Jump to content


Bf 110 E Rear gun MG-81 error?

MG81 110 E Rear Guner

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
12 replies to this topic

mrlomo #1 Posted 02 March 2014 - 11:48 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    07-09-2013
Maybe I am wrong on this, but I was about to upgrade the rear gun on the BF 110, the MG-15, to the dual 7.92mm MG 81Z and noticed that the damage per second drops by 15 going from 41 to 24 per second.   Since the rear gunner now has dual MGs it seems that the damage should increase so is it an Admin error or actually that effects game play?   I don't want to upgrade my read guns if they are going to do less damage.
Mr LoMo

An_Average_Jho #2 Posted 02 March 2014 - 11:50 PM

    Helvetic Polyglot

  • Alpha tester
  • 57 battles
  • 2,588
  • [WWPD] WWPD
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
The damage is 24 per second per gun. The MG81 Zwilling, since it has two guns, has 48 dps.

Everything tastes better if it tries to eat you before you eat it

I named my airplane Iosef because it kept on Stalin

 

"Quod natura non dat, Salmantica non præstat"


Aurabird #3 Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:20 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 3 battles
  • 1,116
  • Member since:
    07-23-2012

View PostAn_Average_Jho, on 03 March 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

The damage is 24 per second per gun. The MG81 Zwilling, since it has two guns, has 48 dps.

 That seems a little silly, considering this case anyway. Maybe WG should add a combined stat when the plane is equipped with such guns, to avoid confusion like this.



Angadan #4 Posted 20 May 2014 - 10:15 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014

Umm, is anyone SURE that the upgrade to MG-81Z increases your total rear gunner DPS?  The tool tip doesn't even mention there being a second gun; most tool tips of this nature do.

 

One way or the other, there's an error to correct.  Either we have misinformation in the info panel for the upgrade, or we have a weapon system that actually gets worse when you add a second machine gun of the same type.

 

Can anyone undeniably confirm that it's a typo and not an unintended nerf to the gunner?  Anyone with valid testing, or any WG staff member who checked the code and can confirm?


Edited by Angadan, 20 May 2014 - 10:16 PM.

l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

 

Go Vols!


SkywhaleExpress #5 Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:11 PM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

View PostAngadan, on 20 May 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:

Umm, is anyone SURE that the upgrade to MG-81Z increases your total rear gunner DPS?  The tool tip doesn't even mention there being a second gun; most tool tips of this nature do.

 

One way or the other, there's an error to correct.  Either we have misinformation in the info panel for the upgrade, or we have a weapon system that actually gets worse when you add a second machine gun of the same type.

 

Can anyone undeniably confirm that it's a typo and not an unintended nerf to the gunner?  Anyone with valid testing, or any WG staff member who checked the code and can confirm?

Think of it as more damage per shot , but barely any difference in damage per socnd.



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


Angadan #6 Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:42 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014
Yah, my concern is that the tool tips might be right, and it is going to actually be a 40% decrease in DPS:  the tool tip for the MG-15 says 41 DPS ... for the supposed "upgraded" MG-81Z, 24 DPS ... 41 down to 24, that's a pretty hefty reduction for an "upgrade."

Edited by Angadan, 20 May 2014 - 11:42 PM.

l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

 

Go Vols!


Nihtwaco #7 Posted 21 May 2014 - 12:16 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 862 battles
  • 649
  • [DSA] DSA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

File a support ticket on this as it was supposed to have been fixed so weapons and tools tip Matched and gave correct data per gun and for the twin mount.
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_81_machine_gun

 

A lot of errors in tools tips, Cyclic rate way off, Muzzle velocity is in meters per sec even though I have imperial units selected.

From Wiki

 

"A special twin-mount MG 81Z (the Z suffix stands for Zwilling - meaning "twin") was introduced in 1942. It paired up two of the weapons on one mount to provide even more firepower with a maximum rate of fire of 3200 rounds/minute without requiring much more space than a standard machine gun."

 

It was a nasty weapon to be shot at with. How it is rated for damage output is up to the game developers but the Tool tip and weapon rating should be consistent internally. I have already filed several Tickets on this issue in the past it is time a few more folks filed one also.

 

In real life it was a Major upgrade to aircraft mounting it. No need to change drums every three bursts more ammo carried and much higher rate of fire.

 


Edited by Nihtwaco, 21 May 2014 - 12:20 AM.


HZero #8 Posted 21 May 2014 - 06:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha tester
  • 1009 battles
  • 1,526
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I can't really speak to the game mechanics, but just for fun, here is a photo I took a few weeks ago of some surviving Zwilling mounts, currently in a display case at the Dulles site of the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum.

 

Spoiler

 


Dreaming of better days.  When this game had full matches, fiery dogfights, and hope for the future.

 

 


pyantoryng #9 Posted 21 May 2014 - 06:30 PM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2992 battles
  • 8,582
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

2x MG 81Z...the upgrade to MG 81Z makes the 110E's rear actually mean something.

 

Then again, we still have the Beaufighter's quad turret to debate about...



WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

Angadan #10 Posted 21 May 2014 - 06:36 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014

View Postpyantoryng, on 21 May 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

2x MG 81Z...the upgrade to MG 81Z makes the 110E's rear actually mean something....

 

Pyantoryng, are you saying the upgrade actually increases damage, rather than (as the tooltips seem to say) decreases it?  You can confirm it?


l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

 

Go Vols!


pyantoryng #11 Posted 21 May 2014 - 07:29 PM

    Colonel

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2992 battles
  • 8,582
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
My belief from a long time back was that the 81Z is an improvement (earlier versions would say something like 2x MG 81Z). I believed that it was the FIRST rear gun that can actually deal some damage to pursuers - the 110B's single barrel rear gun is not very satisfactory...and so does the C-6

 

From a limited testing under less-than-ideal condition recently, I observed that the MG-81Z makes 2-damage shots more often than the MG-15 can...but getting angle on a unpredictable target is not easy, and it tend to get skewed by AA fire.

 

A paper observation: The Bf 110B before it uses the single-barrel version of the MG-81, rated at 45DPS, and unupgraded uses the same MG-15 with exactly the same stats (including 41DPS), save for tier level, with the one on Bf 110E - the Bf 110C-6 also uses the MG-15 with the exact same stats. The MG-81 Z, however, is rated at 24DPS, and is now labelled as one MG-81Z, and not two (2x MG-81 Z) like in the past.

 

I'm inclined to believe that WG had not adjust the 81Z stats before molding the "Zwilling" model into a single gun, thus leaving it with the old DPS stat of 24DPS of the single 'barrel' back when it was stated to be two guns.

 

Still, how rear gun's DPS is calculated remains unknown in most cases - the number '41' of the MG-15 is not very impressive in practice when that gun is not very effective in deterring pursuers (I fly my C-6  and I find its rear gun inadequate).



WoWP makes a great jousting game...especially with the 262 and people busy in furballs...
I am deaf, silent, and fly with unrealistic controls. Do not count on me to carry - my back's already broken from overweight.

Angadan #12 Posted 21 May 2014 - 10:14 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014
Yah, so still a bit of doubt existing.  Wonder if a WG staffer could help by checking it and letting us know.

l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

 

Go Vols!


Chris3d #13 Posted 16 June 2014 - 07:40 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Really there's still no answer to this?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users