AT rifle raping StuGs/StuH

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Eternal]

The british AT rifle rapes the assault guns. I do not think it should be this way, as the AT rifles is a light vehicle counter, not an anti-tank weapon.

And yes, I know the assault guns aren't real tanks, but their armour (both gamewise and IRL) is closer to that of tanks than light vehicles.

Nerf the AT Rifle's penetration vs. assault guns

Discuss!

[Armfelt]

I don't know how much that is changed in EiRR with Boyz rifle. What´s the stats? After that we can discuss. I agree that they should'nt be tank hunters, just truck hunters.

[brn4meplz]

If they are hitting and penetrating, the modifiers should be so bad they only scratch the paint. I know it's that way for the P4 and up. Can't visualize the StuG/StuH modifiers off the top of my head but I can look into it.

[Mysthalin]

At 16.58 percent chance to penetrate and 45 damage if it penetrates... It rapes StuGs/StuHs?
Seriously?

-.-

[brn4meplz]

well there you go. he looked it up before i got home. Mathematically then they blow chunks on the StuG chassis

[Eternal]

2 squads of AT Rifles destroy a StuG with relative ease. I will save the replay next time I encounter it. I do not know if skirts can affect this?

Also I am of the same opinion as burn, they should only scratch the armour of anything but light vehicles.

[Mysthalin]

If there's 4 AT rifles (2 squads), then the combined possibility of not penetrating at all with any of them in a volley is about 50 percent.

Why would you be fighting 2 squads of AT rifles with a StuG in a straight-up firefight anyway? If you're fighting at long range - then I guess it's alright, but I personaly just drive up, suppress and powerslide. Hardly feel a dent - let alone coming near to the possibility of being "destroyed with relative ease".

[Eternal]

Maybe I just had an extremely unlucky game. But An entire 2v2 I had to run from the AT rifles, as the first volley usually killed the gunner, the next blew the engine.

[Mysthalin]

Probably an unlucky game. This is why you should check up on the stats before you post something as silly as that ;p.

[Eternal]

Still, it shouldn't be able to penetrate at all. Counts vs. all tanks, both allied and axis

[Mysthalin]

Why not? One good reason please?
I mean, bikes can penetrate pershings.

[CafeMilani]

Why not? One good reason please?
I mean, bikes can penetrate pershings.

...ha....ha....

[Eternal]

Fine. The odds of them penetrating tanks should be the same, as a bike vs a pershing

[brn4meplz]

Low chances and not penetrating ever are 2 seperate things.

You know it was a torpedo launder from a Swordfish biplane(first world war technology there!) denting and bending the rudder of the Bismarck that caused it to turn in only a single direction eventually surrounded and sunk.

If an outdated and for the most part useless wooden plane can cripple the largest ship of it's class then I think Boys AT rifles should have a chance to land lucky hits too.

[Mysthalin]

Fine. The odds of them penetrating tanks should be the same, as a bike vs a pershing

Why exactly should a hand-held Anti-Tank piece people pay 60 munitions for only have the same chance of penetrating the frontal armour of a medium-class assault gun that a bike machinegun you don't pay anything extra for when faced against a heavy tank?

Feel like giving any arguments other than "I want it that way"?

[Eternal]

I am sorry. I have always enjoyed that CoH, and Eir in particular, retained a shred of realism. It sets it apart from the old-school RTS.

However, even saying realism now means that your argument is invalid. I've only played for 2 years (I think) And still I've seen the mod steer further and further away from combined arms combat, and more towards gimmicky spam builds. I am trying to atleast voice an opinion against this direction.

This was just a case, where I thought that the weapon simply is way too powerful, compared to what it was (16mm penetration, 80mm thickness on the front of the StuG).

And balance I think, that a 16% chance is still too much, vs a heavily armoured vehicle.

[Mysthalin]

You couldn't be more wrong about what the mod has steered to, to be honest. When's the last time you saw a 30 greyhound company? When's the last time you saw 70 volks? What about 70 airborne and nothing else?
Spam... well, you can still spam a single unit type - but either it's limited by huge pool values, or it's simply not that efficient. I mean, take even me for example, someone who's considered a spammer. I don't ever spam 1 unit type because it requires you to play infinitely better than the enemy to actually win - I usually use at least 3-4 unit types(at the very least). And when you have 4 unit types - the spam goes from "gimmick" to "themed".
Gimmick type spams, which work at the most once, or require simply retarded ammounts of effort to make work for longer than that just don't happen any more these days - noone's bothered enough to bother.

The mod's as spam-unfriendly as it has ever been.



So you're saying the bullet on the MG42 was just as likely to penetrate the front armour of a Pershing? If we're going to abide by realism, I propose the Boys AT rifle immobilises or destroys the main gun of the StuG and any other tank on it's first shot. Any sensible person using a Boys AT rifle would aim for either the turret, or for the threads to disable the enemy tank - they wouldn't fire at the frontal armour outright.

To be perfectly honest, though - at this point of the war the Boys AT rifle was nearly obsolete, used in very rare occurences. Implementing it "as it was" would simply be pointless - and it's capabilities were decided based on it's cost.

But the realism arguments are moot, anyway (as one of the balance forum guidelines say) - if you're not going to make an argument better than "it was like that in real life" - then just don't bother.

[Eternal]

Then I withdraw this thread. Lock incoming.

I have no other argument than it seems silly and a bit imbalanced that a 60mun upgrade can fight off af tank.

[Mysthalin]

Because the stats clearly show you simply CAN'T fight off a tank with this 60 mun upgrade.

[EliteGren]

90 mun*