Hammer gammon are (still) too expensive.

So those nasty flame grenades are free and only cost 30 muni????

What about the multiple ( infiltration is it?) grenades which are wipetastic?

They cost 15 muni.

For comparison, ost assault nades, which is exactly the same thing, just for assault grens only, does cost 25 muni.

You may consider one's gaster to be well and truly flabbered.

15 muni and free with tech? If a gammon costs 75 those things should be 60 at least.

Use it against MGs in buildings and stuff like that, things that can't usually retreat in time. I think it pretty much oneshot wipes a building.

Same about penal charge, but one of them cost 45 muni and second 75.

It's to counter Axis vehicles in Hulldown, duh.

It's to counter Axis vehicles in Hulldown, duh.

That explains engine overheat snare

Hammer Gammon Bomb are meant to be used against vehicles and are extremely powerful if the explosion hits a vehicle.

It immobilizes any vehicle that it hits for 8 whole seconds...

It has different range the satchel and different use and it should not be compared with it...

If its price is to be reduced it should be allot less effective vs infantry so it does not not replace mills bombs and have a lesser affect on armor.

In is current performance is gamble and it should be expensive...

Just like the AEC Tread Shot ability Gammon Bombs are an interesting design idea as a side-tech option to give the Brits an additional snare but is likewise poorly executed. I assume this was the primary idea behind them anyway.

Problem is the high cost usually makes it inefficient to try unless you have the perfect ambush set up to make full use of the immobilized tank assuming you hit it. Its usually just more efficient to spam Strafing Support, Artillery Cover, or buy Brens. This would be okay if their secondary uses didn't also suck since they don't one-shot bunkers and the long fuse means its pretty useless as a regular grenade. For that reason it makes sense to either buff it versus building or slightly reduce the cost.

Would be better if it was a sticky grenade that had shorter throw range/shorter stun/ something to balance out it being able to land 100%

Hammer Gammon Bomb are meant to be used against vehicles and are extremely powerful if the explosion hits a vehicle.

It immobilizes any vehicle that it hits for 8 whole seconds...

It has different range the satchel and different use and it should not be compared with it...

If its price is to be reduced it should be allot less effective vs infantry so it does not not replace mills bombs and have a lesser affect on armor.

In is current performance is gamble and it should be expensive...

Range is still the same and AOE is also the same if not less. Damage should roughly be the same it just no one has seen penals in awhile to realize that are basically the same.

In the range dept you may be thinking of the commando "cooked" Gammon bomb that has a smaller AOE but is very potent?

Comparing Gammon bomb to the Satchel, here.

Hammer Gammon Bomb are meant to be used against vehicles and are extremely powerful if the explosion hits a vehicle.

It immobilizes any vehicle that it hits for 8 whole seconds...

The explosion is not really that powerful (200 vs 340 damage), however it does immobilize the vehicle for 8 seconds (the penal satchel doesn't seem to immobilize vehicles)

It has different range the satchel and different use and it should not be compared with it...

The throwing range on the gammon bomb is longer 12 vs 10, but I would argue that this is negligible. Penals also get Hurrah.

The Gammon bomb upgrade is not really non-tech; it comes a bit too late into the game, when Tommies' complete lack of utility begins to show.

My personal opinion that a "more spammable" gammon bomb at 45-50-ish munitions is not going to be much of a substitute for the lack of snaring options of that faction. (AT nades/fausts/etc are wayyy more spammable, and they cause permanent engine damage -- unless you play as USF).

PS: I can't really comment on the anti-infantry performance, since I can't launch my tools
But no, the Gammon bomb should not become a better satchel charge.

Just tried about 4 Gammon bombs against Panthers. No stun or other crit and not much damage

Satchel cost 60, and its locked behind an specialist unit, thats why its better than gammon bomb

satchel cost 45 munition.

They should destroy the engine of a tank considering how hard it is to snare a tank with one

PS: I can't really comment on the anti-infantry performance, since I can't launch my tools
But no, the Gammon bomb should not become a better satchel charge.

Sorry, by mobile i was meaning non-team infantery and fast moving vehicles.
I wont say it is useless as it does significant dammage (somethin' like 200 for gamon + stun and 300-350 for satchel) to vehicles. 3-4 secondes to detonate may seems a lot but i found it enough to hit a vehicle that stop his engine to aim better as he cannot escape the danger zone in time. Plus, a satchel/gammon in the face is often unexpected and catch most player by surprise, focused they are, on the positionning of your at guns.

the gammon bomb have a 3.3 seconds fuse and a short throw range. People should be already watching for the regular grenade if a squad get within 20 meters of you. There's no excuse for not dodging the gammon bomb.

the reason most people doesn't expect a gammon bomb is because most people don't use it.

The throwing range on the gammon bomb is longer 12 vs 10, but I would argue that this is negligible. Penals also get Hurrah.
...

2 more range is 20% which I would argue in not negligible. Gamon bomb also has more AOE 4.5vs3.75 (20% better.

2 more range is 20% which I would argue in not negligible. Gamon bomb also has more AOE 4.5vs3.75 (20% better.

bigger AOE but significantly less damage. 340 vs 200 is a lot.

it's not like the satchel and penal are models of excellence to begin with. Their only real use is to knock down buildings and not much else.

bigger AOE but significantly less damage. 340 vs 200 is a lot.

it's not like the satchel and penal are models of excellence to begin with. Their only real use is to knock down buildings and not much else.

In this case bigger AOE mean that it can stun vehicles in quite a big area and that it can wipe out support teams and garrisoned units quite good...

And that is why I said that comparing gammon with satchel is not really helpful in the first place...they both do a big boom and the similarities end there...

In this case bigger AOE mean that it can stun vehicles in quite a big area and that it can wipe out support teams and garrisoned units quite good...

And that is why I said that comparing gammon with satchel is not really helpful in the first place...they both do a big boom and the similarities end there...

The hammer gammon is entirely dodgeable. it's got a 12 meter throw range with a 3.3 seconds fuse. The Molotov have 15 range and the two allied grenades have 20 meter range.

Any units should really be moving or watching out for explosives if an enemy unit get that close. Tanks shouldn't really be loitering that close to infantry units to begin with. Too many take the tommies' lack of regular tank snare for granted.

Gammon is dodge-able never argued differently and that is why I described it as a gamble in it current form...

I only argued that if it to become cheaper and more spammable it should also become weaker. Less investment less rewards...

2 more range is 20% which I would argue in not negligible. Gamon bomb also has more AOE 4.5vs3.75 (20% better.

Multiplying something small with 20% will still yield something small.

Would increasing the far accuracy of Shock Troops by 100% turn them into snipers? No, they are still going to be pathetically horrible at far range. In the case of Shock Troops even 100% is negligible. I'm not going to argue anymore about the range.

Now, regarding AoE::
- Gammon bomb has a wider radius (6 vs 5 -- AoE radius is a different thing from far AoE distance)

However, the Satchel charge deals more damage (340 vs 200). Does this make a difference vs infantry which has 80 health? Yes, it does:
- The Satchel charge deals enough damage to kill infantry models ANYWHERE within the explosion zone (340 * 0.25 = 85; I'm just multiplying with the far AoE damage multiplier here)
- The Gammon bomb does NOT deal enough damage in the outer ring to kill infantry (200 * 0.25 = 50).

That means that the Satchel Charge is lethal in a 5-unit radius.
The Gammon bomb is lethal in AT MOST a 4.5-unit radius (it's even lower).

Now, if somebody could tell me what is the Mid AoE distance & damage modifier for the gammon bomb, I could calculate the exact lethal distance for the gammon bomb.

PS: Final note regarding damage vs garrisons.

Incorrect stuff.
Show Spoiler

It seems that gammon bomb has the damage_all_in_hold property set to true, whereas the satchel charge does not. What does this mean?
- The satchel charge will only damage the garrisoned models that are close to the explosion, just as if the unit was out in the open (i.e., all affected models will die).
- The gammon bomb will also damage units that are situated in the other end of the building (for 50 damage).

Thus (ignoring the price difference), a gammon bomb would be the better choice for attacking larger buildings (e.g., train stations) -- provided that the building does not collapse (satchel charge is better here)

Note that it's not the gammon bomb that's the exception for the damage_all_in_hold property; it's the satchel charge. All other explosives have that property set to true (tank shells, grenades, demo-charges, etc).