Jump to content


Ammo capacity is too low (36)


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

hjorte #1 Posted 22 July 2017 - 09:48 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14022 battles
  • 150
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

Please fit some more shells into the AMX 12 t and the AMX 13 75. How about 44?

Quite often I find myself gocarting around the battlefield with no ammo, but still enemies to kill. Makes me look even more stupid than usual!

Put some more into the AMX 13 90 as well while you are at it.

 

Is it WG's passive way of nerfing these tanks?



AliceUnchained #2 Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:36 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011
The BatChat 25t AP has even less at 30...

Nishi_Kinuyo #3 Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:45 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 7880 battles
  • 4,572
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
Didn't they historically have only like 12 shells? :trollface:

AliceUnchained #4 Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:46 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 22 July 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

Didn't they historically have only like 12 shells? 

 

Historically one shell would also be enough to knock out a tank in most cases...

Enforcer1975 #5 Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:47 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,935
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 22 July 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

Didn't they historically have only like 12 shells? :trollface:

 

This is when WG can finally bring in the support truck consumables for gold.... :P

Edited by Enforcer1975, 22 July 2017 - 10:47 AM.


Enforcer1975 #6 Posted 22 July 2017 - 10:50 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,935
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostAliceUnchained, on 22 July 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

 

Historically one shell would also be enough to knock out a tank in most cases...

 

Tracks...modules...resurrecting crew members...minimap.arty view....spotting through bushes...you can apply it to a lot of illogical stuff in the game.

I think the fact that they can unload their magazines in mere seconds...reload while running away is already advantage enough.



gg72 #7 Posted 22 July 2017 - 11:18 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 63769 battles
  • 21
  • [FILO] FILO
  • Member since:
    11-18-2012

Historically the crew had to exit these tanks to manually reload the clip from the back of the turret

 



ClassicFrog #8 Posted 22 July 2017 - 11:34 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 45729 battles
  • 2,982
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 22 July 2017 - 09:45 AM, said:

Didn't they historically have only like 12 shells? :trollface:

 

Yes, but they were all loaded in the clip. And you could expect to kill a tank or at least damage it enough to put it out of action with just one of the shells, if it hits and penetrates. That's plenty.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #9 Posted 22 July 2017 - 12:41 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 30558 battles
  • 2,567
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View Posthjorte, on 22 July 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Please fit some more shells into the AMX 12 t and the AMX 13 75. How about 44?

Quite often I find myself gocarting around the battlefield with no ammo, but still enemies to kill. Makes me look even more stupid than usual!

Put some more into the AMX 13 90 as well while you are at it.

 

Is it WG's passive way of nerfing these tanks?

 

Your average damage is a little over 700 out of a clip potential of 4800+. You don't need more shells, you need to hit things with the ones you've got.

Enforcer1975 #10 Posted 22 July 2017 - 12:51 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,935
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostClassicFrog, on 22 July 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

 

Yes, but they were all loaded in the clip. And you could expect to kill a tank or at least damage it enough to put it out of action with just one of the shells, if it hits and penetrates. That's plenty.

 

Yeah but don't forget it wasn't *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* like in the game. They had to crack one of the drums to align it with the breach then drop the shell and ram it in....takes some time maybe even longer than if you had a loader picking one out of the rack and shoving it into the breach all by hand. It autoloaders had been that much better every nation would use it. The russian tanks only have it because it fits into their doctrine ( smaller tanks, less armor needed for same protection etc... ) but it's known that the loading mechanisms can cause problems. Todays autoloaders are much better.


Edited by Enforcer1975, 22 July 2017 - 12:57 PM.


ClassicFrog #11 Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:11 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 45729 battles
  • 2,982
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

View PostEnforcer1975, on 22 July 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

 

Yeah but don't forget it wasn't *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam* like in the game. They had to crack one of the drums to align it with the breach then drop the shell and ram it in....takes some time maybe even longer than if you had a loader picking one out of the rack and shoving it into the breach all by hand. It autoloaders had been that much better every nation would use it. The russian tanks only have it because it fits into their doctrine ( smaller tanks, less armor needed for same protection etc... ) but it's known that the loading mechanisms can cause problems. Todays autoloaders are much better.

 

I could not find the data about 12t but 13-90 with it's 90mm gun had rate of fire of 10 shots per minute, so 6 seconds of inter clip reload. That's actually pretty much *bam* *bam* *bam* ... as you put it.

Y_O_L_0 #12 Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19926 battles
  • 907
  • [FUSED] FUSED
  • Member since:
    12-27-2012
I am currently playing the French light line too, and I did run out of ammo with the AMX 13 75. Though I never considered it to be a problem, the low ammo count motivated me to make all my shells count. My favorite tank in the line was the AMX 13 75, I think I have a Fadin's medal with that tank.

The AMX 13 90 on the other hand never ran out of ammo, I was even making blind shots with it and never ran out of ammo.

Having low ammo count is a way for WG to limit the damage potential of tgese tanks, I guess.

Enforcer1975 #13 Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,935
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostClassicFrog, on 22 July 2017 - 01:11 PM, said:

 

I could not find the data about 12t but 13-90 with it's 90mm gun had rate of fire of 10 shots per minute, so 6 seconds of inter clip reload. That's actually pretty much *bam* *bam* *bam* ... as you put it.

 

If it was 6s but in the game it's like 2.5s between shots...and iirc all autoloaders have less than 3s between shots too. Autoloaders are way stronger in the game than in reality but nobody moans about that. Even having a 20-40s magazine reload while running away at full speed isn't bad if you consider that they wouldn't be able to load ammo like that in the first place. They are plenty powerful compared to their RL counterparts.

Edited by Enforcer1975, 22 July 2017 - 01:34 PM.


ClassicFrog #14 Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:38 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 45729 battles
  • 2,982
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

View PostEnforcer1975, on 22 July 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

Autoloaders are way stronger in the game than in reality but nobody moans about that.

 

They aren't. In reality something like 90% of successful hits would result in killed tanks. If you transfer it into the game then imagine ALL guns having around 2000 damage per shot, and THEN think how powerful autoloaders would be.



anonym_uktlgGKuDbuG #15 Posted 22 July 2017 - 01:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 1,451
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018
Changing the "wet ammo rack" to an "improved ammo rack" that doubles its HP and gives you 25% more ammo capacity (rounded to the nearest full clip for autoloaders) would make for an interesting piece of equipment.

ClassicFrog #16 Posted 22 July 2017 - 02:14 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 45729 battles
  • 2,982
  • Member since:
    04-05-2012

View PostTr0gledyte, on 22 July 2017 - 12:46 PM, said:

Changing the "wet ammo rack" to an "improved ammo rack" that doubles its HP and gives you 25% more ammo capacity (rounded to the nearest full clip for autoloaders) would make for an interesting piece of equipment.

 

I would make it -25% hit points. You have more ammo, yes, but now it's everywhere. I'm guessing it would be difficult to resize the module collision model, but you could make it more fragile to simulate the greater odds it might get hit. Still, there are some tanks out there with limited ammo that might want to have such module anyway, especially with reusable repair kits we have now.

hjorte #17 Posted 22 July 2017 - 02:48 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 14022 battles
  • 150
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 22 July 2017 - 12:41 PM, said:

 

Your average damage is a little over 700 out of a clip potential of 4800+. You don't need more shells, you need to hit things with the ones you've got.

 

Cocky, are we? And incorrect, too.

Let us know how much average damage you expect from an AMX 13 75, for you to NOT make such a comment. 3500 dmg per battle? 4800?



Enforcer1975 #18 Posted 22 July 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20973 battles
  • 10,935
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostClassicFrog, on 22 July 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

 

They aren't. In reality something like 90% of successful hits would result in killed tanks. If you transfer it into the game then imagine ALL guns having around 2000 damage per shot, and THEN think how powerful autoloaders would be.

 

If it was like that yes. But all tanks have hitpoints and damage values. They are still way more powerful than any other tank in their current state because they have the burst damage as a trait.

NUKLEAR_SLUG #19 Posted 22 July 2017 - 04:56 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 30558 battles
  • 2,567
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View Posthjorte, on 22 July 2017 - 02:48 PM, said:

 

Cocky, are we? And incorrect, too.

Let us know how much average damage you expect from an AMX 13 75, for you to NOT make such a comment. 3500 dmg per battle? 4800?

 

Dude, it's in your WOT profile. 733 avg damage. If you're constantly firing your entire loadout to do that then you're averaging one damaging hit per clip and a half. So sure, have a couple extra clips if it makes you happy but you'll pretty much only be managing one extra hit per game. 

Cannes76 #20 Posted 22 July 2017 - 05:05 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 68723 battles
  • 1,768
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011

View PostEnforcer1975, on 22 July 2017 - 01:32 PM, said:

 

If it was 6s but in the game it's like 2.5s between shots...and iirc all autoloaders have less than 3s between shots too. Autoloaders are way stronger in the game than in reality but nobody moans about that. Even having a 20-40s magazine reload while running away at full speed isn't bad if you consider that they wouldn't be able to load ammo like that in the first place. They are plenty powerful compared to their RL counterparts.

 

Nobody moans about autoloaders being OP? :teethhappy: What planet have you been living on, mate?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users