Boys AT rifles

[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

[LeoPhone]

These rifles have the role of anti light vehicle and wont penetrate tank front armor.

however, they penetrate rear tank armor without any problem. This seems rather odd because it makes the weapon actually able to fight tanks or even heavy tanks.
the front penetration of boys AT vs tiger is 0.1, the front penetration of 75mm sherman vs tiger is 0.25.
however, they boys AT has a 0.6 chanse to penetrate rear armor tiger opposed to the 0.5 chanse of 75mm sherman.

Hitting rear armor with them is easy because of the high accuracy at long range.

I suggest to reduce rear armor penetration values of the boys AT rifle so it will stay in it's role of anti light vehicle. It also seems a bit more logic this way since tank rear armor is actually NOT made out of paper.

[RikiRude]

They should be able to penetrate rear, but obviously shouldn't be able to penetrate better than a upgun sherman. It does very minimal damage (like 3% if i remember correctly?). Also they can penetrate M-10s quite well and do a bit of damage.

[DarkSoldierX]

I do think it should go down, they always penetrate my p4 , maybe -5 mun cost to compensate?

[Malgoroth]

Boys AT rifles are fine. If they penetrate a tank, it'll be from behind (HA!) and rarely from anywhere else, though it happens from time to time. As an armor player it's my only defense against speedy PE vehicle incursions.

Mainline AT it is not.
Support AT it is awesome.

[BigDick]

boys at are imho way to good against pe and shit against wehrmacht

when ever i would change something on them it would be buffing them against tanks (rear) and nerfing them against PE vehicles

[LeoPhone]

maybe nerf against pe vehicles yes, but also vs rear armor. atm its like a super zook since it got 100% accuracy.

[Uglysori]

maybe nerf against pe vehicles yes, but also vs rear armor. atm its like a super zook since it got 100% accuracy.

It doesn't have 100% accuracy, just low scatter like RRs.

[DarkSoldierX]

which is sorta like having 100% acc except you cant go through shotblockers.

[Uglysori]

In the end though I'd rather face mass boys AT on my PE than RRs.  At least the platform for boys AT are so much easier to kill than AB. And as much as I hate to say it, it doesn't make any sense for the AT rifles to do *less* dmg to PE Lvs.  By nature of an AT rifle, that should be the only thing its good at.  If you're going to tone them down a bit, I'd probably be a proponent of a slightly shorter range on them.  That way you'll see them employed alot less in straight-on attacks since they should be shit against the frontal armor of any real tank anyway and it will be harder for them to rush in a mass to snipe out that pak gun like a poor man's rr.  The shorter range on the otherhand shouldn't really affect their flanking or rear attack ability since that usually comes with an element of surprise.

[Spartan_Marine88]

In the end though I'd rather face mass boys AT on my PE than RRs.  At least the platform for boys AT are so much easier to kill than AB. And as much as I hate to say it, it doesn't make any sense for the AT rifles to do *less* dmg to PE Lvs.  By nature of an AT rifle, that should be the only thing its good at.  If you're going to tone them down a bit, I'd probably be a proponent of a slightly shorter range on them.  That way you'll see them employed alot less in straight-on attacks since they should be shit against the frontal armor of any real tank anyway and it will be harder for them to rush in a mass to snipe out that pak gun like a poor man's rr.  The shorter range on the otherhand shouldn't really affect their flanking or rear attack ability since that usually comes with an element of surprise.

+1 ill be honest, i really respect Uglys opinion on this. He is a longtime PE user and probably one of the least biased people on here

[LeoPhone]

he just spams ists lol, thats why he wants boys instead of RR. bounces off ist.

[Uglysori]

*yawn* or maybe because the platform that carries RRs normally is really hard to kill and can fire up and chase you? 

[PonySlaystation]

Boys AT are too expensive, not worth it.

[RikiRude]

you just put those boys in my ... wait. what is going on?

[BigDick]

And as much as I hate to say it, it doesn't make any sense for the AT rifles to do *less* dmg to PE Lvs.  By nature of an AT rifle, that should be the only thing its good at.  

there are many things in CoH that make no sense, thats why we call gameplay > realism
try to fight as PE without jagd(panthers) a churchill boys at company or a pershing boys AT company
that doesn't work cost/pop effective because they easily snipe your only medicore counters to churchill or pershing armor (50mm, marders)

maybe nerf against pe vehicles yes, but also vs rear armor. atm its like a super zook since it got 100% accuracy.

boys AT are 90 mun that is more than zooks on elite infantry rangers while doing way less damage (2x60=120 vs 2x112.5=225 in case of your tiger example) and having way less penetration
get your facts straight

you can say they are anti light vehicle but seriously who will need those then? they own pe but you don't really need them (ATGs own pe too but less mobile) and wehrmacht don't has decent light armor
almost no one use pumas and actually they are not very good against puma armor (like RRs)
so what are they supposed to be used against? bikes?

to give a benefit for flanking tanks by decent rearpenetration is imho the only thing to make them useful
 

[smurfORnot]

so what are they supposed to be used against? bikes?

they miss bikes rly bad...with my luft,when I tried them on jeeps,dunno did I even get a single hit...

[TheIcelandicManiac]

I dont really mind the Boys rifle that much But it is annoying when 2 squads of them rush my hetzers and allmost kill it from the front armor due to its Meh health and Exelent armor.

[LeoPhone]

boys AT are 90 mun that is more than zooks on elite infantry rangers while doing way less damage (2x60=120 vs 2x112.5=225 in case of your tiger example) and having way less penetration
get your facts straight
 

but zooks always miss at long range so in the end boys can do more DPS.
and the only tank where the zook has some decent pen. against is the PIV. but a PIV will still beat them.

I dont really mind the Boys rifle that much But it is annoying when 2 squads of them rush my hetzers and allmost kill it from the front armor due to its Meh health and Exelent armor.

less ricochet damage then. that is possible.

[Uglysori]

there are many things in CoH that make no sense, thats why we call gameplay > realism
try to fight as PE without jagd(panthers) a churchill boys at company or a pershing boys AT company
that doesn't work cost/pop effective because they easily snipe your only medicore counters to churchill or pershing armor (50mm, marders)

boys AT are 90 mun that is more than zooks on elite infantry rangers while doing way less damage (2x60=120 vs 2x112.5=225 in case of your tiger example) and having way less penetration
get your facts straight

you can say they are anti light vehicle but seriously who will need those then? they own pe but you don't really need them (ATGs own pe too but less mobile) and wehrmacht don't has decent light armor
almost no one use pumas and actually they are not very good against puma armor (like RRs)
so what are they supposed to be used against? bikes?

to give a benefit for flanking tanks by decent rearpenetration is imho the only thing to make them useful
 

So which pt are you arguing for exactly?  That the current rear penetration should be kept but that the dmg should be toned down vs PE?  I still think a slight tone down on range would be the best solution than toning down the dmg vs PE LVs on the boys at.  It makes it harder for players to use them in frontal attacks esp the en mass snipe out the 50mm or AT gun poor man rr's method but doesn't preclude them being employed in flanking attacks where they should be able to wreck PE LVs or rear pen tanks if the player isn't paying attention.

[Poppi]

At rifles are super weak against frontal heavy armor. In the rear... ok. Not great. Plus AT rifles are expensive.
And if your complaining how it does descent damage against rear armor and want it toned down....guard your armor? I know i know guard german armor. Who would do such a thing