vehicle 50 cals such as the ones carried by m4s and Most allied open tops are doing extremely low damage compared to there engineer built counter parts. this is very frustrating in the open tops case when most engments with planes are incredibly 1 sided as the 50 cal they rely on for air defense will never save them. additionally in a anti infantry role it doesn’t have the needed power to deter infantry requiring up to three body shots from a 50 caliber bullet to kill one infantrymen
11 Likes
1 Like
50 cals used to one hit kill infantry. Main reason why I bought the Sherman Firefly despite knowing how pathetically unrealistic 17 pounders are in Enlisted.
the next to no damage on vehicles is what i hate i used to be able to scare of planes now they just eat my entire spray and kill me flying off unharmed or faling to even dent apcs with the 50s like seriously an izuz truck is unfazed by a browning machine gun
1 Like
Add a poll quickly.
3 Likes
I’ve got a good idea. Take vehicles like the M24 and Sherman for example—their commanders simply aren’t properly trained to handle those heavy machine guns anyway.
Since War Thunder has already started nerfing the ammo capacity of American heavy machine guns mounted on tanks, we might as well make it so these HMGs, which aren’t meant to be operated by the tank commander, can instead be manned by any infantry that climbs onto the rear of the vehicle.
Restore their original high damage output while cutting down their total ammo supply. Even so, they’d still have at least twice the ammo count of Soviet 14.5mm roof machine guns.
Right now, because of the damage nerfs, these slow-firing but high-damage heavy machine guns are honestly worse than Germany’s MG42 roof anti-aircraft machine guns, and that’s totally unreasonable. The Soviet M3A1 suffers from this problem too.
In reality, a single 12.7mm round can punch straight through a tree and knock it down. One bullet can blow a bowl-sized hole in a human body, and even tear a person clean in half.
But in this game, it takes three shots just to take down one soldier. Are the troops in Enlisted all superhumans with some kind of anomalous super-tough physique on Anton’s planet?
2 Likes
Hello your post is under Suggestions , which means you would need a poll, based on this new policy
Please add a poll, else this topic will be closed in 3 days
If you need the poll shortcode, you can edit your post and paste the shortcode below or alternatively use the poll builder
[poll type=regular results=always chartType=bar]
# [TITLE]
* Yes
* No
[/poll]
Happy Posting
1 Like
Please edit the post body itself, not on the replies
- the ammo box capacity was not 200 (as it is now ingame).
- M2 built by engineers do way more damage than the vehicle M2.
I don’t think this game should always strive for more realism, but in this case it seems balanced to give it realistic ammo capacity, and also give it full dmg like the HMG built by engineers ingame.
notes about ammo box capacity:
- when the mg was installed in the commander hatch, it used 50 rounds ammo box (source TM 9-731B: Medium Tank M4A2). It becomes evident when you realize the commander had to grab the ammo box below and bring it up to reload the mg. It’s a smaller can than what we see in the m4a1/2 shermans ingame.
- when the mg was installed in the back, it used (mostly) 100 /105 rounds ammo box (source TM 9-759: Tank, Medium M4A3)
I don’t have hope for a new ammo box model unless we pass it through the wt forum and wait a few years. So either we give it 50 rounds and keep the model (would be more balanced with full dmg and realistic for m4a1/2) or make it 100 (to fit the box we see - which isn’t the case rn). I would vote for 50 and full dmg but both are good.
(now let’s hope OP can make the poll)
1 Like
I would like that they revise the angles as well. I know the M2s in commander hatch could be fired ‘almost vertically’ (manual). There’s a +80º elevation number for that mount (AFV database). M2s mounted on back would also be capable of that.
I saw a video with a mounted DshK where it also could be aimed vertically, although it was on a more modern vehicle. The person was inside the hatch when aiming up. They could revise the poses. Honestly I don’t mind much about the looks, only the functionality, it already looks bad anyway.
No idea about the axis mounts but I suspect they also had better angle.
I think 50 cals are weak in planes for ground strafing!
Keep As is or change
- Yes
- No
0
voters
mods said make a new post i just finished that please go to it instead