The AA guns are maybe unintentionally nerfed, and here's how

Suggestions
1

2cm Flakvierling 38 IRL has four magazines, 20 rounds each, total of 80. In-game, it only has a mag of 10, for 40 shots. Each shot fires all four guns. I did a lot of digging and found a report of a US technical manual reporting that the max traverse rate of the standard Flakvierling mount to be about 22.5 degrees per full handwheel crank, with 13 pounds of weight on the crank. I’m not sure how to properly calculate the traverse in-game but I would guess it to be 8-12 degrees per second.

To make the mount viable for AA, it needs it’s proper statistics so it can be more reactionary and effective against actual air targets, as it was designed. Plane damage models need more focus as well, I look forward to seeing both fixed as well as alternative measures such as AA tanks implemented!

7 Likes
2

If anybody wants to take a look, here’s the US technical manual. TM E 9-9228 Technical Manual Enemy (German) 2CM Flakvierling 38 (German 20-MM Antiaircraft Gun, Four-Barreled Mount) 1943 : United States. War Department : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The ‘fine’ traverse rate is 7.5 degrees, which is smooth, un-interrupted turning of the mount. The listed 22.5 degrees is ‘coarse’, as in the traverse is pitched with the exertion of applying the crank. The difference is ‘fine’ traverse allows better leading/targetting of aircraft, and ‘coarse’ does not.

So the 22.5 would be if you had to rapidly re-direct the guns to another angle, and 7.5 would be for actual engagement. Hence, the 8 degrees in-game is a absolute nerf because most people would want the coarse traverse to re-orient the guns to a plane, before actually engaging.

4 Likes
3

Yep - all been reported before :confused:

4

the reason behind to the nerf of the AA,

is because it would make an incredible gun nest more than the actual mg.

which somewhat already happens since everyone can build them, but as you can see, despite the fact of not being very practical against planes, people still use them against infantry.

if you buff them, this would not solve the issue and people would still use them against infantry but better.

5

thought the mg nerf was exactly what you ppl asked for ?

Pretty sure its for engi squad only. I might be wrong havent played for a while.
I highly doubt the AA’s would be such gamebreaker as current planes are and elevation limitations can be implemented.

Pretty sure they were realisticly used against infantry as well. Not sure why such realistic addition would be bad.

6

so there is the question, how do we make MG nests better vs infantry than flak guns— and all of that without nerfing the AA gun so it doesnt lose power against aircraft?

7

no,

i’m not talking about the machinegun it self, but the mg nest from engys type 2.

yes, fortunately, unlikely CAT and CBT, only the enginners from the engy squads are able to build those emplacement.

but AA would be used much more than they already are against infantry if buffed as suggested above.

just like AA trucks that are present.

why do you think they are not out yet?

because those would be incredible good at shredding infantry and used way more for that role instead of the AA one inteded to do so.

because guess what.
no one wants getting wiped out harder than PPKS over berlins with milk trucks.

no offence to devs either, but they still haven’t fixed vehicles hitboxes.

as such, i bloody dare you to kill someone on driving around in a kubelwagen with a bolt action rifle.

you will somehow and mostlikely shoot all angles of the car when you are in reality trying to kill the driver.
but it cannot be done if you don’t have a smg and a bit of luck.

so yeah, hitboxes would be the first issue.
germans don’t have milk trucks.
nor the americans.

meaning that those would be closed top. good luck with that if you are not close enough.

we saw the “results” with artillery.

it had to be nerfed because it was no fun whatsoever. spammed to an extent, and pretty much gamebreaking if you ask anyone.

outside the whiner that loved to make cheese kills behind some unreachable corner.

1 Like
8

So finally engy would have something actually useful.

Limit the elevation, majority of problems solved. Remove the shield from AA’s technically all problems solved.

If I had to guess id say it has something to do with incapable devs.

Still worth it as theres absolutely nothing to stop the sealclubber planes, which currently and most likely in future will still remain the sealclubbers with most kills at the end of game.

tbh im still more annoyed by nuclear armed planes than any milk truck or kubelwagen.

Artillery was annoying, but no where near comparable to nuke planes.
And yet the planes remains in the game.

Minor annoyance by AA shredding infantry < Finally having something to actually fight against the gamebreaking planes.

1 Like
9

Well I’ma do it again.

10

maybe a simple solution for now could be to prevent flak and AT guns from being build indoors. That should already fix 80% of the cheesing.

11

that is pretty much debatable.

no.
this would not solve the issue.

if planes are flying towards you at low attitude ( which the majority does ).
you ain’t gonna do much, since you can’t do anything at all in that situation if your gun is fixed.

… or perhaps devs that actually somewhat care about balance?

welllllll
to the very least, devs stated that they are working on surfaces against bombs, laying down = receiving less damage and many others factors can change weather you are inside or outside, how close you are to the bomb, and many other aspects.

so, they are working on.

i don’t know. every 30 seconds with multiple artillery on a point TO the point where you weren’t be able to do much,

perhaps.

in my personal opinion, as a pilot as well,
i think that the " right fix " to apply would be 3 simple changes:

1st, Move Bomber spawns far from where they currently are.
allowing for engineers and fighters to prevent the first bomb run

2nd, Move refiller point far away as well, or rework them complealty. ( perhaps where you have to land. but i see that a bit harder )

and last but not least,
3rd, increase fighter experience
so that many people will consider the option and be rewarded of actually doing their job.

but, as i said, this is my personal opinion. and i have yet to " test " that out or even consider the draw back.

1 Like
12

Here, a 360* takes 20 seconds.

https://streamable.com/fquh2u

360*/20s = 18°/s

But let’s be generous and say 19 seconds

360*/19s = 18.9*/s

1 Like
13

Hmm. If it really is 18-19 degrees/s, that’s much better than what I guessed. Still, in-game that feels horrendously slow. As a reactionary weapon it’s abysmal, I would much rather have a shoulder-assisted tripod gun than a hand-cranked mount. Maybe the issue is really just the planes. Not only is there no radar or early-detection equipment, but they spawn close enough to start a strafe anyways.

14

these arent fair accusations. im not a dev or anything, but i kno thers a lot of stress in any job, but i woudlt doubt it if thers more on game development, esp when working on a new game of this nature.

15

I feel the same and was surprised.

At 22.5°/s that’s a full rotation in 16 seconds. 2-3 seconds less than ingame. Not that much but still some precious seconds during a fight.

I think the really short range of the AA and the planes always attacking really close to the ground at high speed makes the AA traverse speed to look like so much worse

2 Likes
16

exept, mine isn’t an accusation in the first place?

17

I think the really short range of the AA and the planes always attacking really close to the ground at high speed makes the AA traverse speed to look like so much worse

Yeah, I absolutely agree on that. Every second matters when planes spawn close enough to start a strafe immediately. Thanks for calculating the in-game traverse BTW, that’s awesome.

One thing I don’t understand is why people are debating AA-infantry balance when the primary issue on-hand is everything-plane balance. AA is effective against infantry, as it should be; a 20mm HE, or even AP shell, hitting a full-grown man is gunna %$#@ up his day. Just as a 500lb bomb dropping around the corner of a wooden building from you is still gunna blow you to bits. The difference between both is that currently the AA is more effective as anti-infantry than anti-plane, and planes currently have no viable counter; even using a fighter is a 50/50 chance you’ll take a bomber down before you run out of ammo. This isn’t ‘perspective’, it’s the actual in-game experience. We want AA buffed to actually be FUNCTIONAL against planes. That is the reason why you see them being used more for anti-infantry than the actual role, anti-air, because one is more effective and viable than the other, and that is the problem. Increasing the traverse rate, at least, would lessen the usage for anti-infantry by increasing the usage for anti-air.

18

it’s the same reasons why there are no tigers over normandy, or t34s/kv1/2s in moscow.
( a bit in a different manner but )
balance.

you apparently are not aware of the people complaining about AA being used on infantry.
i can somewhat understand and see that.

problem is,

if people didn’t used them before for airplanes due to their state, i don’t think it will actually make people use them with any newer tweaks.

as i said, people used them against infantry.
it would become more convenient and way effective against infantry.
meaning that it will be over used more in that role because it’s more effective, and easier.

that’s the point.

and to the very least, currently, AA cannot shread that quickly Soldiers ( unless in hallways or tight areas ) due to their low rotation speed, low ammo capacity, low rate of fire and slow reload.

so once again, it’s needless to add potential " raper " for infantry. there are already many things that " hurts " the infantry gameplay. which it’s somewhat the main feature of this game a skill based infantry shooter with elements of vehicles. let’s not forget that.

as such, the AA can be used but the problem stands in airplane models. where they can sock up entire clips without taking damage.

yes, they can be effective. but that’s not what they are supposed to.

and yes, in real life there are many records of AA stations shooting on infantry but that’s not the point.

i guess you nailed the point.

but increasing traverse rate would make easier the anti infantry capabilities of the gun it self.

because currently, there’s always a chance to shoot the member that it’s using the gun and it’s pointing at you ( unless weird hitboxes stops your bullets ).

but as i keep repeating, it wouldn’t benefict the actual gameplay.

more cheesy stuff than there are currently.

1 Like
19

No it isnt, current engineer squad is literally waste of space.

I highly doubt they fly amongst infantry on the ground which was the point of minor elevation limitation.
And even if they did we can always remove the shield from AA guns so they wont be effective against infantry, rather makes you just sitting target.

Clearly, thats why the LMG’s were nerfed before they were even fixed and we still have the same plane issue that has been around as long as the game has.

Yeah, while “working” on them they could remove the issue from the game and bring it back once things works as intended.

I walked thru those artillerys and at worst case 1-2 of my squad died. Thats how ineffective they were at killing anything.
Sure it made life complete misery but it was same on both sides.
So no they definitely aint comparable to nuclear planes.

So delay the nuclears 15-30seconds and then continue same shit that everyone has been asking to be entirely removed or nerfed?
So instead of actually fixing anything just delay the broken thing ?

Again, delay the broken thing rather than fix the issue.

And the ground would still remain without AA or actually anything that could counter the plane spam from the ground.
So yet again absolutely no fix of anykind to actual problem.

20

i could stay here telling you otherwise…

but it’s really not.

have you ever flied airplanes in enlisted or war thunder?

doesn’t seems you quite understand how they work.

i mean, to be somewhat an hard target for perfect strife runs, or avoid eye contact, you usually stay on low ground. which, to explain with a simple picture:

Dead ZOne
Dead ZOne1920×1080 171 KB

( i guess i could have done something better, but eh )
the issue would be as you can clearly see, it’s somewhat similar to have a building in front. where it does not allow you to aim lower ( which the tweaks you are speaking of, would do )

and pilots, quite often fly low to avoid " troubles ". it’s a useful technique that is often used by pilots.

by doing so, you would limit the AA to shoot Infantry which it’s good. but on the other hand, it ain’t gonna deal with the things that is supposed to.

the airplane can shoot the AA before that last can return fire. sometimes, a strife if accurate can destroy the gun it self.

normandy as represented above it’s the example of where and why the elevation limitation is an issue.

( more for the germans since they are on the high ground ). but the same could be said about monastery over moscow. or even berlin since the only effective emplacements are on cliffs or even roofs.

the lmg fix it’s a short term solution for that problem.
and quite frankly, it’s not even a solution or fix, but to the very least, adressed the issue where everyone was super accurate while moving.

so i guess it worked.

agreed

yes, moving those bombers quite far, it would actually delay alot more. so if people spotted ( which it’s hard to miss ) a bomber, they can deal with it with an airplane, or build AA defences to deal with in time.

which currently, you cannot even prevent the first bomb run. so, it’s more of a solution for the current problem.

how so?.

i don’t think there are any issues to fix. rather, deal. and adjust.

because as far as i can tell, the only " broken " things are explosives above the 250kg/lb.
( which as they said, they are working on ).

smart solution is to actually delay and move further back in order to let breath.

that’s why CAS support is often used smartly and precisely rather than every minuts. ( yes, in real life it would be different. but we are talking about a game. so balance must be considered ).

i don’t think so.

the current AA is quite capable of dealing with Planes. not faster one though.
but that’s why it’s fighter’s role, innit?.

but, the AA can be replaced with something else if that is the problem.