M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Talk about CoH1 or BKMOD1 in general.
User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 11 Dec 2014, 17:54

Hello.

I once asked why the M10 Wolverine has such a slow turret rotation speed and the answer was that it has historcial reasons and i was ok with that. But in the past games the question raised up why the CW M10 achilles has a much faster rotation speed than the US M10 Wolverine?
Maybe it has also historical reasons and brits added a better turret but if not i am really curious why there is a difference.


Also The US M10 has target priority Inf and not tanks which is stupid. Change it pls;)


And if it is allowed to put the question: Is the Hellcat gun better than M10 Wolverine gun? And Hellcat HVAP better than Wolverine HVAP? In my last games Hellcats knocked out heavies with HVAP pretty well while M10 still struggled to pen Tank IV´s with HVAP.

User avatar
HaryPL
Team Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 09:35
Location: Poland

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby HaryPL » 11 Dec 2014, 19:42

In Achilles there was small engine that was turning the turret, in basic M10 it was hand-cranked AFAIK.

And yes, for the moment the M18 has better gun, and HVAP ammo, than M10.
Bravery doesn't meant that You are not afraid. It means that You go there anyway.

Image

Never argue with an Idiot. He’ll drag you down to his level, then beat you with experience.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 11 Dec 2014, 20:44

HaryPL wrote:And yes, for the moment the M18 has better gun, and HVAP ammo, than M10.



How much better? In my past games My hellcats could deal Wither Tigers and Panthers very well when shooting HVAP. The M10 often struggeld to pen tank IV´s with HVAP (even from ambush sometimes) and bounced often from Panthers which were just 2 meters away if even using HVAP. There seem to be a huge difference.


Also that means that only Armor doc has reliable Tankbusters with Hellact and jackson while Inf and Airborne have worse M10 Wolverines with weaker guns and slower turret rotation speed.


That brings me btw to another point about which i will open a new topic.

Yummy
Posts: 43
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 01:58

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Yummy » 15 Dec 2014, 01:18

Oliver, many units with the same weaponry behave completely different, which is stupid of course. M10 is useless as Marder III - just something wrong in their coded capabilities (accuracy, damage, penetration)
Examples: Look at the 28mm gun - PE gun excellent (takes 2 shots to kill recon tank), better than 37mm, WM 28mm can't penetrate recon tank or if it does accidentally, it doesn't take more than 1/3 from recon tank HP. We have plenty of 20 mm guns, yet they behave differently. 38 (t) gepard, which is cheaper than 20mm halftrack (!!!), can kill halftracks which is fine, but wirbelwind can't do much with it's 4x20mm guns. Also TH panzer IV one-shot things, I think it uses panther gun, instead panzer IV as it should be (might be an ingame bug). And there are many more examples. With so many big differences, balance can be never achieved.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Dec 2014, 03:02

Yummy wrote:Oliver, many units with the same weaponry behave completely different, which is stupid of course. M10 is useless as Marder III - just something wrong in their coded capabilities (accuracy, damage, penetration)
Examples: Look at the 28mm gun - PE gun excellent (takes 2 shots to kill recon tank), better than 37mm, WM 28mm can't penetrate recon tank or if it does accidentally, it doesn't take more than 1/3 from recon tank HP. We have plenty of 20 mm guns, yet they behave differently. 38 (t) gepard, which is cheaper than 20mm halftrack (!!!), can kill halftracks which is fine, but wirbelwind can't do much with it's 4x20mm guns. Also TH panzer IV one-shot things, I think it uses panther gun, instead panzer IV as it should be (might be an ingame bug). And there are many more examples. With so many big differences, balance can be never achieved.



yeah, that 20 mm acting always different is silly.

TH IV/48 uses Tank IV gun (75 mm/L48) such as hetzer. The IV/A and IV/70 a panther gun (75mm/L70)

Yummy
Posts: 43
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 01:58

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Yummy » 15 Dec 2014, 11:29

The problem is the tank hunter tank (pz.kmpf.w. IV Ausf H) performs way better than blitzkrieg panzer IV H. If it was just 20mm the game would be alright, but it's not just the 20mm problem :P.

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 857
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 15 Dec 2014, 12:21

Yummy wrote:The problem is the tank hunter tank (pz.kmpf.w. IV Ausf H) performs way better than blitzkrieg panzer IV H. If it was just 20mm the game would be alright, but it's not just the 20mm problem :P.

TH panzer have 1.5 vet lvl after tech tree upgrade + zimerit which increase health and armor a bit + tank commanders are available earlier to PE, thats why th panzers usually with captains, when blitzkrieg players always use pz4 without it, cause you need heavy tank factory for building commanders. All that factors are making pe panzer much better, true.

Eselschreck
Posts: 7
Joined: 30 Dec 2014, 00:07

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Eselschreck » 30 Dec 2014, 15:37

Yummy wrote:Oliver, many units with the same weaponry behave completely different, which is stupid of course. M10 is useless as Marder III - just something wrong in their coded capabilities (accuracy, damage, penetration)
Examples: Look at the 28mm gun - PE gun excellent (takes 2 shots to kill recon tank), better than 37mm, WM 28mm can't penetrate recon tank or if it does accidentally, it doesn't take more than 1/3 from recon tank HP. We have plenty of 20 mm guns, yet they behave differently. 38 (t) gepard, which is cheaper than 20mm halftrack (!!!), can kill halftracks which is fine, but wirbelwind can't do much with it's 4x20mm guns. Also TH panzer IV one-shot things, I think it uses panther gun, instead panzer IV as it should be (might be an ingame bug). And there are many more examples. With so many big differences, balance can be never achieved.


With regards to something like the Wirbelwind, it has to be this way, otherwise it wouldn't be balanced. It would be like an Ostwind, only with four times to fire rate.

Yummy
Posts: 43
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 01:58

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Yummy » 02 Jan 2015, 15:05

@ Eselschreck: Not really, ostwind has 37mm, Wirbelwind 20mm and no damage currently. There are many ways to balance such unit - short bursts, not very accurate, long reload time, long aiming time etc.

Eselschreck
Posts: 7
Joined: 30 Dec 2014, 00:07

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Eselschreck » 02 Jan 2015, 15:37

Yummy wrote:@ Eselschreck: Not really, ostwind has 37mm, Wirbelwind 20mm and no damage currently. There are many ways to balance such unit - short bursts, not very accurate, long reload time, long aiming time etc.


The Wirbelwind has all of these.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 02 Jan 2015, 16:56

Eselschreck wrote:
Yummy wrote:@ Eselschreck: Not really, ostwind has 37mm, Wirbelwind 20mm and no damage currently. There are many ways to balance such unit - short bursts, not very accurate, long reload time, long aiming time etc.


The Wirbelwind has all of these.



wirbelwind is weird. Per bullet low damage but therefore something like 100% accuracy. Less accuracy and higher damage per bullet would be same deadly, just different. And the fact that quads (cal 50 and 20 mm) suck against vehicles is rather kind of imbalance for me. As sample the quad 20 m from luft cost about the same (if not more) than single 20 mm from def doc. Booth shred inf very very well and fast (single has no suppression but it kils fast enough anyway) just that the single shreds HT´s, greyhounds etc within seconds and with like 5 shots. The Quad does actually nothing against them.

I did open one or more topic/s about that in old forum already. Make a new topic about that matter if you want

Kasbah
Posts: 251
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 12:34

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Kasbah » 02 Jan 2015, 17:20

Anyone here uses Wiberlwind? I don't. It costs a lot and it often looks on any direction but the one where the enemy infantry is. Infantry can blow it away quite easily, just rushing frontally and throwing an at grenade or a shreck.

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby V13dweller » 02 Jan 2015, 17:51

I very rarely use the Wirblewind or Quads in that aspect at all, they do much too little damage, they can't do shite against vehicles, and the suppression is not that great (Especially the US one)
The Wirblewind seems to do more damage when it's firing HE to armoured vehicles, I would not mind paying 4x the cost of a Single Flak gun for the Wirblewind, if it did proper damage of the single flak 20mm.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 02 Jan 2015, 20:58

V13dweller wrote:I very rarely use the Wirblewind or Quads in that aspect at all, they do much too little damage, they can't do shite against vehicles, and the suppression is not that great (Especially the US one)
The Wirblewind seems to do more damage when it's firing HE to armoured vehicles, I would not mind paying 4x the cost of a Single Flak gun for the Wirblewind, if it did proper damage of the single flak 20mm.



me too. The quads need some fixing to compete with their single barreld "brothers".

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2760
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby MarKr » 03 Jan 2015, 11:41

wirbelwind is weird. Per bullet low damage but therefore something like 100% accuracy.

It for some reason has high accuracy but on distant range it is about 50%. Yes, it has low damage but long bursts (about 32 rounds) so even comparatively higher accuracy doesn't make it OP, you and I have already talked about why it is like that...but anyway I'm quite curious - what would you do to improve it?
Image

User avatar
Sukin-kot (SVT)
Posts: 857
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 08:36
Location: Ekaterinburg, Russia

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Sukin-kot (SVT) » 03 Jan 2015, 12:07

Im also never use Wirbelwind ( only as AA), it cost much + 75 ammo for HE rounds (wihtout them no sense), it supress good, but damage is very low, especially against commando, when they use smoke sometimes all burst just hiting a ground between them, same to Crusader, supression is good, but no kills (although it sometimes can kill whole squad in a burst, but it hapens seldomly). Id prefer better damage, but lower supression for both units.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 03 Jan 2015, 12:52

Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:Im also never use Wirbelwind ( only as AA), it cost much + 75 ammo for HE rounds (wihtout them no sense), it supress good, but damage is very low, especially against commando, when they use smoke sometimes all burst just hiting a ground between them, same to Crusader, supression is good, but no kills (although it sometimes can kill whole squad in a burst, but it hapens seldomly). Id prefer better damage, but lower supression for both units.



Actually the suppression would be very high and should pin very fast. Damage should be also good but idk how good it really is without HE. What i can say is that damage vs vehicle sucks. Ostwinds with 37 mm and units with single 20 mm killing HT´s and hellcats very fast. A single burst of Wirbelwind did not even kill a jeep last time i used it.

Sicne quads cost same and even more than single barreld brothers and similiar units i just dont see the point why the quads cant be as same deadly (or even more) against vehicles.

User avatar
V13dweller
Posts: 128
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 09:18
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby V13dweller » 03 Jan 2015, 14:52

I agree completely, the quad flaks are almost useless against almost everything, it can only just deal with infantry, you can forget about taking on basically anything with armour.

As warhawks said, even jeeps can survive the wirblewind on most occasions, almost all other armoured vehicles can to.

The HE makes it decent, but the AP is abysmal at best, and Abysmal is being generous, the HE seems to do a better job against armour than the AP.

Kasbah
Posts: 251
Joined: 08 Dec 2014, 12:34

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Kasbah » 03 Jan 2015, 17:45

So can we expect any Wiberlwind improvement in further versions? And I mean improvements in effectiveness, no cost decrease.
Thx

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 03 Jan 2015, 20:35

Kasbah wrote:So can we expect any Wiberlwind improvement in further versions? And I mean improvements in effectiveness, no cost decrease.
Thx



all quads

User avatar
Rubytooth_UA
Posts: 11
Joined: 29 Dec 2014, 17:00

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Rubytooth_UA » 07 Jan 2015, 11:44

As Warhawks97 start about Wolverine VS Achilles I want to mark firstly about anti-tank:
Wolverine is sh**t that dont cost MP and FueL you had paid for it. US have overpowered Jumbo so no reason to pay for that bandbox. Brits have the best anti-tank Achilles that equal in efficiency to Firefly but has ambush and superior stealth strike!

The 2nd point is Wirbelwind that s*cks of Ostwind in all categories and in fact cant kill even jeep. The only reason its to make like AA unit (but 88 Flak has high priority).

Anyway Wolverine and Wilberwind s*cks... and have been pushed by analogs.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 07 Jan 2015, 13:52

Rubytooth_UA wrote:As Warhawks97 start about Wolverine VS Achilles I want to mark firstly about anti-tank:
Wolverine is sh**t that dont cost MP and FueL you had paid for it. US have overpowered Jumbo so no reason to pay for that bandbox. Brits have the best anti-tank Achilles that equal in efficiency to Firefly but has ambush and superior stealth strike!

The 2nd point is Wirbelwind that s*cks of Ostwind in all categories and in fact cant kill even jeep. The only reason its to make like AA unit (but 88 Flak has high priority).

Anyway Wolverine and Wilberwind s*cks... and have been pushed by analogs.


I played inf doc and i like to combine units and not using only single elite units ;) I had this M10 or several M10´s to fight Tigers and Tank IV´s. Also i like them to rush enemie artillery pieces when enemie paks are down for a short moment.


But when talking about M10 wolverine the devs need to look into gun stats. HVAP is bugged or changed with basic rounds.

I had a game and i fired 6 shots in total on enemie tanks. The HVAP´s always bounced on Tigers and Tank IV´s from close distant. In my first attack the M10 fired two HVAP shots on a Tiger from very very close distant and nothing happend. The Hellcat of my teammate did a short job with Tiger from mid range. The other 3 HVAP shots from mid range and ambush vs Tank IV´s also bounced. I made just one single shot with basic rounds from ambush on long range against a Tiger and it instantly penetrated the tiger. M10 Wolverine is very weird and stats of gun or ammo types are broken. Pls check it oO.

User avatar
Rubytooth_UA
Posts: 11
Joined: 29 Dec 2014, 17:00

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Rubytooth_UA » 07 Jan 2015, 19:29

Warhawks97 wrote:

I had a game and i fired 6 shots in total on enemie tanks. The HVAP´s always bounced on Tigers and Tank IV´s from close distant. In my first attack the M10 fired two HVAP shots on a Tiger from very very close distant and nothing happend. The Hellcat of my teammate did a short job with Tiger from mid range. The other 3 HVAP shots from mid range and ambush vs Tank IV´s also bounced. I made just one single shot with basic rounds from ambush on long range against a Tiger and it instantly penetrated the tiger. M10 Wolverine is very weird and stats of gun or ammo types are broken. Pls check it oO.


Agree. Wolverine must be checked and could making some changes with gun. :idea:

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Tiger1996 » 08 Jan 2015, 08:08

Guys, it's not only about the Wolverine neither the 28mm guns performance compared with 37mm ones. It's surely also about much more crap values.. the Jumbo should never ever be able to bounce off the Tiger's 88mm gun with armor piercing rounds loaded! Huh, the 88mm L/56 kwk 36 gun normal AP round is actually up to very well penetrate about 120mm armor thickness on 100m and 110mm at 500m ranges. While the APCR rounds of it is able to penetrate about 171mm armor thickness on 100m and 156mm on 500m ranges...
And when u look at the armor thickness values of the late war tank called Jumbo u will discover out that the early war Tiger is able to penetrate the Jumbo hull armor even at 500m range using the normal AP rounds but it will probably find some problems in penetrating the turret. While the APCR rounds can this way penetrate the Jumbo hull armor even at a range of 2km as it's according to the realistic penetration values, it can penetrate about 111mm armor thickness at 2km range while it will surely find some problems or troubles with penetrating the turret at such a very long range.
Sherman E2 Jumbo armor thickness values;
101/76/38 mm Hull Armor
152/152/152 mm Turret Armor

What is even worse is that how come the Churchill 75mm and Ace versions magically 'several times' are able to penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor???!!! Sometimes I feel like they use 17Ps and not just short barrel 75mm guns while in fact this gun is barely able to penetrate Tiger's side armor at very short ranges.... While the Tiger should greatly even more struggles with penetrating the Churchill.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3452
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: M10 Wolverine and M10 Achilles

Postby Warhawks97 » 08 Jan 2015, 12:39

Tiger1996 wrote:Guys, it's not only about the Wolverine neither the 28mm guns performance compared with 37mm ones. It's surely also about much more crap values.. the Jumbo should never ever be able to bounce off the Tiger's 88mm gun with armor piercing rounds loaded! Huh, the 88mm L/56 kwk 36 gun normal AP round is actually up to very well penetrate about 120mm armor thickness on 100m and 110mm at 500m ranges. While the APCR rounds of it is able to penetrate about 171mm armor thickness on 100m and 156mm on 500m ranges...
And when u look at the armor thickness values of the late war tank called Jumbo u will discover out that the early war Tiger is able to penetrate the Jumbo hull armor even at 500m range using the normal AP rounds but it will probably find some problems in penetrating the turret. While the APCR rounds can this way penetrate the Jumbo hull armor even at a range of 2km as it's according to the realistic penetration values, it can penetrate about 111mm armor thickness at 2km range while it will surely find some problems or troubles with penetrating the turret at such a very long range.
Sherman E2 Jumbo armor thickness values;
101/76/38 mm Hull Armor
152/152/152 mm Turret Armor

What is even worse is that how come the Churchill 75mm and Ace versions magically 'several times' are able to penetrate the Tiger's frontal armor???!!! Sometimes I feel like they use 17Ps and not just short barrel 75mm guns while in fact this gun is barely able to penetrate Tiger's side armor at very short ranges.... While the Tiger should greatly even more struggles with penetrating the Churchill.



game doesnt reflect angels. So it even happend in a combat in france that a Panther bounced three times from a sherman hitting the front of it from a very very poor angel.


And who is using RE? I´ve seen one church ace in several month. But aces are no more aces and this single vet 1 ace ive seen lost against a Tiger without damaging it. I dont have made many experiences with new aces but it seems less an issue now that church ace pens tigers too often. Furthermore i am not sure what kind of gun it used (the later churchs) but its afaik a way stonger than sherman 75 mm gun.


The 28mm Had very good pen stats and high muzzle velocity. It was better than the 37 mm but the damage was unsatisfying.


Return to “General - CoH1 / BKMOD1”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest