2-pounder,6-pounder,75mm QF

[Devilfish]

Hey, i would like to share few suggestions about allied at guns.

Firstly, both axis and us can build a powerful and very useful early at gun (37mm) which can knock out all vehicles threads and even some tanks from sides/rear at very solid ranges. Our poor british friends hasnt been so lucky, they are only left with AT boys (which are more expensive then riflemen squad). What about adding Ordnance QF 2-pounder, which was used in reality with success to the game to set them equal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_2-pounder

Secondly, 6-pounder. Why can't brits build it from second truck like other fractions? Why are you forced to call-in a forward glider in order to get such a needed help, while others can normally build their 50mm and 57mm guns (57mm is adopted 6-pounder anyway).
Additionaly, isn't 6-pounder underperforming? It was capable of penetrating 94mm of armor at 100m, so tanks like pz4 shouldnt be a problem (not even H and J version with 80mm of flat armor, not mentioning 50mm turret). APDS rounds available from 44´ were able to pen 130/142mm of armor at 100m so tiger or even possible panther shouldnt be safe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_6-pounder

Thirdly, there is a mistake with churchills. One with 6-pounder is cheaper and description says its better vs infantry and can use HE rounds like shermans on US side. Later, more expensive possess 75 QF cannon and description says it has improved penetration capabilities, can use APDS rounds and no HE. This is upside down. 75 QF gun was developed because 6-pounder was too small caliber for effective HE rounds, so 75 was created for using US 75mm HE rounds used by shermans. Unfortunatelly penetration has suffered to around 75mm at 100m and no APDS nor APCR were possible for use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_75_mm

Lastly, Churchill Croc. It has 75mm QF gun as normal churchill, yet it was able to penetrate tiger 2 frontally in pvp game and reduced its hp by more then 1/3, which is just pure BS (It was meant for countering inf, bunkers and emplacement).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_Crocodile

I know wiki isn't exactly super-reliable source, but i think it might serve well for such matters.
So what do you think guys?

[Krieger Blitzer]

Hmm, I agree that it's actually terrible to see a Croc Churchill with 75mm QF being able to sometimes 1 shot kill a Tiger 57mm guns weren't bad too but btw they can sometimes penetrate Tigers already... The idea of the 2p AT gun to be added to the Brits is also nice actually and surely I am with it if possible to achieve!

[Warhawks97]

I never understood why Boys AT are in game even as these weapon got removed from fron in 42. In game they sometimes can save the allied ass when scout vehicles managed to outflank US paks. The cal 50 was the actual replacment of boys at. The pen stats of Boys AT and cal. 50 had been the same so far so there was no more need for boys AT.


Then the 6 pounder stuff: In game the paks have a range of 75 but it doesnt mean 75 meters. i dont know which distant it should be in reality (maybe 75 range= 1000 meter?). Idk.

Then you should also note that only brits had these special AP rounds which could penetrated tigers at 100 meters. the US had only the standard AP and APCBC rounds but no APCR or APDS which the brits later used. So it would actually mean that only brits would be able to use special AP rounds for the 6 pounder but US would not have special AP round for their 57 mm (57 and 6 pounder are the same gun just different names). But removing AP rounds for US 57 mm pak due to realism would also mean to remove the special AP rounds for axis 50 mm, Panther tank and Tiger Tank. Their APCR (Pzgr.40) got withdrawn from them in 43 already.


I also dont understand why brits need glider to get 6 pounder and why it cant be in second truck. Same for US inf doc 75 mm pack howitzer. They also need forward HQ to get them and are not available in motorpool.


About churchill i cant really say which guns they used exactly and if the 57 was better in armor piercing than the 75 mm (same as cromwell has?). Their armor is also a bit weak (they had at least 101 mm for MK IV and later version quite often additional armor plates increasing armor to 152 mm, sometimes up to 170 mm. However Tank IV´s can penetrate them quite easily or at least i dont have probs killing them with my tank IV´s). That the crocc gun is overperforming against Panthers and Tigers is a known problem.


Side fact: The first Tiger got knocked out in north africa by a churchill with 6 pounder from 100 meter distant or less. The church jammed the Tigers turret with the fist shots but he did need many more to knock the tiger off. I am not sure but the tiger can nowdays be seen in a museum somewhere.

[Devilfish]

Well according to wiki, 2-pounder was able to turn 360 degress so woudnt be so easy to outflank, though was heavier then 37mm counterparts and would be slower. 75mm QF had worse pen then 6-pounder (well at least according to wiki again) and was designed to use 75mm US HE to counter soft targets more efficiently.

If community agree with my points, can they be added to to-do list or someone notify developers or something?

[Krieger Blitzer]

Don't worry about that. They can see just everything!

[JimQwilleran]

This thread includes all fair points about brit's AT guns. I'd go along with all of what you say!

Playing with brits in early game requires great skill in operating AT boys. I am really looking forward to replacing them with a normal at gun, available in the first command truck, after lieutenant.

[Wake]

Boys AT squad often loses to early axis vehicles when at close range and not in cover.

The ONLY bonus to boys AT over the 37mm AT gun is that it has a 360 degree firing radius and is more mobile. Other than that, it's a really bad and very overpriced unit. It costs 270 MP compared to 200 MP for an AT gun, yet you can guarantee that it will miss many shots and becomes useless quite quickly.

Boys AT are so bad. I've had a 20mm puma of mine kill a boys AT when they were inside of a building. I was laughing so hard becuase the poor brit player thought that his only AT unit could kill the unit it was designed to kill, when in reality, it was just free veterancy.

Then an American player brought up a 37mm AT gun, and I had to drive my puma away, because I actually fear the AT gun.

[MarKr]

Thirdly, there is a mistake with churchills. One with 6-pounder is cheaper and description says its better vs infantry and can use HE rounds like shermans on US side. Later, more expensive possess 75 QF cannon and description says it has improved penetration capabilities, can use APDS rounds and no HE. This is upside down. 75 QF gun was developed because 6-pounder was too small caliber for effective HE rounds, so 75 was created for using US 75mm HE rounds used by shermans. Unfortunatelly penetration has suffered to around 75mm at 100m and no APDS nor APCR were possible for use.
.....
Lastly, Churchill Croc. It has 75mm QF gun as normal churchill, yet it was able to penetrate tiger 2 frontally in pvp game and reduced its hp by more then 1/3, which is just pure BS (It was meant for countering inf, bunkers and emplacement).

I think the Churchills are made this way so each type can have some role in the game. 6-pounder is the earliest avaiable model for a player and it fulfills the role of infantry crusher.
Note: you might be right about the histoical usage but I think that if you use the 6-pounder Churchill and 75QF Churchill against infantry WITHOUT any ammo ability or mode, the 75 QF is actually better. However 6-pounder has HE mode which supports its anti-infantry capabilities and puts it on level of 75mm Sherman (but churchill has better armor).

75QF Churchill - the "AT" one
it actually has pretty low chance to penetrate Tiger at max range so you would have to get really close to get your chances up, however even with strong armor, Tiger gun is still very dangerous. However the Churchill has timed "AP" ability which increases penetration chance. Add to that that RE doctrine always sits on a tons of ammo since they have nothing to spend it on, and you realize that the Churchills can fire AP almost non-stop. So it is probable that your Tiger got penetrated with one of these AP shells (I managed that too several times in one game where I went RE). However in one on one Tigers still have the high ground.

AVRE is emplacement/bunker cracker.

95mm's role is kinda clear

And Croc...well it has the same 75QF cannon but it also has the same AP muniton ability and comes with veted Tank commander (TCs increase penetration too) which makes it possible to penetrate Panthers etc... But what to do about it? If Croc gets nerfed, there will be no reason to use it at all. (and Churchills are underused as it is already)

[lunarwolf]

agreed

[Warhawks97]

Thirdly, there is a mistake with churchills. One with 6-pounder is cheaper and description says its better vs infantry and can use HE rounds like shermans on US side. Later, more expensive possess 75 QF cannon and description says it has improved penetration capabilities, can use APDS rounds and no HE. This is upside down. 75 QF gun was developed because 6-pounder was too small caliber for effective HE rounds, so 75 was created for using US 75mm HE rounds used by shermans. Unfortunatelly penetration has suffered to around 75mm at 100m and no APDS nor APCR were possible for use.
.....
Lastly, Churchill Croc. It has 75mm QF gun as normal churchill, yet it was able to penetrate tiger 2 frontally in pvp game and reduced its hp by more then 1/3, which is just pure BS (It was meant for countering inf, bunkers and emplacement).

I think the Churchills are made this way so each type can have some role in the game. 6-pounder is the earliest avaiable model for a player and it fulfills the role of infantry crusher.
Note: you might be right about the histoical usage but I think that if you use the 6-pounder Churchill and 75QF Churchill against infantry WITHOUT any ammo ability or mode, the 75 QF is actually better. However 6-pounder has HE mode which supports its anti-infantry capabilities and puts it on level of 75mm Sherman (but churchill has better armor).

75QF Churchill - the "AT" one
it actually has pretty low chance to penetrate Tiger at max range so you would have to get really close to get your chances up, however even with strong armor, Tiger gun is still very dangerous. However the Churchill has timed "AP" ability which increases penetration chance. Add to that that RE doctrine always sits on a tons of ammo since they have nothing to spend it on, and you realize that the Churchills can fire AP almost non-stop. So it is probable that your Tiger got penetrated with one of these AP shells (I managed that too several times in one game where I went RE). However in one on one Tigers still have the high ground.

AVRE is emplacement/bunker cracker.

95mm's role is kinda clear

And Croc...well it has the same 75QF cannon but it also has the same AP muniton ability and comes with veted Tank commander (TCs increase penetration too) which makes it possible to penetrate Panthers etc... But what to do about it? If Croc gets nerfed, there will be no reason to use it at all. (and Churchills are underused as it is already)

well....

The one with 75 mm has better armor right? So what would speak against it to give HE to 75 mm churchills with big armor to be able to crack enemie defenses like paks, emplacments etc while the early with 6 pounder is more to fight against Tank IV´s etc? In the early stage the church and crusader AA are the first available tanks on RE so it makes kinda no sense to have two good anti personal tanks but nothing to fight tanks offensivley. Also as a break through doctrine it would make more sense to have 95 mm churchill and avre unlock before 75 mm churchill right? I often dont see the sense two get two churchill battle tanks and the more important defensive cracker churchills so late.

Also the crock could use a price drop. If the 75 mm would be turned into a anti personal gun without much armor penetrating stuff the cost could drop to 800 mp in a role as pure anti inf/anti defenive tank with very big armor.

[MarKr]

The one with 75 mm has better armor right?

No it doesn't. Only Croc has stronger armor, other Churchill versions share the same armor type.

So what would speak against it to give HE to 75 mm churchills with big armor to be able to crack enemie defenses like paks, emplacments etc while the early with 6 pounder is more to fight against Tank IV´s etc?

6-pounder is equivalent of the US 57mm gun which doesn't really excel against PIVs so it wouldn't really fit into the role either. ATM this churchill without HE mode needs to hit a weak Half track 2 or 3 times to destroy it. Against PIVs it bounces off quite often too. Sure, AP ability would improve penetration but still...

In the early stage the church and crusader AA are the first available tanks on RE so it makes kinda no sense to have two good anti personal tanks but nothing to fight tanks offensivley.

Churchill is much more durable against AT weapons.

Also the crock could use a price drop. If the 75 mm would be turned into a anti personal gun without much armor penetrating stuff the cost could drop to 800 mp in a role as pure anti inf/anti defenive tank with very big armor.

If the Croc loses the AT potential, there will be no need to use it; it is true its flamethrower kills infantry in a second, and emplacement crews pretty fast too, however 75 QF would be infantry chewer and for emplacements you already have AVRE...Croc would still have better armour but I think it would make it even less seen in the game.

[Warhawks97]

The one with 75 mm has better armor right?

No it doesn't. Only Croc has stronger armor, other Churchill versions share the same armor type.

lol. Why cost it more then? The MK IV had 101 and sometimes uparmored to 152. the MK VI or VII or what it is was at 152 mm quite often. Anyway.... why cost it more?

[

So what would speak against it to give HE to 75 mm churchills with big armor to be able to crack enemie defenses like paks, emplacments etc while the early with 6 pounder is more to fight against Tank IV´s etc?

6-pounder is equivalent of the US 57mm gun which doesn't really excel against PIVs so it wouldn't really fit into the role either. ATM this churchill without HE mode needs to hit a weak Half track 2 or 3 times to destroy it. Against PIVs it bounces off quite often too. Sure, AP ability would improve penetration but still...

Well. If armor values would be fair booth tank IV and church would bounce each other using basic rounds and with special AP rounds (and maybe command tank) the church could have a fair chance.

[

In the early stage the church and crusader AA are the first available tanks on RE so it makes kinda no sense to have two good anti personal tanks but nothing to fight tanks offensivley.

Churchill is much more durable against AT weapons.

I see... you need more practice. I prefer speed and flexibility when enemie comes with schrecks, nades and even AT nades

[

Also the crock could use a price drop. If the 75 mm would be turned into a anti personal gun without much armor penetrating stuff the cost could drop to 800 mp in a role as pure anti inf/anti defenive tank with very big armor.

If the Croc loses the AT potential, there will be no need to use it; it is true its flamethrower kills infantry in a second, and emplacement crews pretty fast too, however 75 QF would be infantry chewer and for emplacements you already have AVRE...Croc would still have better armour but I think it would make it even less seen in the game.

I dont see churchills often used anyway. And be realistic.... why should someone buy a slowly moving 1300 mp tank to kill tanks as RE when he can spam 17 pounder emplacments, achilles, firefly or comet. A cheaper crocc for pure breakthrough missions and to soak pak and tank fire+ reinforcment options and flames + HE rounds would make more sense than one expensive unit which is halfway good vs tanks but able to flame inf and which get still knocked out often by all kind of hidden Tankbusters or heavy 88 guns. Also avre cracks bunker and 95 mm paks and weapon crews but finally you still need a unit that can soak all kind of weapons and the infantry. And when the tank would get cheaper the player could support it with firefly or comet etc.

[MarKr]

lol. Why cost it more then? The MK IV had 101 and sometimes uparmored to 152. the MK VI or VII or what it is was at 152 mm quite often. Anyway.... why cost it more?

Because of a different performance? Truth be told there is little sense in sending a 6-pounder even against medium tanks (unless you enjoy watching shells bouncing off )

Well. If armor values would be fair booth tank IV and church would bounce each other using basic rounds and with special AP rounds (and maybe command tank) the church could have a fair chance.

Perhaps...

I prefer speed and flexibility when enemie comes with schrecks, nades and even AT nades

If you preffer such features, then Churchills are not the right choice for you

I dont see churchills often used anyway.

And with such changes this won't get better :/ (at least from my point of view).

And be realistic.... why should someone buy a slowly moving 1300 mp tank to kill tanks as RE when he can spam 17 pounder emplacments, achilles, firefly or comet.

Maybe...ehm...to soak up the damage while all those 17-pounders deal damage to tanks I would still consider Croc Churchill to be the sturdiest allied tank out there...

imho weapon changes for Churchills are not necesary especially only to swap roles of two or three units.

[Devilfish]

Point is 6-pounder was perfectly capable to knock out any panzer IV. And balance reasons? Axis 50mm has not really a hard time with shermans so why should 6-pounder struggle against pz4? And it would make churchill a more capable tank.

The thing with 75mm and 6p churchills.....its just pure realism reason, just make 75mm one good against inf, able to use HE loadout and 6-pounder a AT one with sabot rounds available.

And the croc....i mean balance should have more priority then realism i know.....but its just so wierd that stupid, so weak 75mm QF is penetrating king tiger with APDS rounds which was not even possible to use with that gun, while in reality it would have huge problems to penetrate pz4 H...

[MarKr]

But as I said - what will be its purpose then? Super strong anti-infantry heavy tank? I mean with 75mm QF + perma HE mode + that flamethrower that kind of firepower will chew infantry like nothing. But why build a Croc when you can get normal 75mm QF churchill with just slightly less effectiveness? Well, yeah, Croc has better armor but do you really need to have such tank just to kill some infantry squads? Some might say that with the flamethrower and perma HE the Croc might become quite cool tool for breaching dug in opponent but you have AVRE for that...

I don't know... I can think of situations where that might work but in general I think the versions with 75mm QF would become even more rare in game than now.

[Devilfish]

You're right there, but its still kinda too much in my opinion. If there should be maintained at least some realism, crocs current capabilities are very far beyond. Though i agree, it would be neccessery to provide some deeper changes in the RE doc tree or i dunno yet.

[Warhawks97]

Point is 6-pounder was perfectly capable to knock out any panzer IV. And balance reasons? Axis 50mm has not really a hard time with shermans so why should 6-pounder struggle against pz4? And it would make churchill a more capable tank.

The thing with 75mm and 6p churchills.....its just pure realism reason, just make 75mm one good against inf, able to use HE loadout and 6-pounder a AT one with sabot rounds available.

And the croc....i mean balance should have more priority then realism i know.....but its just so wierd that stupid, so weak 75mm QF is penetrating king tiger with APDS rounds which was not even possible to use with that gun, while in reality it would have huge problems to penetrate pz4 H...

depends. I am currently trying to find out gun efficencies and early stage Tank IV´s of north africa is nothing compared to later used Tank IV G/H/J (Thing is axis had in general higher BHN values for their steel plates while US used rather soft steel but which then caused less fragmentation inside the tank which increased crews chance to survive while axis armor was harder but when cracking causing fragmentation inside. But also axis steel qualtity wasnt always the same and during shooting tests some panthers cracked much faster than others). Those had even a quite fair chance to bounce 76 sherman shells. I am currently in reasearches here. But as this tank is a brits which had APDS rounds for their 6 pounder unlike US had the gun is capable to pen later Tank IV tanks and we all know that RE sits on ammo.


@Markr:

Lets have a look: The first church with 6 pounder would have 6 pounder and APDS and could come quite early together with AA tank. After command tank RE can deploy the church with 75 mm and HE rounds to fight inf and to soak damage combined with achilles or any other 17 pounder tank. When achilles get unlocked and available after command tank there is no more need for a slow churchill to fight enemie armor. Finally in late game the MK VI would be replaced by the croc churchill which has then even bigger armor and flamethrower to clean out trenches, bunkers etc which HE rounds often fail to do. Thing is flamethrower cant shoot always at all directions and HE rounds could help a lot dealing with at guns etc shooting from different directions. The cost of crocc would be like 800-900 mp and usless against enemie armor but thick armored and very good against all stuff of inf, weapon crews wherever they are.

Maybe you can also do some CP swaps inside of church tree. Add one to the croc and remove one from the first churchill. Maybe switch MK VI with 95 mm. So it would be 95 mm->MK VI->AVRE->MK VIII (crocc). The reason is obvious. If the the first churchill with AA Tank fails to do a major breakthrough in mid stage then its mostly because of very heavy defenses (88 etc). It doesnt help then to get the same churchill just with another gun and since CW or RE has no assault inf or mobile mortar vehicles they do need the 95 mm. If the 95 killed some paks and ambushes the player can get the next churchill with HE rounds supported then by more powerfull 17 pounders as the 6 pounder wouldnt be sufficiend anymore. And as last trump comes AVRE and crocc do deal with very massive defenses.