delems

Remove armored cars.

57 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, pbveteran said:

@stankyus

Srry you are being bias and your arguments can't really be defended..

There is a clear unbalance of PAC and Dac with 232 I don't want them to be remove as Delems argues because they can be a lot of fun but a short term solution should be implement to fixed this very big gap, this is a very old wound between axis players and CRS.

I play warthunder I use and fought against 20mm Axis Pzgr 40.. it's deadly in close range especially when flanking but so is everything.. Tanking is about first shots and flanking, in WW2ol 232 with first shots and flanking can barely kill any AFV and the skill required is very high even between Scout cars and light tanks because you need short distances to even penetrate 20mm also the dispersion is very significant at around 200m.

The game won't become unbalance with a limited number of PzGR 40 rounds to the 232 because again tanking is about first shots and flanking. With a large battlefield as this and no invisible walls, weapon differences are greatly mitigated as long they are effective except 232 weapons are pretty much ineffective, the 232 is more similar to a vickers than a dac or pan..

Bias? I have 26k Kills playing German... I know what the Axis players struggles are equipment wise.  The 232 scout car is just not an issue in T-0. Its a glairing AT gap that has been covered up with a Fantasy round, while more viable solutions just have to be modelled.

 

I also looked up your stats. You have not played for a while, let alone have any sorties this map? Your career kills in CSR are very few 270 kills but have a  high KD ratio for a someone who just started or are you a old time player with a new name? You also have not played allied at all... how the hell are you discussing AP.40 and the Allied ACs in a thread as if you know what its like in one of those Allied ACs?  You call me bias yet almost 25% of my kill totals are as an Axis player?  

 

Bringing another game into this one and talking with authority about an balance is rather presumptuous. Especially if you have been around for a long while. AP.40 was in this game for a while. The Physics engine does not calculate AP.40 correctly, it does not bleed off the energy fast enough to produce its ballistics properly and it was penetrating armor at much longer distances then it should ever had along with the respawn for new ammo.

Your lack of knowledge base about how equipment is entered into this game is lacking. There IS a price for everything and that is not a bias statement. Its a global statement of fact. You demand the 232 to have a auto cannon with AP.40.. if that happens there will be a price to pay. You might only get 2x 232s for instance and the Dac into T-0 at the same numbers. That's just how the game works, they balance out everything for all sides.

I am fine with AP.40 entering the game as long as the physics engine can handle it, however if specialty ammo enters and especially an auto cannon tossing that round about you open the gates to adding new ammo types across the board and allowing for all sides to have AP tank killer rounds in auto cannons. That means the Allies should finally get a HEAT round and the most logical area for that would be the 75mm on the Sherman tanks... the only auto cannon with AP rounds that are tank killers reside with the mle38 AA gun.  The Axis already have AP rounds for the flak30. So if an argument can be made, the allies would need a auto cannon platform with AP rounds that can kill tanks also all things being equitable.. the only viable solution would be adding that too the mle38. That is how the game works with new additions.

There are existing gaps in the game as it stands that need working out and AP.40 is not one of them.

47mm Pak36 and Brit TD far outweigh the gap of a tank killing AP.40 round for the 232.

I rather time be spent on adding those items by far over fixing a Physics engine to handle AP.40 properly... for something like a 232. There is ZERO bang for the buck.

That is not a bias argument either, that is a fiduciary argument. If we are going to add a Axis AC tank killer the best way about doing that is spend the time with adding the next AC triad which I posted before.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the SdfKz 232 needs a rework  so it isnt wonky and unstable.  if the steering worked properly AKA you can lock the rear steering,  for a more normal ride then people wouldnt have that much of an issue with it. almost all the complaints from people about it stem from the wonky steering which never occurred in real life.

The all wheel turning in the 232 wasnt there so it could turn faster, it was there because the Vehicle had a Rear Driver so they could back out of dangerous situiations faster. which is a shame, that this function isn't even included in the vehicle

Edited by mauserk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you want to kill Allied tanks in a Armored Car?

SdfKz 221 with 2.8 cm schwere Panzerbüchse 41

Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lob12 said:

I gave 150$ for the gaddamn software so they can make a puma and make Delems STFU already

puma wont solve the issue with 232's the vehicle has to be reworked from the wheels up. once the vehicle drives properly it wont have issue killing other vehicles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2016 at 5:58 PM, stankyus said:

 

Bringing another game into this one and talking with authority about an balance is rather presumptuous. Especially if you have been around for a long while. AP.40 was in this game for a while. The Physics engine does not calculate AP.40 correctly, it does not bleed off the energy fast enough to produce its ballistics properly and it was penetrating armor at much longer distances then it should ever had along with the respawn for new ammo.

Your lack of knowledge base about how equipment is entered into this game is lacking. There IS a price for everything and that is not a bias statement. Its a global statement of fact. You demand the 232 to have a auto cannon with AP.40.. if that happens there will be a price to pay. You might only get 2x 232s for instance and the Dac into T-0 at the same numbers. That's just how the game works, they balance out everything for all sides.

I am fine with AP.40 entering the game as long as the physics engine can handle it, however if specialty ammo enters and especially an auto cannon tossing that round about you open the gates to adding new ammo types across the board and allowing for all sides to have AP tank killer rounds in auto cannons. That means the Allies should finally get a HEAT round and the most logical area for that would be the 75mm on the Sherman tanks... the only auto cannon with AP rounds that are tank killers reside with the mle38 AA gun.  The Axis already have AP rounds for the flak30. So if an argument can be made, the allies would need a auto cannon platform with AP rounds that can kill tanks also all things being equitable.. the only viable solution would be adding that too the mle38. That is how the game works with new additions.

There are existing gaps in the game as it stands that need working out and AP.40 is not one of them.

47mm Pak36 and Brit TD far outweigh the gap of a tank killing AP.40 round for the 232.

I rather time be spent on adding those items by far over fixing a Physics engine to handle AP.40 properly... for something like a 232. There is ZERO bang for the buck.

That is not a bias argument either, that is a fiduciary argument. If we are going to add a Axis AC tank killer the best way about doing that is spend the time with adding the next AC triad which I posted before.

AFAIK the engine can only correctly model AP and the problems are in Rounds like the German PzGr 39 that is a APCBC-HE-T and I think the same applies to APHE.

Having PzGr 40 in tier 0 would probably keep everything has it is, Matty could still not be penetrated and some French tanks as well, PzGr 40 has a higher chance to bounce of armor, it generates less spall and fragmentation and for you to effectively kill a tank you would have to know more or less were to aim, meaning you will loose more rounds trying to hit the crew also the 20mm PzGr 40 in real life it bleeds a lot of energy fast, so it would become useless very fast at long ranges.(It's much more easy to balance the PzGr 40 jut by changing the number of mags)

The PzGr 40 is a short term solution that for me looks very cost effective to implement you don't have to model a new vehicle and are less depended on the vehicle proprietary engine and the main reason is to allow on tier 1 and 2 to be able to kill at least Shermans and Stuarts at more safe distances with less skill required than DAC.

You can't compare Axis AFVs and Allied AFVs on equal terms all German tanks were very weak on sides and rear, Allies were much more armored being able to penetrate 30mm with Axis and Allied with 30mm is unbalanced because of what I just mention, therefore DAC at least on Tier 0 would still have less number compared to 232 With PzGr 40.

I'm all for mixed ammo setups just like warthunder, I didn't now there was a 75mm Sherman HEAT round but I'm all for the 105mm Sherman with HEAT.

 

Yeah this is my F2P account I'm a 2005 player and I do not recall the PzGr 40 ever being ingame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@stankyus

I saying you are being bias because HEAT is not OP in the game on the German side without it Tier 0 and tier 1 would be even more unbalanced.

And a 20mm PzGr 40 even on tier 0 will never have the impact the DAC,Pan and Stuart have from Tier 0 to Tier 3 how can you compare the ability to take down all Axis Tanks from 1.5km and the tiger from 100m... with just the extra ability to take Sherman and making easier to kill M10 and Stuart at 100m while still leaving Churchills and Matties untouched.

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, pbveteran said:

@stankyus

I saying you are being bias because HEAT is not OP in the game on the German side without it Tier 0 and tier 1 would be even more unbalanced.

And a 20mm PzGr 40 even on tier 0 will never have the impact the DAC,Pan and Stuart have from Tier 0 to Tier 3 how can you compare the ability to take down all Axis Tanks from 1.5km and the tiger from 100m... with just the extra ability to take Sherman and making easier to kill M10 and Stuart at 100m while still leaving Churchills and Matties untouched.

Just FYI, prior to the HEAT upgrade and increased HEAT rounds, the Axis had more Map wins then the Allies. The allies even had more Matties available to them.

 

As per your other point about the AP.40 needing strickt aiming because of the spall... that is no different then the AP rounds of the 25mm on the Pan. Shot placement is everything. The 232 will have just enough penetration to kill crew in the Matty, but unlike the PAN AP, it will have multiple penetrations at a high rate of speed making up for any mistake in shot placement. Who needs spall when 20 rounds with minimal spall would act like a shot gun inside a tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, pbveteran said:

AFAIK the engine can only correctly model AP and the problems are in Rounds like the German PzGr 39 that is a APCBC-HE-T and I think the same applies to APHE.

Having PzGr 40 in tier 0 would probably keep everything has it is, Matty could still not be penetrated and some French tanks as well, PzGr 40 has a higher chance to bounce of armor, it generates less spall and fragmentation and for you to effectively kill a tank you would have to know more or less were to aim, meaning you will loose more rounds trying to hit the crew also the 20mm PzGr 40 in real life it bleeds a lot of energy fast, so it would become useless very fast at long ranges.(It's much more easy to balance the PzGr 40 jut by changing the number of mags)

The PzGr 40 is a short term solution that for me looks very cost effective to implement you don't have to model a new vehicle and are less depended on the vehicle proprietary engine and the main reason is to allow on tier 1 and 2 to be able to kill at least Shermans and Stuarts at more safe distances with less skill required than DAC.

You can't compare Axis AFVs and Allied AFVs on equal terms all German tanks were very weak on sides and rear, Allies were much more armored being able to penetrate 30mm with Axis and Allied with 30mm is unbalanced because of what I just mention, therefore DAC at least on Tier 0 would still have less number compared to 232 With PzGr 40.

I'm all for mixed ammo setups just like warthunder, I didn't now there was a 75mm Sherman HEAT round but I'm all for the 105mm Sherman with HEAT.

 

Yeah this is my F2P account I'm a 2005 player and I do not recall the PzGr 40 ever being ingame.

No its the AP.40 that has the issue.. All regular rounds work fine. IN order for AP.40 to function properly the physics engine would have to be rewritten so AP.40 would bleed off energy correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stankyus said:

Just FYI, prior to the HEAT upgrade and increased HEAT rounds, the Axis had more Map wins then the Allies. The allies even had more Matties available to them.

 

As per your other point about the AP.40 needing strickt aiming because of the spall... that is no different then the AP rounds of the 25mm on the Pan. Shot placement is everything. The 232 will have just enough penetration to kill crew in the Matty, but unlike the PAN AP, it will have multiple penetrations at a high rate of speed making up for any mistake in shot placement. Who needs spall when 20 rounds with minimal spall would act like a shot gun inside a tank.

Where could it kill the crew? according warthunder Armor highlights and x-ray the only place you could is penetrate is in the radiators and transmission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pbveteran said:

Where could it kill the crew? according warthunder Armor highlights and x-ray the only place you could is penetrate is in the radiators and transmission.

I have not looked up the penetration tables for AP.40 ammo, I'm going off of your stated penetration of 63mm, I assume you are correct about that, IF that is the case, then just like the Pan and DAC requiring flanking manuvers, the 232 will require for the most part flanking manuvers also. The Matty has 55mm rear armor, well enough penetration to start an engine fire. You bringing the Stu into the mix which btw the 232 AP ingame can kill.. If you are correct the Sherman tanks will pop to the 20mm round from the flank, its only 38mm so you now have a pretty good range to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, stankyus said:

I have not looked up the penetration tables for AP.40 ammo, I'm going off of your stated penetration of 63mm, I assume you are correct about that, IF that is the case, then just like the Pan and DAC requiring flanking manuvers, the 232 will require for the most part flanking manuvers also. The Matty has 55mm rear armor, well enough penetration to start an engine fire. You bringing the Stu into the mix which btw the 232 AP ingame can kill.. If you are correct the Sherman tanks will pop to the 20mm round from the flank, its only 38mm so you now have a pretty good range to do it.

Ingame I never manage to take down a Matilda from the rear with a IVG or IIIG and according to Warthunder what is behind the rear armor, is the radiator and transmission.

That's why you sap and shoot at the side rear because it has the fuel there(75mm Armor)... So you won't be able to kill the crew of the Matilda and flame it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2016 at 10:00 AM, mauserk said:

you want to kill Allied tanks in a Armored Car?

SdfKz 221 with 2.8 cm schwere Panzerbüchse 41

Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221Image result for Sd. Kfz. 221

 

That'd be cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2016 at 0:58 PM, stankyus said:

Bias? I have 26k Kills playing German... I know what the Axis players struggles are equipment wise.  The 232 scout car is just not an issue in T-0. Its a glairing AT gap that has been covered up with a Fantasy round, while more viable solutions just have to be modelled.

 

LULZ....

 

He tries to tell us he's not biased and immediately states that the 232 is "not an issue" in tier0 and makes mention of "fantasy" rounds... Capitalizing the F in fantasy.

 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the tiger, mattty, and AC deaths to weak units are under reported in stats. the char vs pak36 is a good example, can kill the turret gunner, kill the engine do all kinds of damage and get no kill after he despawns.

same with the pak36 clipping into a matty, and riflemen and lmg's vs tanks/AC's. happens all the time with normal tanking too, unless they explode there may be no kill...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, major0noob said:

the tiger, mattty, and AC deaths to weak units are under reported in stats. the char vs pak36 is a good example, can kill the turret gunner, kill the engine do all kinds of damage and get no kill after he despawns.

same with the pak36 clipping into a matty, and riflemen and lmg's vs tanks/AC's. happens all the time with normal tanking too, unless they explode there may be no kill...

For me as long a Matilda can kill, it's not dead but I have seen many cases of Matildas having both tracks blown, degunned, engine out but still shooting infantry with Coax because we have no more sappers, so they keep gaining kills until they run out of ammo or despawn.

 

@mauserk

The 221 with 2.8cm was too rare even more than the puma I think, plus the gunner is exposed from the rear and top..

That would be a very silly idea one nade your vehicle is lost or a simple rifleman could kill the vehicle from 800+, it would give use a more historical correct battlefield and would be very ineffective compare to the Dac or the Pan, that don't have their gunner exposed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vasduten1 said:

LULZ....

 

He tries to tell us he's not biased and immediately states that the 232 is "not an issue" in tier0 and makes mention of "fantasy" rounds... Capitalizing the F in fantasy.

 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Its not an issue, I can agree about the intenea, that being said its about as ridiculous about complaining that the Vickers cannot kill heavy tanks. Neither where purpose built AT weapons platforms.  That's how crazy this argument is. The PAN has a AT gun... the 232 does not. Even the 2.8 gun mentioned is a squeezebore round. I have no issue with that entering except again for the fact that the game cannot handle the physics required for it operate properly.  I can also see you have played Allied with a total of 225 kills, for me that's 2 game sessions for me to achieve this many kills. I have 3000x the amount of experience playing the Allied side and 5x more experience playing the Axis side then you do . I know about the problems the Axis face and the 232 is not one of them... not even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, stankyus said:

Its not an issue, I can agree about the intenea, that being said its about as ridiculous about complaining that the Vickers cannot kill heavy tanks. Neither where purpose built AT weapons platforms.  That's how crazy this argument is. The PAN has a AT gun... the 232 does not. Even the 2.8 gun mentioned is a squeezebore round. I have no issue with that entering except again for the fact that the game cannot handle the physics required for it operate properly.  I can also see you have played Allied with a total of 225 kills, for me that's 2 game sessions for me to achieve this many kills. I have 3000x the amount of experience playing the Allied side and 5x more experience playing the Axis side then you do . I know about the problems the Axis face and the 232 is not one of them... not even close.

Under normal circumstances I would just chalk the 232 up to a difference in equipment set and leave it at that. It's fun to have different equipment on each side. However, as I mentioned before, we have gone down the road of not releasing new weapons and putting weapons in game to cover perceived imbalances of weapons in already in game.  If the MG34 simply must be balanced out somehow rather than looked upon as simply a more effective capability on the Axis side (as the Pan and DAC are for armored cars)  I would say at this point their gripe is justified since it represents a capability clearly not in the hands of one side.  Apparently all sides must have the exact same capability.  You can't cave to the demands of one side on that issue and leave the other out in the cold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, saronin said:

Under normal circumstances I would just chalk the 232 up to a difference in equipment set and leave it at that. It's fun to have different equipment on each side. However, as I mentioned before, we have gone down the road of not releasing new weapons and putting weapons in game to cover perceived imbalances of weapons in already in game.  If the MG34 simply must be balanced out somehow rather than looked upon as simply a more effective capability on the Axis side (as the Pan and DAC are for armored cars)  I would say at this point their gripe is justified since it represents a capability clearly not in the hands of one side.  Apparently all sides must have the exact same capability.  You can't cave to the demands of one side on that issue and leave the other out in the cold.

Sure you can... he just did!

Stankyus routinely clamors for balance but fails to grasp that the AC game is totally UNbalanced in ALL tiers.

 

Full circle now, and back to the OP: Remove armored cars until they are balanced.

Edited by vasduten1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys know you get a shat ton more armor than the Allies to compensate for stuff like this, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's still not enough... the pan has close to a 1.0K/D vs the 4D, over 1 vs the 38t and .25-.5 vs everything else.

it's like having 6 more S35's, while axis's extra bottom bucket stuff is only practical for anti inf work. waste of game time using those extra 3f's at the start of a battle.

the brit and american dac's are even worse...

 

lowering their supply would help balance, axis can loose those junk tanks.

most of all their just a pain in the a.s.s like mobile RPATS. no fun playing against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2016 at 5:07 PM, pbveteran said:

For me as long a Matilda can kill, it's not dead but I have seen many cases of Matildas having both tracks blown, degunned, engine out but still shooting infantry with Coax because we have no more sappers, so they keep gaining kills until they run out of ammo or despawn.

 

@mauserk

The 221 with 2.8cm was too rare even more than the puma I think, plus the gunner is exposed from the rear and top..

That would be a very silly idea one nade your vehicle is lost or a simple rifleman could kill the vehicle from 800+, it would give use a more historical correct battlefield and would be very ineffective compare to the Dac or the Pan, that don't have their gunner exposed.

lol TOO RARE!!  did you know that the BEF only had 6 Matilda II tanks in the whole formation!!!! and 5 of them were in the same battlion. 6th was for parts motorpool queen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, capco said:

You guys know you get a shat ton more armor than the Allies to compensate for stuff like this, right?

hush you, damn liberal elite.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, capco said:

You guys know you get a shat ton more armor than the Allies to compensate for stuff like this, right?

As with all things any adjustment to the equipment set would require a re calibration of equipment numbers to compensate. Quite honestly I don't know why Allied players are not cheering this idea on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, saronin said:

As with all things any adjustment to the equipment set would require a re calibration of equipment numbers to compensate. Quite honestly I don't know why Allied players are not cheering this idea on.  

...maybe it's because they'd have to face tank-killing fast ACs.

Maybe they don't WANT numbers for the 2C and 3F reduced in order to add a 234 with 50MM AP rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.