Jump to content


Achilles vs M10 Wolverine?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
20 replies to this topic

lord_pillowpants #-19 Posted Dec 27 2011 - 15:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9414 battles
  • 911
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011
Achilles has to be one of the Brit TDs listed but will it be a tier 6 due to superior gun? or will it be a tier 5 like the M10?

The Achilles was originally fitted with the M7 76mm but later had the 17pdr installed...


I NEED to know as I love TD's... :)


L P

evhgear #-18 Posted Dec 27 2011 - 16:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 4989 battles
  • 386
  • Member since:
    09-10-2010
The 17pounders was a quite powerfull gun. It was an extremly precise gun and had a quite better penetration performance than the US 76mm gun. This is from wiki :

Quote

The 17-pounder used two types of anti-tank ammunition. APCBC (Armour Piercing, Capped, Ballistic Capped) ammunition could penetrate 140 mm of armour at 457 metres and 131 mm at 914 m at a 30 degree angle. APDS (Armour Piercing, Discarding Sabot) could penetrate 208 mm of armour at 457 m and 192 mm at 914 m at a 30 degree angle, allowing it to penetrate the armour of even the redoubtable King Tiger tank.

The performance of the 17pounder in game will probably something between the 7.5cmL70 and the 7.5L100

Ogopogo #-17 Posted Dec 27 2011 - 19:38

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14734 battles
  • 3,896
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010
The 17lber will probably wind up being slightly more powerful than the 7.5cm L/70, but definatly not near the L/100. The Achilles also possessed a covered turret in addition to slightly thicker armor.

NTRabbit #-16 Posted Dec 27 2011 - 19:53

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9841 battles
  • 695
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010
The Achilles was an American Lend Lease vehicle with a British gun, so it will guaranteed end up as a premium tank, like every other Lend Lease vehicle in game.

Unfortunately, since there hasn't been a premium TD of any variety added to the game outside of the SU-85i on the Russian server, so it's hard to say how it would be tiered.

Redwing6 #-15 Posted Dec 27 2011 - 20:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 15842 battles
  • 2,550
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011
1. British Pre-Alpha Tree by Chuffy based on this source. Link to the full Hi res version of this image (2000x1550).

http://chuffy.www.id.../UKtanktree.jpg



Achilles will be a premium TD

TheOldGuardian #-14 Posted Dec 28 2011 - 02:42

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5408 battles
  • 116
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
Well even if it's a premium TD (which means unmodifiable) I'd buy it, mainly because 17 pounders are what you use to open up BIG tin cans.

NTRabbit #-13 Posted Dec 28 2011 - 09:40

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9841 battles
  • 695
  • Member since:
    09-09-2010
The QF 17 pounder in game is shaping up to be roughly equivalent to the 7.5cm L/70, so you'd expect it to be roughly equivalent to a so armed StuG in terms of armour penetration, with minor balancing differences in accuracy, shell damage and rate of fire.

The_Chieftain #-12 Posted Jan 02 2012 - 06:53

    Major

  • Military Specialist
  • 2914 battles
  • 4,333
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View Postevhgear, on Dec 27 2011 - 16:05, said:

The 17pounders was a quite powerfull gun. It was an extremly precise gun and had a quite better penetration performance than the US 76mm gun. This is from wiki :

17pr was either extremely precise, or it had quite better penetration than the US 76mm, depending on if it was shooting APCBC or Sabot. I'm not sure quite how they're planning on implementing that problem in the game, as accuracy is in-game a function of the gun, not the ammo.

razielkaine #-11 Posted Jan 02 2012 - 09:08

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6024 battles
  • 771
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jan 02 2012 - 06:53, said:

17pr was either extremely precise, or it had quite better penetration than the US 76mm, depending on if it was shooting APCBC or Sabot. I'm not sure quite how they're planning on implementing that problem in the game, as accuracy is in-game a function of the gun, not the ammo.
Those 2 being problems in the one package was only in the early days of the firely tank period, the kinks where worked out to where its accuracy was not lacking to have high penetration.

Dominatus #-10 Posted Jan 02 2012 - 09:11

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 6132 battles
  • 6,141
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View Postrazielkaine, on Jan 02 2012 - 09:08, said:

Those 2 being problems in the one package was only in the early days of the firely tank period, the kinks where worked out to where its accuracy was not lacking to have high penetration.

The APDS round had accuracy and damage issues compared to APCBC, if I recall correctly.

Noah56 #-9 Posted Jan 16 2012 - 19:33

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 11484 battles
  • 190
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011
Pause for a min.... off topic but isnt the tier 2 light Tetrarch the same tank we got for the new years?

Ogopogo #-8 Posted Jan 16 2012 - 19:42

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 14734 battles
  • 3,896
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

View PostNoah56, on Jan 16 2012 - 19:33, said:

Pause for a min.... off topic but isnt the tier 2 light Tetrarch the same tank we got for the new years?
Minus the lack of upgrades, yes.

MegaBMan25 #-7 Posted Feb 16 2012 - 17:01

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6028 battles
  • 233
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011
The achilles should be a tier V/VI, depends and what the devs do with it.  The 17pdr is better than the 76mm guns, and it had slightly better armor.  As far as playing it, i would play it more like a m10 wolverine, and less like a m36 slugger.  Better DPS and armor than m10 , but still lest DPS and armor than M36

Chaosticket #-6 Posted Apr 15 2012 - 07:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16719 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
teh Achilles is an improved Wolverine, and not just the gun. much better AT gun in 17 pounder, more armor on front and sides, even a cover for the turret, which the Americans didnt make until after the war...

The hard part is comparing it too slugger like the above guy said. not as much armor and 90mm was better than 17 pounder. maybe make the achilles turret fast? it would be slowe than the hellcat but faster and more armored.

a bridge between the hellcat and slugger?

Spectre12078 #-5 Posted Apr 15 2012 - 07:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 17875 battles
  • 2,358
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View PostChaosticket, on Apr 15 2012 - 07:27, said:

teh Achilles is an improved Wolverine, and not just the gun. much better AT gun in 17 pounder, more armor on front and sides, even a cover for the turret, which the Americans didnt make until after the war...

The hard part is comparing it too slugger like the above guy said. not as much armor and 90mm was better than 17 pounder. maybe make the achilles turret fast? it would be slowe than the hellcat but faster and more armored.

a bridge between the hellcat and slugger?
I would say its not a Hellcat nor is it a Jackson. Its more of an inbetween. Not as fast as the Hellcat,but not as squishy as it either,but more mobile than the Jackson,with slightly less gun

Chaosticket #-4 Posted Apr 15 2012 - 07:38

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16719 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
Didnt I just say all that?

Warpped #-3 Posted Apr 15 2012 - 15:29

    Private

  • Players
  • 6249 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostMegaBMan25, on Feb 16 2012 - 17:01, said:

The achilles should be a tier V/VI, depends and what the devs do with it.  The 17pdr is better than the 76mm guns, and it had slightly better armor.  As far as playing it, i would play it more like a m10 wolverine, and less like a m36 slugger.  Better DPS and armor than m10 , but still lest DPS and armor than M36
Maybe its just me but the M10 is a horrible tank.  It is extremely slow so you cannot stick your nose out and get back safely.  The turret is also very slow.  It has poor armor (can be 1 hit by almost every tank in every battle) and the gun is not as good as the 105 on the T40.  If it was not for wanting the 18 I would have scrapped it.  The T40 is a much better tank with the 105.  You are correct - I am hating the M10.

Chaosticket #-2 Posted Apr 15 2012 - 20:25

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16719 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
I do agree with the poor performance of the M10 Wolverine.

Light armor, low health, very slow turret, large target. I refer to it as "wannabee Sherman".

Slugger is better but continues some of the faults. Very slow turret, soft turret armor, poor side armor, slower.

charon2112 #-1 Posted Apr 20 2012 - 20:22

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 1268 battles
  • 140
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011

View PostWarpped, on Apr 15 2012 - 15:29, said:

Maybe its just me but the M10 is a horrible tank.  It is extremely slow so you cannot stick your nose out and get back safely.  The turret is also very slow.  It has poor armor (can be 1 hit by almost every tank in every battle) and the gun is not as good as the 105 on the T40.  If it was not for wanting the 18 I would have scrapped it.  The T40 is a much better tank with the 105.  You are correct - I am hating the M10.

That's because it's not a tank, it's a TD.  If you play it like a tank you will get knocked out and you will hate the experience.  M10 players biggest mistake is playing it like a medium tank.

Kalinin #0 Posted Apr 20 2012 - 23:21

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 5402 battles
  • 836
  • Member since:
    12-17-2010

View Postcharon2112, on Apr 20 2012 - 20:22, said:

That's because it's not a tank, it's a TD.  If you play it like a tank you will get knocked out and you will hate the experience.  M10 players biggest mistake is playing it like a medium tank.

It's not great as a TD either due to it's large size and poor camo. Plus having low penetration can be a real pain in such a fragile non-flanking vehicle.