.50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

User avatar
kvnrthr
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon 10 Sep 2012 13:29
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Contact:

.50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby kvnrthr » Mon 29 May 2017 02:04

The halftracks and other light vehicles in this game really don't have very spectacular armor. Realistically I think the .50 MG really shouldn't have trouble penetrating them at close ranges. It would be a nice feature to have, as a limited way to fight off enemy light vehicles. Right now halftracks seem to be running a bit too freely when they know infantry lacks AT weapons.

However not sure how this would work balance wise. Would we see a repeat of the KPVT situation of Wargame where the capability inflates the price of the weapon far too much? In that case it would be better to leave it off. I'm also unsure if with the in game scaling (+1 AP/100 m) system it would be too strong at close range. The last thing I'd like is for this to be penetrating tanks, even point blank.
Hoping for a better next-gen Wargame and new engine in a few years...
One can dream ;_;

captaincarnage
Major
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sat 29 Mar 2014 23:50
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby captaincarnage » Mon 29 May 2017 02:23

50 cals are already very strong and can be used to suppress light vehicles anyway, adding ap is probably not the best idea from a balance perspective, especially as crew served 50's are available to some divisions.
I hope your buratino's die screaming.

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby Mike » Mon 29 May 2017 03:26

I swear I've kill HTs with .50s. It takes a little while, but can be done.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby FrangibleCover » Mon 29 May 2017 13:42

If we're worried about symmetrical balance I'm pretty sure that the Germans issued a few boxes of a decent 7.92mm AP round to some machine guns. If there was a limited pool of AP loaded MG halftracks and s.MG34 teams to match the limited pool of Allied .50 halftracks and .50 cal teams then that would be roughly equal, although the .50 should be the better of the two. To an extent this prevents KPV syndrome because both sides can do it so there'll be less lobbying to have it changed.

They still definitely shouldn't be able to kill tanks though.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby Hidden Gunman » Mon 29 May 2017 14:15

I think there's enough anti-armour weaponry already, it's a matter of putting it in your BG and siting it appropriately.
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

User avatar
HaryPL
Lieutenant
Posts: 1373
Joined: Mon 3 Dec 2012 01:41
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby HaryPL » Mon 29 May 2017 14:59

No it shouldnt. Its bad enough that i provides AAA bubble against anti-tank attackers when 4 HT/Tanks are grouped together with CV even when no real AAA is present.

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Mon 29 May 2017 15:53

To prevent it from scaling too hard thisbcapability could come as a seperate ammo pool like the Stielgranate on the PAK 36. If it had 2 AP on 500 m(just an example) it would become 7 AP at point blanc, instead of 10 if it would start at 800 m with 2 AP.
Image

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby Hidden Gunman » Tue 30 May 2017 11:47

I actually have a feeling that AT guns may dominate the meta game at some point...
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

User avatar
Miskyavine
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 689
Joined: Sat 18 Feb 2012 09:03
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby Miskyavine » Tue 30 May 2017 21:25

give it 1 AP or less but needs to kill light vehicles relatively decently that thing could easily delete 222 armored cars and Halftracks in reallife . Anything tank wise not so much. Panzer 2s were protected frontally. but a 50 could kill a PZ4 from behind no matter the variant.
How i feel when reading the OFF TOPIC section of the forums http://imgur.com/gallery/t9IXqDs
Image

CUALEB_Operator
Corporal
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed 18 Feb 2015 07:17
Contact:

Re: .50 caliber MG: should it have AP value?

Postby CUALEB_Operator » Tue 30 May 2017 22:57

.50 cal can outshoot a 222 or 250/9 already in a suppression game. I don't found them needing any buff.

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest