the game and that would be more than acceptable.

I'd say that LW fliers would like to get some credibility back from _having_ to fly with 108s just to down aircraft reliably. I don't like to have to do that and I know others don't either - it makes a mockery of history.

Cheers,
Norris <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

naw, there are those who want "their" side tobe uber http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Badsight.
04-14-2005, 11:05 PM
yea but there just Tards

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>And, while it can be argued that the current loadout _is_ historically correct, it's doesn't represent a common loadout. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>noo thats not totally correct , what we have in FB was never used as a defined load-out

the NOSE Cannon always had MG rounds , it was the GUNPODS that recieved the ammo load that we have in the MG151 Nose mount now , as in HE-AP but no MG . BUT ! in FB its the Gunpods that are getting the MG rounds & the Nose mounts dont ever

so there hass been some confusion/mix-up somewhere along the coding process