6pounder(57mm) = 75mmPak ?
Posts: 172
6pounder(75mm) penetration = 75mmPak penetration What?
Wasn't USF 57mm copy of the UKF 6pounder?
Edit: I forgot this. MP difference is why I brought up this.
Cheaper gun has same performance? Is this right?
Posts: 2053
American 57mm's basic ammunition is crap but AP rounds boosts it up. UKF simply have AP rounds by default.
Posts: 76
Permanently BannedAmmunition.
American 57mm's basic ammunition is crap but AP rounds boosts it up. UKF simply have AP rounds by default.
Relic's design is flawless
Posts: 1930
Posts: 476
Posts: 172
The question is why 6pounder costs 270 mp, while pak costs 320mp, meanwhile it has same performance vs armor (if we dont talk about target weakpoint)
That's what I wanted talk about. Good point.
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
The question is why 6pounder costs 270 mp, while pak costs 320mp, meanwhile it has same performance vs armor (if we dont talk about target weakpoint)
I think that the reasoning is that the 6lber is a Pak40 with a tighter arc, which means that it should be cheaper than a Pak40. To be fair, brits are quite manpower starved, so a cheap at gun makes sense, but that is also a bad way to balance.
Posts: 172
I think that the reasoning is that the 6lber is a Pak40 with a tighter arc, which means that it should be cheaper than a Pak40. To be fair, brits are quite manpower starved, so a cheap at gun makes sense, but that is also a bad way to balance.
Part of MP starvation needs to be changed through patches.
But this one also needs proper change. It's too effective AT method at for the price that affects engagement a lot.
Posts: 83
Posts: 4928
Apparently the 6pdr has 1.5X accuracy against vehicles, if I understand Cruzz's post over in The More You Know correctly, which gives it another leg up over all the other AT guns. It's definitely a very effective unit.
Which makes it even sillier that it's cheaper than other AT Guns. I think Relic took "Allies lack AT" to heart, a bit too much, when they made the British. Even their Scout Cars and Light Tanks have AT Guns on them
Posts: 172
You shouldn't compare just unit vs. unit, instead look armies as a whole. Brits have no anti-vehicle granades, piats are shit and brits are most likely going to have very poor map control. So they need their highly efficent at guns.
The idea of 'this army sucks at some point, so this unit should be effcient like hell' is not good.
You can cover any factions with that single line. So, no. (Especially when it's about AT weapon)
This one is over the right amount of efficiency. That's all.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
They had to have something that is actually effective.
Posts: 369
Or if you're gonna make it more expensive, something should be done about British MP problems.
Posts: 172
Perhaps, but you can't simply nerf the 6 pounder if Brits don't get other reliable AT options, such as better PIATs.
Or if you're gonna make it more expensive, something should be done about British MP problems.
Not just one should be looked at. Brit can have better PIAT and less mp problem through patches.
And this one should perform that worth its mp cost, not more.
Posts: 172
Well, brits don't have vehicle snare and PIATs make PTRS look like great AT weapon.
They had to have something that is actually effective.
Critical Shot isn't a snare?
All those things should be adjusted, including this.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Critical Shot isn't a snare?
All those things should be adjusted, including this.
Nope if we're talking anything bigger then half truck.
Posts: 2470
Well, brits don't have vehicle snare and PIATs make PTRS look like great AT weapon.
They had to have something that is actually effective.
pretty sure the brit mine is a snare although i haven't actually used it (in the two games i played against the ai) and i haven't seen it used (in the dozen 4v4s i've played against brits)
Posts: 66
Well, brits don't have vehicle snare and PIATs make PTRS look like great AT weapon.
They had to have something that is actually effective.
So their tanks, which usually roll earlier than the Axis counterparts are INEFFECTIVE????
such myopic vision.....
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
So their tanks, which usually roll earlier than the Axis counterparts are INEFFECTIVE????
such myopic vision.....
If brit tanks roll out faster then ost ones(or even OKW P4) you've made something terribly wrong.
Livestreams
43 | |||||
24 | |||||
22 | |||||
5 | |||||
208 | |||||
17 | |||||
8 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.647231.737+7
- 4.1111616.643-1
- 5.277108.719+28
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.922406.694+1
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.8621.804+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
2 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Wethe184
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM