17p AP rounds

[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

[smurfORnot]

how can you say that,defensive guy has awesome medic bunker,and ultra awesome rocket arty,so he can kill all those badass churchils!

[Mysthalin]

how can you say that,defensive guy has awesome medic bunker,and ultra awesome rocket arty,so he can kill all those badass churchils!

Fail attempt at sarcasm.

Not anyone else's fault you can't use medic bunkers, and rocket arty rapes absolute face now. Instant drop, awesome damage and pinnage all around!

I'd also much rather use a 6 pdr over a 17 pdr. The one, singular penetrating 150 dmg shot that I might get off before the 17pdr is dead (lol 7 second reload) just pales in comparison to the one penetrating 150 dmg shot and one bounced 75 dmg shot that I'll get from the 6 pdr (reasonable expectations vs most tanks) and possibly live to tell the tale. For less of a muni drain as well.

[smurfORnot]

from what I saw with rocket arty I wasnt much impressed...
and medic bunker is nothing exciting,atleast not to me,even though I have one...would still rather have ablative armor and crocs...hmmm,panthers/tigers and shit with ablative,would love that way more than rocket arty or medic bunker.

[Mysthalin]

Because Defensive and Blitzkrieg are the same doctrines, right?

If you want to beef up your tanks, go for Blitz or Terror. Don't expect much in the way of tanks from defensive(Albeit Panthers and StuGs both work nicely in that doctrine).

[NightRain]

Because Defensive and Blitzkrieg are the same doctrines, right?

If you want to beef up your tanks, go for Blitz or Terror. Don't expect much in the way of tanks from defensive(Albeit Panthers and StuGs both work nicely in that doctrine).

Panthers to chew up all fuel left overs and StuGs due to them getting cloak, that's about it haha.

[PonySlaystation]

Not if a 6p is much more cost effective, and a pak40 does much better.


If you take two players, both level 9 and maxed out so they both have the argument of the "cost" of a T3 being inert, who do you think does better? The guy using the cost effective pak40, or the guy using the worse 17P?

The difference is miniscule. It's like comparing WM sniper and US sniper. The fact that it's a T3 means that a RE player can buy better unlocks like Ablative Armour. Plus the AP rounds makes it better than the Pak40.

[Mysthalin]

The difference is miniscule. It's like comparing WM sniper and US sniper. The fact that it's a T3 means that a RE player can buy better unlocks like Ablative Armour. Plus the AP rounds makes it better than the Pak40.

The difference is huge. Not only does the Pak40 deal 187 damage per shot stock, it also fires faster.
Even with HVAP the 17 pounder does not deal more DPS than the pak40, with the only true superiority lieing in it's +5 range.. Which isn't that easy to use.

[PonySlaystation]

The difference is huge. Not only does the Pak40 deal 187 damage per shot stock, it also fires faster.
Even with HVAP the 17 pounder does not deal more DPS than the pak40, with the only true superiority lieing in it's +5 range.. Which isn't that easy to use.

Accuracy is much more important than reload time.

[Mysthalin]

Their accuracy is nigh identical -.-

[DarkSoldierX]

Their accuracy is nigh identical -.-

Which is why these units need to be balanced, or made unique in there own ways. Right now the 17p is just slower at everything, and does less damage.

Edit: Reminds me, Gechutes price needs to be lowerd, His DPS got reduced significantly. He does do 180 dmg per shot, but reload is 7.5 sec, way too long for his price.

[8thRifleRegiment]

Let us be reminded taht the pak40 is a tier 3 compared to a tier 1. it needs to be better then the 17pdr or it loses its worth as a tier 3

[PonySlaystation]

Their accuracy is nigh identical -.-

Not with AP rounds.

Anyways, RE is far from finished, I'm sure they'll add some nice doctrinal stuff so the units wont have to modified. They don't have to be identical, that's the thing.

[RikiRude]

This is my 2 cents. I've used 17s, and 6 pounders.

I used 17 pounders until I decided I wanted an AVRE. I have an abundance of MU so the cost between the 17 with HVAP rounds and the cost of the 6 pounder did not matter.

After using 17s for some time and a mix of 17s and 6s, I have to say I am much happier with the 6 pounders, sometimes when I'm facing heavies I wish I had the 17, but for the most part I wouldnt field more than 2.

It fires WAY too slow, if you can keep a recon squad close, or a bren squad with button available, they are quite good. But if you don't get the first shot, the enemy can just move their tank to the other side of the map knowing your 17 cant get over there fast enough. If you don't have button, its easy to circle them.

The +5 range does not really matter, the accuracy helps though. If you can consistently recrew your 17s they can become quite annoying for your enemy. but if your enemy recrews them, sad day.

[pqumsieh]

The difference between tiers should be potency. Being in a different tier should not effect a cost effective analysis. A T1 should be less potent overall than a T3 (i.e. the Pak40 should be a better ATG than the 17 lb given the current tiers). However, cost effectiveness in relation to price can differ.

In other words, because the 17lb preforms significantly worse than the Pak40, its price should be reduced. Tier level does not effect price, unit performance does. (or should rather).

The argument by the OP is not that the 17lb should be better than the pak40 or even made to be the same level; rather, he argues the price of the 17lb should be reduced. If you have two units that preform the same role but one clearly outperforms the other, it makes sense that the weaker one would be cheaper.

Does anyone disagree with my statements? Can we all agree the 17lb will likely need a price decrease. The only way it should get a performance increase is if we move it up the tiers; as a tier 1 ability its preforming just fine.

PQ

[PonySlaystation]

The 17 pdr with APCR rounds does more damage than a Pak40 and has 5 times more penetration and x1.25 more accuracy and 5+  longer range. These buffs makes the 17 pdr a lot stronger than the Pak40. So if anything it should be moved to T3 without any changes or Pak40 should be moved to T1/T2.

[Mysthalin]

The 17 pdr with APCR rounds does more damage than a Pak40 and has 5 times more penetration and x1.25 more accuracy and 5+  longer range. These buffs makes the 17 pdr a lot stronger than the Pak40. So if anything it should be moved to T3 without any changes or Pak40 should be moved to T1/T2.

Lies.

17 pdr with APCR rounds deals THE SAME damage as a pak40.
The penetration increase is negligible since the pak40 already always penetrates everything in the allied arsenal bar a few select cases(68 percent chance to pen pershing at long range, 80.19% chance to pen churchil at long range). Same can be said of the 17 pdr (essentially meaning that there's no tangible increase in penetration output for the 17 pdr in the use of HVAP).
More accuracy and 5+ range MAY be of some use (not really much, all things considered) - but the faster ROF of the pak40 FAR offsets this.

Oh, and with AP rounds the cost of the 17pdr goes up to a RETARDED 200 munitions.

Considering the two ATGs fullfill identical roles, if anything - the 17pdr needs to go up significantly in damage output if it is to stay at the same cost.

[PonySlaystation]

Lies.

17 pdr with APCR rounds deals THE SAME damage as a pak40.

It does 0.5 more damage.

More accuracy and 5+ range MAY be of some use (not really much, all things considered) - but the faster ROF of the pak40 FAR offsets this.

Oh, and with AP rounds the cost of the 17pdr goes up to a RETARDED 200 munitions.

Extra range and accuracy on an ATG is a lot better than reload. They are hard-hitting but slow meaning that they will rarely get off more than 1 shot at a time. The reload difference would only make a difference if you fired like 5-6 shots at once which NEVER happens.

And the extra range and accuracy is just insane, there's no backing up from this thing. The main issue with Pak40s is their low accuracy and short range but with the 17 pdr just pop APCR rounds and you'll get 100% accuracy and +5 rage which is basically the length of a Tiger. So no, it should not go down in price.

[BigDick]

but you have to consider what you are fighting with this weapons

3 out of 6 axis have heavy tanks available that have high costs/limited availability and or other weaknesses attached but as benefit a strong armor (that gets negated either by firefly or by 17pounder)


if you build a royal engis company it usually consists of heavy churchill usage, that give you awesome anti inf/anti support weapon tools but leave you weak against heavy armor (no fuel for fireflies)

the special tool against heavy armor of defensive is the flak
the pak40 is just additional and give you not that much benefit because your company lacks more in AI, in mobile stuff and light armor

[LeoPhone]

In this discussion about 17 pdr vs pak 40 no one said yet that the 17 pdr arc of fire is much tinier than the pak 40? (60 vs 80)

this seems the main drawback of the 17 pdr imo. but I like it. if the 17 isn't good enough then it should be improved at other fronts (like reload)

[pqumsieh]

+1 to leo