Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jul 2017, 21:42

How to start. I think simply throwing stuff arround. So here we go.

Axis and CW AT guns (checked the 6 pounder, 17, 50 mm and 75 mm)


Veterancy Bonuses:

Vet 1:
0.85 received damage modifier

Vet 2:
1.15 increased health modifier

Vet 3:
1.155 weapon damage modifier


US 57 and 76 mm AT guns


Veterancy Bonuses:

Vet 1:
1.15 increased Weapon accuracy

Vet 2:
1.5 penetration modifier (!!!)

Vet 3:
1.25 weapon damage modifier


US 37 mm AT gun:

Vet 1:
1.15 weapon accuracy modifier

Vet 2:
0.85 received damage modifier

vet 3:
1.155 weapon damage modifier.




Issues:

1. The US anti tank guns receive too massive boosts from veterancy
2. US 57 mm AT gun is almost crap untill reaching vet 2.
3. US 57 mm becomes largely superior in killing tanks as the CW 6 pounder (same gun) with veterancy 2

Example of medium AT gun efficiency (from ambush):

Accuracy increased by 1.5, penetration by 1.25 and damage by 1.25


axis 50 mm vs sherman (penetration):
0.7549 (TT )x 0.75 (max range)= 56,62% Ambush: x1.25 = 70,77%

After second sandbags:
56,62% x 0.85 = 48,127% Ambush: 60,16%


US 57 mm vs normal tank IV (E and F versions with max 50 mm armor and no slopping)
0.5 (TT) x 0.7 (max range) = 37,5% Ambush : 46,86%

US 57 mm vs normal Tank IV (E and F after reaching vet 2)
37,5% x 1.5 (vet) = 56,25% Ambush: 70,31%


Axis 50 mm vs 76 sherman:
0.7549 (TT)x0.75 (max range)x 0.85 (Sherman modifier) = 48,12% Ambush: 60,16%

After second sandbags:
48,12% x 0.85= 40,9% Ambush: 51,13%


US 57 mm vs Tank IV J
0.5 (TT) x 0.7 (max range) x 0.8 (H/J version modifier)= 28% Ambush: 35%

vet 2:
28% x 1.5 =42% Ambush: 52,5%

skirts (H/J)
0.4 (TT) x 0.7 (max range) x 0.8 (H/J modifier) = 22,4% Ambush: 28%

vet 2 and skirts
22.4% x 1.5= 33,6% Ambush: 42%



The AP shell gives 33% pen boost for axis and 30% for US

Problems:

1. US 57 mm struggles to be a reliable AT gun option even against the axis stubby Tank IV versions and others. Even from an ambush its far from being a weapon that protects your units against paper tanks.

As drastic examples: The axis 50 mm without ambush penetrates an already boosted 76 sherman with sandbags with a chance of 40.9%
The US 57 mm with ambush penetrates Tank IV E and F with a chance of just 46.86%

2. Currently the 57 mm US AT gun gets close to axis performence only when reaching vet2. But thats everything but easy when you barely score.
3. The axis 50 mm can engage any sherman, even with sandbags, pretty well. Thus being a tool of choice for quickly locking shermans as no ambush is required for effective use against any sherman.
4. Sherman support is being almost obsolet in doctrines like inf doc.
5. US is forced to use the gun from ambush if they dont want to get crushed by early stubby tank IV´s.



Suggestion:

1. Cut the US veterancy boosts or make them similiar to CW/Axis with more "BK style veterancy" boosts.
2. The max penetration for an unambushed 50 mm against a sherman should be arround 50% at max range. Thats in order to prevent fast and cheap 50 mm "running accross the map" and preventing any use of allied armor-> forcing a better use of 75 mm AT gun for reliable protection). Restrict them more to ambushed use when fighting shermans. TT value need to be set to 0.6666666667 to achieve that. Pen vs 76 sherman would be 42.5% at max range and no ambush. 36.13% against 76 with sandbags (considering the ammount of upgrades, fuel and MP to achieve that protection i do belive that this is more than fair to have such a protection against medium AT guns)


3. US 57 mm should at least provide some more reliable counter the smallest medium type tanks.
Set TT vs Tank IV to 0.75 (52,5% pen at max range vs basic tank IV´s, 42% vs J)
Against skirt Type Tank IV to 0.65 (36,4% vs J and H using skirts)



But the way it currently is i dont see the point of the 57 mm if not being a counter against even the lightest tank IV versions.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 26 Jul 2017, 22:11

Aren't you satisfied enough yet? Why do you want to change everything? 57mm is working very well now. It is a counter for Panzer IV, I have seen it with my own eyes. Reliable enough vs lighter versions. The whole community has discussed 57mm many times and I guess we reached the compromise that it should be left alone..

I can't help myself to get this personal: You see, you haven't been playing for quite a time. Bk has changed. Why the hell you try to buff allies even more? It's now allies that are stronger, not axis. Could you just stop bringing up your old ideas because they dont fit here anymore.. You do more harm than good now imo.

Danikas
Posts: 16
Joined: 02 May 2017, 23:15

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Danikas » 26 Jul 2017, 22:14

I agree in current state its much easier to win as allies than axis and further nerf to axis wont help.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jul 2017, 22:24

Can you pls stop hating arround? What happend with you? In my memories you are actually a friendly guy. And suddenly this? Its not that i make decisions here. I mean i made my private mod anyway with 400 or more changes. Do you see me suggesting 400 changes now?

I did play games lately. Sometimes with different names. Lots of players ive never seen before and stacking in completely mixed teams with different skills.

I did use the 57 mm (coz i had them not so bad in memories) but got largely disappointed when saw it bouncing from lot of stuff i actually assumed to stop.


On top of that, unless when playing against allied team with few mates with skills it was afterall pretty easy to sooner or later rush over most US defenses with Tank IV´s. Hardest counter had been a few M10. The tank IV spam with 234 combo is working decently still, all i had to kill was the 17 pdr first. With that hendeld AT changes it became even easier. Just Boys AT bothered my 234 but it was ok.



And that veterancy gives such buffs (50%) is purely from vanilla coh. And why do does the 57 mm needs two vets just to reach somehow the basic performence of an 50 mm of the same cost?

I felt in a need to get something more reliable when i played US since HE round and Handeld AT changes. Pretty much every early rushed axis medium tank forced me to quickly ambush M10 somewhere or to build a 76 mm AT emplacment. I had to rush "opportunity targets" for the Tank IV so that my 57 could fire 6 shots before killing a Tank IV (that was just standing there taking shot after shot)

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1207
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 26 Jul 2017, 23:23

JimQwilleran wrote:Could you just stop bringing up your old ideas because they dont fit here anymore.. You do more harm than good now imo.


Just a little reminder here WE (the team) decide what is good, what is bad, its not because there is wall text of "ideas" we will implement them in bk, its not a democratic vote here, just a ideas bowl.
Image

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 26 Jul 2017, 23:31

I am hating around because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about and you see nothing beside what you want to see.

How many games have you played with current patch? You have been gone from bk. You haven't seen changes that happened. But I have been playing this mod everyday for over 3 years now resulting in almost 2500 played games exclusively in bk. I have seen every single decision, I have been discussing them here. And what I see is possibly catastrophic results of your ideas now. I am not gonna engage in corsix/stats discussion here, cause I know you can drag those wall of text topics into oblivion. I am gonna tell you what I am feeling basing on my experience and intuition: your recent ideas are harmful.

So please stop acting like some kind of guru, who can imagine 100 game scenarios per minute, caus most of what you are saying here is hardly close to the game reality. Don't u think it would be good to read and play more before you actually propose something? Because when someone comes to forum saying "omg that tank bounces everything omg nerf", we and devs laugh at him. Suddenly you come and say so and everybody is acting like it was enlightened wisdom.

Panzerblitz1 wrote:
Just a little reminder here WE (the team) decide what is good, what is bad, its not because there is wall text of "ideas" we will implement them in bk, its not a democratic vote here, just a ideas bowl.


And I am glad that you changed this armor disaster into something less disastrous, but still those changes will fuck up the balance, you will see. It will make game much more campy for sure. Rip axis even more than now.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 26 Jul 2017, 23:46

JimQwilleran wrote:
How many games have you played with current patch?


13 win streak with axis (first game was a loss iirc). 5 losses to 1 win with US (wasnt that one against you? me and shadow and kwok. You said something or complaint which pissed kwok so he left. Complaining about using a certain unit or something. I didnt read the chat. But kwok was pissed for a while. He said something that at the end he will only be able to use pioneers because whenver a unit is used, someone complains)

Reasons like always. Randoms, no teamplay or only bad one = dead. Locked by AT guns or smashed by medium tank rush paired with neblers. To be honest the last game could have been won with just slight teamplay (RAF for 17 pdr, armor doc using supply yard before spamming shermans and me getting a bit earlier a bit more inf.

Played with guys ive never seen before (some with very good stats.... idk if from vcoh or BK) and only new maps (which made it much harder for me compared to others). In four or five games i played with lehr and tiger. As axis i turned two games that were litterally lost (to be honest, it was Luftwaffe inf from Tiger that completely changed one of the games from loss to win backed with some of my heroic Hetzers.)

In another game we rushed CW and US with double PE in few mins. Gren spam + scout cars. That cost drop for PE inf makes a huge difference. Before it was just cars.

What actually prevented instant loss for CW were the much more deadlier boys AT. I think those are the real reason why allied can go from early to mid and even late game much better now.

Wanna have more informations?

Yes, maybe you can blame me for "not playing the expert league" currently. But idk who currently plays BK. Kwok, shadow, toni, tiger, lehr. Thats what i saw. The rest is completely new with whole different playstyles (some of them quite good, less meta).

All in all it almost feels like at times i left BK actually. Even made a 2 vs 3 already but lost it. But close and it doesnt count i would say.

And cant await the 380 MP Tank IV. Think about that as well before rushing for critics here. If you want to stop them you have to rush for M10 and try to get as many as possible. And pray you have enough ammo then.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jul 2017, 00:00, edited 1 time in total.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 26 Jul 2017, 23:51

I will tell you who you played with. You played with me under different names. With me and my mates, when you lost as allies vs axis. And I saw what you are doing. You are playing using old style, style that doesn't work - then you come here and agitate to change the mod to fit your vision of the mod. And that's a thing I will oppose either it's Tiger, Kwok, You or anybody.

So I ask you to play 50 more games before you start proposing. So you could be more objective. Because you dont understand current balance. Being good and competent is not for ever...

User avatar
Medic Truck
Posts: 70
Joined: 15 Jun 2017, 19:31
Location: Kathmandu, Nepal

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Medic Truck » 27 Jul 2017, 00:09

JimQwilleran wrote:And what I see is possibly catastrophic results of your ideas now. I am not gonna engage in corsix/stats discussion here, cause I know you can drag those wall of text topics into oblivion. I am gonna tell you what I am feeling basing on my experience and intuition: your recent ideas are harmful.



With all due respect sir, this is actually the time where people are discussing the pros and cons of different changes. So, why not engage in the corsix/stats discussions as well? I am personally very much interested in each and every faction and doctrines as I love this game. I would consider these changes to Armor as very nicely thought as of now.

I had mentioned somewhere else that all I see is Luft/Terror/RAF/Infantry(only for arties). Nothing else. So, I would say it is a good move to bring armor into the front and if things don't work out well, devs themselves go to lengths to hear things up.

Also, devs should also ALWAYS consider a player's opinion ONLY if the person plays with almost everything. Having a favourite doc is a different thing. Hating a faction(doc) is totally different. I hope devs will always care for this.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 00:09

JimQwilleran wrote:I will tell you who you played with. You played with me under different names. With me and my mates, when you lost as allies vs axis. And I saw what you are doing. You are playing using old style, style that doesn't work - then you come here and agitate to change the mod to fit your vision of the mod. And that's a thing I will oppose either it's Tiger, Kwok, You or anybody.


ah. that game. Yeah. i tried to hold up lines. I did well or? Killing tank IV´s with howitzer direct shot and 57 mm at guns... using M10 killing stugs in offense, being the only who build recons, killing several mortar HT with 37 mm AT gun only. Smashing parts of your teams defenses with arty.

Yeah.... old inf doc stlye. Being everywhere as support. Otherwise the left side would have been collapsed instantly coz of your rushes. My recons, Halftracks (esspecially M16 AA), M10 and sniper kept us alive. Wasnt it also your 234/3 that i sniped away with 37 mm?
You guys rushed idk how many vehicles in my 37 mm....which never changed location.

Yeah. great skills over there. Meanwhile my armor mate forgot supply yard and fuel upgrades untill i told him close before end.

And i just watched the replay and you know what? You guys could have smashed us sooooo easily. Playing Luft and Bk doc..... but building trenches and spamming scout cars... really? It was your Luft mates Panther that ruined our days and Beren bot Tank III spam.

If it was you, jailbait and done (maybe your mate) you played everything but perfect. Swimming in fuel and lots of inf.... but not a single fucking hetzer or the plain simple Tank IV spam Gebirgs combo tactic. very disappointing actually what you guys did there. Just watched the replay. As for me i was trying to hold up lines. While doing so my greyhound has rushed the right side.... just like that.

Watch the replay before marking "the big guy" here. The Panther at the end smashed us coz we havent got a 17 pdr.... but well... shit happens. The way i took out your medium tanks were rather heroic with 105 direct shot (first time ever i killed a tank that way) and that risky m10 move (the only teamplay moment in this game from our side)

So I ask you to play 50 more games before you start proposing. So you could be more objective. Because you dont understand current balance. Being good and competent is not for ever...


Sure. Shadow, kwok, tiger and lots of new guys. Gonna have some fun with BK doc. And many frustrating armor moments.


I had mentioned somewhere else that all I see is Luft/Terror/RAF/Infantry(only for arties). Nothing else. So, I would say it is a good move to bring armor into the front and if things don't work out well, devs themselves go to lengths to hear things up.



And I saw what you are doing. You are playing using old style, style that doesn't work


oh, illa. Your team choosed Luft, Luft, Terror, BK.... and then nebler, nebler. walking stuka, walking stuka.....

Absolutely not the old times, right? And guess what? they worked. Just like that game with tank IV gebirgs combo i had with tiger. Or vehicle rush....double PE.

So dont throw such a bullshit in here. They still work pretty good. I used them with success and had to deal with them. And thats bad that many things are still working the same way.


And i didnt hear much of alternatives for inf doc. Rangers suck as always and so on. I was just getting the infiltration rangers for testing but the Luftwaffe Panther from other Luft guy ruined my day.

Too bad. Maybe you could have seen something different then. Sadly not enough time. But i guess they would have made a nice job on mid and right side.
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jul 2017, 00:32, edited 1 time in total.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 27 Jul 2017, 00:24

My dear friend, u know why we played swimming in res and suiciding every second unit? Not because axis are good, but because teams were unbalanced. We didn't really have to care to win. What I am concerned about are balanced games where axis have no start to allies. But I guess that 1 lost game is enough proof for you... That's why I am saying that you see only what you want to see.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 00:38

JimQwilleran wrote:My dear friend, u know why we played swimming in res and suiciding every second unit? Not because axis are good, but because teams were unbalanced. We didn't really have to care to win. What I am concerned about are balanced games where axis have no start to allies. But I guess that 1 lost game is enough proof for you... That's why I am saying that you see only what you want to see.



Well. I think we could have got you if the Luft Panther didnt came on the right. Coz later you struggled when we were just about to bolster our lines.

Yes we had two noobs in our team.

But as i said:
Ive seen very well how old tactics work still in like 20 games.

Rocket arty spam, Tank IV/ Gebirgs... vehicle rushes on some maps. If i am not mistaken the number of games is clearly above 1. Or maybe not..... 4+6+5+3= 1. I will call my mathematics teacher tomorrow. I forgot how to calculate.

To be honest. After a few almost hilarious 2 vs 2 (Vehicle rush, Gebirgs Tank Iv combo, Luft inf turns game out of nothing, being rushed by single PE car coz of the many hedgerows which made him preventing my AT easily.... and that after he wasted all his early units... grens, krad, schwimm this one car made the day.... it was a 2 vs 2 on 3 vs 3 map just for info) i was close to throw BK away again.



What I am concerned about are balanced games where axis have no start to allies


oh. so its all about this for you? I admit that Boys AT giving allied in early game a massive punch forward. But what then? Mid game, axis survived etc. Old story. Rocket arty, medium armor, Luftwaffe rambos and later big Armor. Besides that this is a "british thing". I am talking about a almost key US tool for mid games (when CW rushes for 17 pdr anyways).
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jul 2017, 00:46, edited 2 times in total.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 27 Jul 2017, 00:40

Warhawks97 wrote:
Well. I think we could have got you if the Luft Panther didnt came on the right. Coz later you struggled when we were just about to bolster our lines.

Yes we had two noobs in our team.

But as i said:
Ive seen very well how old tactics work still in like 20 games.

Rocket arty spam, Tank IV/ Gebirgs... vehicle rushes on some maps. If i am not mistaken the number of games is clearly above 1. Or maybe not..... 4+6+5+3= 1. I will call my mathematics teacher tomorrow. I forgot how to calculate.

To be honest. After a few almost hilarious 2 vs 2 (Vehicle rush, Gebirgs Tank Iv combo, Luft inf turns game out of nothing, being rushed by single PE car coz of the many hedgerows which made him preventing my AT easily.... and that after he wasted all his early units... grens, krad, schwimm this one car made the day.... it was a 2 vs 2 on 3 vs 3 map just for info).


Let's play and I will show you that the faction that needs buffs is axis, not allies.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 00:44

JimQwilleran wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote:
Well. I think we could have got you if the Luft Panther didnt came on the right. Coz later you struggled when we were just about to bolster our lines.

Yes we had two noobs in our team.

But as i said:
Ive seen very well how old tactics work still in like 20 games.

Rocket arty spam, Tank IV/ Gebirgs... vehicle rushes on some maps. If i am not mistaken the number of games is clearly above 1. Or maybe not..... 4+6+5+3= 1. I will call my mathematics teacher tomorrow. I forgot how to calculate.

To be honest. After a few almost hilarious 2 vs 2 (Vehicle rush, Gebirgs Tank Iv combo, Luft inf turns game out of nothing, being rushed by single PE car coz of the many hedgerows which made him preventing my AT easily.... and that after he wasted all his early units... grens, krad, schwimm this one car made the day.... it was a 2 vs 2 on 3 vs 3 map just for info).


Let's play and I will show you that the faction that needs buffs is axis, not allies.



Let me see some of of your streams or replays. Maybe i can understand you better. Yes, small 1 vs 1 map with Boys AT and then recce asap. Standard as well of what i saw in games and streams from players. Want to show me this "early ally power"? Or anything else has changed significantly for allied early game?

So far what i saw in the games is that the Boys AT makes it much harder for axis to get through the entire vehicle stage. But i think PE has good counter options being able to get an ammount of various inf + at gun and cheaper HMG42. While brits mortar comes significantly later.


Another thing is, why you dont simply open a topic about Boys AT in early game? US early game hasnt got changed.

And why wasting the time here when we have each other in steam
Last edited by Warhawks97 on 27 Jul 2017, 00:48, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 221
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Redgaarden » 27 Jul 2017, 00:46

Haven't read a single thing. BUT I think we can move this topic somewhere else. You dont build 57 against tanks, you use it against pumas.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby JimQwilleran » 27 Jul 2017, 00:48

Warhawks97 wrote:Another thing is, why you dont simply open a topic about Boys AT in early game? US early game hasnt got changed.

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2068&p=19631#p19631

I told you to read first. I hope you will try to find more objective point of view - free from your old anti-axis prejudices.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 1657
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby MarKr » 27 Jul 2017, 00:59

Can you two please solve this in private? Use PMs, play against each other or with each other (whatever sense of the phrase floats your boat) but this measuring of whose dick is bigger, doesn't really help anything.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 01:15

Funny. Last post there was from me.... Making one more as i am more objective on it now.

Better now? I dont want any further escalation. But you bashing against mid game issues while your problem is elsewhere. Not even in US but CW.

Redgaarden wrote:Haven't read a single thing. BUT I think we can move this topic somewhere else. You dont build 57 against tanks, you use it against pumas.



@Red:

1. I was better with the 37 mm against pumas. Having two or so gives more hit changes, covers more area and better protection to each AT gun. Over that the 37 mm has a higher rate of fire. I like the 57 mm AT against slower halftracks or general support. But my weapon of choice aganst vehicles was the 37 mm.

2. What build axis the 50 mm for? Stuat tanks only? They beat pretty much everything that has an engine.

3. If so, why paying 270 MP then? Or axis only 270?

4. You can beat armor. Just with vet 2 only. And i dont get the reason why. If it would be only vs vehicles we wouldnt need a 50% pen boost for vet 2.



MarKr wrote:Can you two please solve this in private? Use PMs, play against each other or with each other (whatever sense of the phrase floats your boat) but this measuring of whose dick is bigger, doesn't really help anything.


yes. I ended it.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 221
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Redgaarden » 27 Jul 2017, 12:09

Glad to hear Warhawks.


1. I was better with the 37 mm against pumas. Having two or so gives more hit changes, covers more area and better protection to each AT gun. Over that the 37 mm has a higher rate of fire. I like the 57 mm AT against slower halftracks or general support. But my weapon of choice aganst vehicles was the 37 mm.


The 57 usually one hit kills light vehicles since it has more dmg than 50mm and axis usually have lower hp values than US halftracks.

2. What build axis the 50 mm for? Stuat tanks only? They beat pretty much everything that has an engine.


I usually build 50mm to kill Jumbo, Churchuills, Super pershings, Pershings with the 50mm. Pretty much everything the 75mm can't handle I kill with the 50mm.

3. If so, why paying 270 MP then? Or axis only 270?


Price is most often irrelevant for Infantry doctrine and rarely armour doctrine. While in WH it is just a nice counter agaisnt everything the allies will throw at them for a long time.

4. You can beat armor. Just with vet 2 only. And i dont get the reason why. If it would be only vs vehicles we wouldnt need a 50% pen boost for vet 2.


Veterancy sucks and doesn't reward most of the time. I usually just ignore it's there and move on.

Warhawks97 wrote: For the notification.


I tired to answer as good as I could.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Panzer-Lehr-Division
Posts: 330
Joined: 12 Dec 2014, 14:03

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Panzer-Lehr-Division » 27 Jul 2017, 13:13

Warhawks97 wrote:
JimQwilleran wrote:
How many games have you played with current patch?


13 win streak with axis (first game was a loss iirc). 5 losses to 1 win with US (wasnt that one against you? me and shadow and kwok. You said something or complaint which pissed kwok so he left. Complaining about using a certain unit or something. I didnt read the chat. But kwok was pissed for a while. He said something that at the end he will only be able to use pioneers because whenver a unit is used, someone complains)

Reasons like always. Randoms, no teamplay or only bad one = dead. Locked by AT guns or smashed by medium tank rush paired with neblers. To be honest the last game could have been won with just slight teamplay (RAF for 17 pdr, armor doc using supply yard before spamming shermans and me getting a bit earlier a bit more inf.

Played with guys ive never seen before (some with very good stats.... idk if from vcoh or BK) and only new maps (which made it much harder for me compared to others). In four or five games i played with lehr and tiger. As axis i turned two games that were litterally lost (to be honest, it was Luftwaffe inf from Tiger that completely changed one of the games from loss to win backed with some of my heroic Hetzers.)

In another game we rushed CW and US with double PE in few mins. Gren spam + scout cars. That cost drop for PE inf makes a huge difference. Before it was just cars.

What actually prevented instant loss for CW were the much more deadlier boys AT. I think those are the real reason why allied can go from early to mid and even late game much better now.

Wanna have more informations?

Yes, maybe you can blame me for "not playing the expert league" currently. But idk who currently plays BK. Kwok, shadow, toni, tiger, lehr. Thats what i saw. The rest is completely new with whole different playstyles (some of them quite good, less meta).

All in all it almost feels like at times i left BK actually. Even made a 2 vs 3 already but lost it. But close and it doesnt count i would say.

And cant await the 380 MP Tank IV. Think about that as well before rushing for critics here. If you want to stop them you have to rush for M10 and try to get as many as possible. And pray you have enough ammo then.

You mean the game 3v3 with tiger and toni we was enemy, and on 2v2 IT was you and me vs wurf and mofeta as se,luft^^ you mixed somethink

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 13:17

I didnt talk about the 3 vs 3. That was a failed game anyways. yeah, i had two 2 vs 2. One i had with tiger Luft /BK combo that worked. And yeah, the other was with you SE and Luft.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Jul 2017, 14:02

Redgaarden wrote:Glad to hear Warhawks.




The 57 usually one hit kills light vehicles since it has more dmg than 50mm and axis usually have lower hp values than US halftracks.


The M16, the axis 251 and 251 with 37 mm have 315 HP. So think they are all equal so far.
damage is 50-90 for US and 50 to 80 for axis. No real difference here.


I usually build 50mm to kill Jumbo, Churchuills, Super pershings, Pershings with the 50mm. Pretty much everything the 75mm can't handle I kill with the 50mm.


Funny, me to. For that reason i dont build the 75 mm even. What i cant kill with the 50 i barely kill with 75 mm. For jumbos i try getting schrecks or wait for 50 mm rocket shot range. So why getting 75 mm here.

And this is the prob. The 50 mm kills everything so well that axis have no need to get more cumbersome 75 mm. And that gives axis a huge advantage in terms of mobility when allied rely a lot more on 76 and 17 pdr to kill some medium armor.




Price is most often irrelevant for Infantry doctrine and rarely armour doctrine. While in WH it is just a nice counter agaisnt everything the allies will throw at them for a long time.


Untill mid game i do care. WH is not really more expensive in this early stage. In terms of reinfoce cost, upkeep and the genrally lower losses in combat (coz you stay at distance) i do have more MP issues as US here. In the end stage that turns. But during the stage when medium AT guns get to the field i struggle more with US most of the time MP wise.



Veterancy sucks and doesn't reward most of the time. I usually just ignore it's there and move on.


You talk about AT guns? They are hard to vet anyways unless a 17 pdr kills a tiger and gets vet 2 right away. As for the 57, the become effective with vet 2 only which you never reach coz its so bad that it barely scores enough to get to vet 2.


I tired to answer as good as I could.


appreciate that. Thx.


Final suggestion on that matter to meet things in the middle:

1. Axis 50 mm pen from 0.7549 to 0.666 vs shermans. That way the pen vs basic sherman would be 49,95% (41% vs e8 still) With ambush its 62,43 % and with AP 83.04% That looks pretty fair. for better chances you can hold fire and let them get closer. For a medium AT and high mobility that seems quite fair.
against sandbagged e8 its 34.82% without boosts. With ambush 47.79% and with ap in addition 63.55%

2. The 57 mm pen chance vs tank to 0.68. The max range pen would be 47.6% vs Tank IV E and F. With ambush 59.5% and AP 77.35%
vs Tank IV J it would then be 38%.08%. Ambush 47,6% and with AP in addition 61.88%
VS Skirted tank IV the pen would be 0.6 as basic. The pen vs J and H (skirts) would be 33.6% at max range. With Ambush 42% and with AP in addition 54.6%

3. US AT guns should get the same vet bonuses as axis and CW AT guns. No more pen boost at vet 2.


Can there be some sort of aggreement regarding that? medium AT wouldnt kill medium armor just like that (or not at all). But from ambush very lethal.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 221
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Redgaarden » 28 Jul 2017, 21:35

The M16, the axis 251 and 251 with 37 mm have 315 HP. So think they are all equal so far.
damage is 50-90 for US and 50 to 80 for axis. No real difference here.


I think the M16 has 415 hp which makes it survive alot of things.

You talk about AT guns? They are hard to vet anyways unless a 17 pdr kills a tiger and gets vet 2 right away. As for the 57, the become effective with vet 2 only which you never reach coz its so bad that it barely scores enough to get to vet 2.


I talk pretty much about most infantry. I mean riflemen get accauracy. But 0 x 0 = 0 so vet 5 rifle is almost equal in combat stats to Grens. The only thing veterancy does is giving upgraded abilities which make the soldiers look less like idiots with guns to more like actual soldiers. But still, idiots with guns get the job done most of the time. You can't keep units alive when you have abilities like 280mm rockets and sturmtigers. Or long tom artillery and Airborne strikes. Veterancy just doesn't pay off. The point of veterancy is keeping units alive and that is impossible if your opponent really want the unit dead.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2366
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Warhawks97 » 28 Jul 2017, 22:53

The M16 has 315. Is there something hidden? Maybe with overrepair, idk how much more HP it gives.


To the vets i wouldnt say it just like that. Luftwaffe inf and Stormtroopers get massively stronger.

Yes, 0x0=0.... but Units like grens or luft inf have very good basic stats. And those are greatly boosted then with veterancy modifiers. I always felt that esspecially for axis and CW inf the vet pays off.

If they want to see something dead this might be true for tanks or US when axis throw all their rocket arty and other weapons of mass desturction with huge AoE at it. But i never felt that killing gebirgs was that i could kill them when i wanted them dead.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 221
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: Anti tank gun and veterancy.

Postby Redgaarden » 29 Jul 2017, 00:46

The M16 has 315. Is there something hidden? Maybe with overrepair, idk how much more HP it gives.


I think overrepair is 125 extra hp when fully overrepaired. Only jeep varaints recieve 75 all other vehicles get vehicles_overrepair_Medium (M16, Shermans, Pershings,) which is I think 125 extra hp. I dont know if all share same overrepair but that is how I think it works.

If they want to see something dead this might be true for tanks or US when axis throw all their rocket arty and other weapons of mass desturction with huge AoE at it. But i never felt that killing gebirgs was that i could kill them when i wanted them dead.


Lucky hit with longtom should kill them. But yeah, dont know much else would kill them other than that. I usually just suicide rush a croc on them or something. As brits they aren't that bad as long as you play something else than RAF in my opinion.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest