Author Topic: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48  (Read 26663 times)

Offline Butcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.839
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #225 on: 09-08-2012, 14:08:10 »
It takes years before you kill just one tank, and after you've killed a second one, you are out of ammo
Yeah I noticed that especially on the Marder. It has about ?10? AP-shots and you can´t keep up big fights because after the 2nd tank you have killed you are in big trouble with your ammo. With the removal of Pzgr. 40 you now have even less shots available than before + you need at least twice as many shots to finish off the enemy.

The same thing goes for Churchills. If I remember correctly the Churchill Mark III has only ?35? shells loaded. And the Churchill Mark IV only 16 HE rounds although being an infantry support tank.
He got banned for our sins. He was not the member FH forums deserved, he was the member we needed.

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #226 on: 09-08-2012, 15:08:10 »
2.4 is bad and needs to be changed in the sense that super silly stupid hits made a kill. For example, extremely angled shots from a marginally killing encounters (e.g. Panzer 3 vs. Crusader mk.III). The 6 pdr might just landed on the top of the Pz 3's front hull at nearly 1 degree angle of impact and still made the kill.

2.45 is bad because now a Firefly or Panther can't properly kill an opponent. Now they are without their authentic capability of making a kill when and how it should be. A direct hit on the side armour at nearly 90 degree angle of impact and doesn't kill makes the trade-off between "fun tanking" and "overdone 1s1k" becomes not worth it.

Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #227 on: 09-08-2012, 15:08:52 »
I'd say those who do brainless rush would like surviving more hit or such. Their regular routine in the past is like: no awareness of situation, no awareness of their enemy, just press "W" and hit anything they see, in less than 5 minutes would get one shot killed by a better enemy, angrily type "damn camper!" on chat and repeat the same routine...2.45 tanking is actually more fun for them and for them only.

Offline AdamPA1006

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 415
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #228 on: 09-08-2012, 15:08:35 »
I'd say those who do brainless rush would like surviving more hit or such. Their regular routine in the past is like: no awareness of situation, no awareness of their enemy, just press "W" and hit anything they see, in less than 5 minutes would get one shot killed by a better enemy, angrily type "damn camper!" on chat and repeat the same routine...2.45 tanking is actually more fun for them and for them only.

I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #229 on: 09-08-2012, 16:08:31 »
I had an absolute blast tanking in my M13/40 for an entire round of Gazala.

The new damage code actually gives you tank combat that lasts for more than 10 seconds. In 2.4, you'd fire one shot, which if you're really good would hit and kill instantly or if you're a regular tanker would land close enough for your second shot to kill. Now you actually get a fight, with shells going both ways. You can get reinforcements, you can repair, can be forced to retreat even, if too many enemy tanks join the fight.

It's the fight that's fun, not the kill.

I understand this attitude to a certain extent, but to be able to 1S1K an enemy doesn't mean, that you aren't fighting. And 1s1k weren't the rule in 2.4. But overall it felt better with some little bugs and flaws and you got really rewarded for moving and using tactics. Tankdestroyers worked as tankdestroyers and you really had to approach with care in all tanks. Shermans are so damn strong now that people start to ask wth? ingame.
I mostly have the feeling that I am just wasting my ammo now. More shots doesn't stand for better or more fighting. I don't see the point to reward someone who made a mistake by giving him the opportunity to retreat and completely repair his tank. That simply is frustrates me. In the past players knew, what they did wrong. But now they just cruise brainless over the map with the idea in mind, that they can stand more than one shot. Once more, that tank fights last longer, doesn't mean that it gets more interesting. After the 10th shot at an enemy tank I simply get bored and frustarted to exaggerate a bit.  :-\
For me it was more intense to know, that I am in possible danger all the time and I knew that I only had one chance. That was the spirit of tanking in 2.4.

Offline katakulli

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #230 on: 09-08-2012, 16:08:13 »
   There are really nice arguments in this thread, why don't we check them by simply joining a fh2 server ?

   Let's start: Allied team trapped at their base, but what happened those two blue tank icons near mouse cursor?


  We can easily learn this of course by checking kill messages. Oh snap, underpowered panzer 4s camping around allied base with their underpowered guns... as usual...


  Frustrating players ? Come on, that's a lie.  :D


Basically, axis bias has removed. Glad its being noticed.

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.125
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #231 on: 09-08-2012, 16:08:34 »
I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.
Hahah, sorry, this isn't personal or something, but I had to laugh here.

Before the tanking sucked because tanks could die so easily and they weren't the metal beasts of the battlefield, many a forumgoer complained. And now, now it is more tactical?

I think this only proves that whatever the devs do, whichever system they think of, to improve or change stuff, there will always be complaints. And yes, sometimes more than others, but it depends on who is complaining. If they are fanatical about it, like some people in this thread, then it looks like there is more complaining going on, but that doesn't justify a thing.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #232 on: 09-08-2012, 16:08:03 »
When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.125
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #233 on: 09-08-2012, 16:08:56 »
You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.
Yes, like katakulli ;)

Seriously: what I mean is that one time you like something a lot but it is hated by others, and the other time it is the other way around.

Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #234 on: 09-08-2012, 17:08:39 »
Lol, allied got base rape in Villers?

Let's see, 2 firefly, 1 achilles, 2 6pdr, 1 churchill

Yeah, if you get rape with these you deserve it really.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #235 on: 09-08-2012, 17:08:37 »
Villers is a map mostly won by the germans ......
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #236 on: 09-08-2012, 17:08:14 »
And on what do you base your knowledge Theta? I was not talking about wich side wins more btw, I was talking about wich side gets baseraped more. These are two different things as you might understand. Though some numbers from your side would be interesting.

And I understand that some people can like the system, because they do to feel like god in a tank or something else or get rewarded for their mistakes. But I never saw such frustration in 2.4 nor did I saw a threat with so much negative feedback in the times of 2.4. Sorry, but all the people around me, who play the game with me, don't yell because of joy, when they hit a Sherman in the ass from 10 metre with the Tiger and it still stands. Then we always get the answer: "You hit it in a bad angle" though we tried it four times. Sound like we are totaly dumb if you ask me.

Offline CologneSky

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 167
  • with FH since the very beginning! (FH 0.5b baby!)
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #237 on: 09-08-2012, 18:08:21 »
I agree, I thought it was way more tactical before because you had to be extremely careful because you could die so easily. I honestly hate the new system, and like someone else said makes tanking on NA maps really, really sucky.
Hahah, sorry, this isn't personal or something, but I had to laugh here.

Before the tanking sucked because tanks could die so easily and they weren't the metal beasts of the battlefield, many a forumgoer complained. And now, now it is more tactical?

I think this only proves that whatever the devs do, whichever system they think of, to improve or change stuff, there will always be complaints. And yes, sometimes more than others, but it depends on who is complaining. If they are fanatical about it, like some people in this thread, then it looks like there is more complaining going on, but that doesn't justify a thing.

actually, I think, it means that in the next patch we should move somewhere between 2.40 and 2.45 ;-)

Offline jan_kurator

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 2.546
  • Magnificent Mustard
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #238 on: 09-08-2012, 18:08:27 »
actually, I think, it means that in the next patch we should move somewhere between 2.40 and 2.45 ;-)

that would be the best soultion

Offline [QPS]_Sex_Bomb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Inefficiency of the 75mm/L48
« Reply #239 on: 09-08-2012, 19:08:49 »
Someone need to tell me what is tactical in having the horizon blocked by fog until suddenly seeing a tank getting out of it and 1s1k you no matter what.  With 2.45, Sherman or Cromwell have a good chance to survive against Pz4 and Marder in this kind of encounter, but it was not the case in previous releases.  Don't wonder why the loudest complaints on the new system come from players generally playing axis. 

When 2.4 was released, there was no big fuzz about the tanking system. Players liked it in general, atleast that's my impression. It had some problems but nothing dramatic that would produce a thread like this one. You can call it fanatic or however you want it sound like, but I think some statements in this threat should give you an idea, how the playing playerbase thinks about the new more on "interaction" based system.

@5hitm4k3r
I'm playing the game and actually LOVE the new tanking system.  I would play even more if I lived in Europe.