Jump to content


APCR needs DMG- in proportion to PEN+

APCR cmon already

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

Desmios #1 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:12

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 3569 battles
  • 473
  • [50-6] 50-6
  • Member since:
    11-28-2011

If an APCR round gives +15% more penetration than its AP counterpart, it should have -15% damage.



Verblonde #2 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:13

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17117 battles
  • 2,282
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015
Nonsense. Next!

Swell_Sell #3 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:19

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20327 battles
  • 197
  • [AJ] AJ
  • Member since:
    10-09-2013
So the T-54 would have a ~150 alpha HEAT shell? Sounds competitive...

Devildog8 #4 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 9257 battles
  • 3,476
  • [XILES] XILES
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostDesmios, on Jun 19 2017 - 13:12, said:

If an APCR round gives +15% more penetration than its AP counterpart, it should have -15% damage.

 

Is this guy serious?

Desmios #5 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 3569 battles
  • 473
  • [50-6] 50-6
  • Member since:
    11-28-2011

View PostVerblonde, on Jun 19 2017 - 14:13, said:

Nonsense. Next!

 

Why is it nonsense?

GeorgePreddy #6 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 14291 battles
  • 5,910
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostDevildog8, on Jun 19 2017 - 16:20, said:

 

Is this guy serious?

 

Unfortunately... probably.

Verblonde #7 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:32

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17117 battles
  • 2,282
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015

View PostDesmios, on Jun 19 2017 - 14:22, said:

 

Why is it nonsense?

 

For the same reasons that removing/nerfing gold rounds is nonsense every time you start essentially the same thread on it:

Gold rounds cost a lot more to buy (in silver; no-one sane uses gold to buy them); it is therefore reasonable that they should be superior. To extend the logic of your original proposal: if you reduce damage in proportion to the increase in penetration, the net 'impact' of each round could be argued as being similar to a regular round. Such rounds should then all cost a similar amount - reduce the cost to gold rounds too much, and you'll probably see a massive increase in usage, even with the nerfed damage.

As we've covered off ad nauseum before, gold rounds do not need wholesale changes - they're better than regular rounds, but cost far more to use. If you're getting swiss-cheesed regularly by them, I suggest refining your technique - the most fearsome gold round can't go through hard cover or wrecks etc. Don't sit still in the open - problem solved! If you can't afford to use them yourself, play with premium tanks a bit (there are plenty of free ones given out) to generate the silver...

NoreyMorse #8 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:32

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 17183 battles
  • 228
  • [-UO-] -UO-
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015

View PostDevildog8, on Jun 19 2017 - 13:20, said:

 

Is this guy serious?

 

I believe he is!

FeelMy_APCR #9 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:32

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 29762 battles
  • 862
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

This guy has been crying about prem rounds for over a year now. Just look through his posts.

He truly is, the most pathetic player on this server.



galspanic #10 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:32

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22929 battles
  • 3,232
  • [GUNS3] GUNS3
  • Member since:
    01-06-2016

View PostDesmios, on Jun 19 2017 - 11:12, said:

If an APCR round gives +15% more penetration than its AP counterpart, it should have -15% damage.

 

Why?

Hans_Mo1eman #11 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:35

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6833 battles
  • 165
  • [GUNS2] GUNS2
  • Member since:
    12-16-2015

That's silly. What about changing other qualities of apcr like higher decreased to pen at range so it is not always the preferred ammo type - did that already, okay.  Maybe they should nerf HEAT ammo too cause it's too good - oh wait HD models have spaced armour and many guns have lower shell velocity on HEAT - hmmmm.

 

I get it, premium ammo is p2w, but credits do not require money and even with premium ammo you still need to hit your target, especially if that target is 2 tiers higher (then you need apcr and good aim usually). If you drive a fat slow super heavy down a cooridoor and get riddled with gold wthelse do you expect and I bet half those shots bounce anyways. There is a time and a place for premium ammo just like there is a time and place for near invincible armour. I think the main difference they could focus on is in the extent of the penetration difference rather than the damage. 



Lord_Hiney #12 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:37

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 12484 battles
  • 2,549
  • Member since:
    03-25-2015
We can talk about issues with prem ammo after the issues with overbuffed super heavies and [edited] corridor meta have been resolved. They're the reason for prem ammo meta in the first place.

Nunya_000 #13 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 20684 battles
  • 9,840
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013
Like a dog with a bone.

Verblonde #14 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:41

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17117 battles
  • 2,282
  • [FUNTB] FUNTB
  • Member since:
    02-08-2015
The only significant change to gold ammo that I would support would be a cap on loadout, at least in randoms (I don't play other modes enough/at all, to know if such a thing would break them) - 20% of ammo capacity say.

The reason for implementing this is that it would add an extra element of complexity to the game's tactical decision-making.

Can't see it happening though, as (indirectly) gold ammo usage helps fund the game, through premium tank and account sales.

Markd73 #15 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 28534 battles
  • 3,357
  • [AOS] AOS
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

I am SHOCKED that Desmios is posting about APCR rounds. I was under the impression that he loved them and wanted complete APCR spam 24/7.  /s

 

Absolutely

 

Shocked



spud_tuber #16 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 41866 battles
  • 3,954
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostLord_Hiney, on Jun 19 2017 - 13:37, said:

We can talk about issues with prem ammo after the issues with overbuffed super heavies and [edited] corridor meta have been resolved. They're the reason for prem ammo meta in the first place.

Actually, overbuffed superheavies are more a product of gold spam than the other way around.  You're almost certainly right that corridor meta does result in increased gold spam, though.



__Monkey #17 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 20:54

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42880 battles
  • 114
  • [R-7] R-7
  • Member since:
    04-08-2014
I don't know why people are hating on the OP. Personally I like his idea. I'm going to add a little more onto it. Nerf the price of the apcr rounds and make the tier 10 economy more viable towards mid-level players. And also -15% of 320 is -48 so the T-54 would have a 270 alpha gun. The real issue i have with nerfing gold ammo is that it literally buffs these overbuffed heavies/super heavies even more. Like Wargaming would need to seriously rework tanks if they intend to balance around gold ammo for heavies. 

Gravtech #18 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 21:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 27239 battles
  • 4,007
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View Post_Monkey_On_Fire_, on Jun 19 2017 - 12:54, said:

I don't know why people are hating on the OP. Personally I like his idea. I'm going to add a little more onto it. Nerf the price of the apcr rounds and make the tier 10 economy more viable towards mid-level players. And also -15% of 320 is -48 so the T-54 would have a 270 alpha gun. The real issue i have with nerfing gold ammo is that it literally buffs these overbuffed heavies/super heavies even more. Like Wargaming would need to seriously rework tanks if they intend to balance around gold ammo for tanks in general

 

For the super heavies that need prem shell rework I'm assuming you're only referring to the Type 5 because there's nothing special about the Maus gold. Gold needs to be reworked in general because WG keeps trying to make the super heavies viable in the game by simply slapping on more armor. That doesn't work; adding more armor only reduces the ability of lower tiered tanks to pen while forcing higher tiers to spam gold because in a confrontation, wasting time with AP can kill you pretty quickly when a Maus can shrug it off by turning a bit and the Type 5 doesn't even have to turn at all to bouncing 90% of standard shells at tier 10

QuicksilverJPR #19 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 21:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 21473 battles
  • 2,833
  • [RPG] RPG
  • Member since:
    01-17-2013

View PostNoreyMorse, on Jun 19 2017 - 14:32, said:

 

I believe he is!

 

Just don't call him Shirley...

Desmios #20 Posted Jun 19 2017 - 22:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 3569 battles
  • 473
  • [50-6] 50-6
  • Member since:
    11-28-2011
And this is why world of tanks is always #1 or #2 on the most toxic gaming community list each year.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users