Are AP Cannons underpowered?

Baneblade · 2013-03-19, 08:04 PM

For the longest time I gimped myself against infantry to mainline the Titan-150 AP cannon on my Vanguard. I thought I was setting myself up to maximize my anti vehicle capabilities.

But then VR came out and I did a more thorough test of the Titans:

AP: 6 Direct hits to kill a Prowler from the front.
HEAT: 6 Direct hits to kill a Prowler from the front.

The HEAT cannon has the added benefit of secondary damage to whoever repairs the tank.

Similar testing on other vehicles resulted in identical TTKs regardless of whether I used the AP or HEAT cannon.

So I guess my question is... why should anyone ever use AP tank weapons? The difference in velocity isn't significant, or frankly noticeable except in the strictest testing parameters.

I'll be changing my certs over to the Titan HEAT Cannon asap.

As for fixing the AP cannons... perhaps a significantly higher velocity and a damage boost.

NOTE: I only really tested the Vanguard cannons, I was a little too pissed off to test the other two MBTs or the Lightning.

Figment · 2013-03-19, 08:07 PM

Any rate of fire difference?

KaskaMatej · 2013-03-19, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Any rate of fire difference?

No. Source.

Ghodere · 2013-03-19, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Any rate of fire difference?

None. There is, however, a damage and shell velocity increase. Even if the damage increase does not reduce standalone TTK, it will reduce TTK when combined with other weapons (secondaries, particularly the Vulcan due to its consistent damage) often.

Conclusion: It's a sidegrade that could stand to gain more AV power without being considered OP.

GreyFu · 2013-03-19, 08:25 PM

Have to agree that there is no real benefit or incentive to go for AP

if they can get people away from using HEAT by actually improving AP it will also potentially give boots on the ground less to worry about with out constantly giving them more toys or the advantage.

It lacks punch, should travel straighter and should have a damage advantage. Possibly even some turret stabilization
Vanguard user here.

AThreatToYou · 2013-03-19, 10:05 PM

In theory, AP shells would honestly be inferior to HEAT rounds at destroying basically everything. That considered, it'd be cool if the AP guns featured a ~20% rate of fire increase.

Sirisian · 2013-03-19, 11:01 PM

Yeah this is the same for the Magrider. It's painfully obvious when going against a prowler with heat rounds. Not sure what good the AP round is now.

Rothnang · 2013-03-19, 11:03 PM

AP cannons are not underpowered. HE and HEAT rounds are overpowered, they inflict way too much damage to hardened targets.

Guplup · 2013-03-19, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by Rothnang

AP cannons are not underpowered. HE and HEAT rounds are overpowered, they inflict way too much damage to hardened targets.

HE does hardly anything to tanks, but yeah, HEAT on MBTs is a little too good at everything.

AP seems pretty balanced on Lightnings though. I believe it takes 1 less shot from the rear, and 2 less from other sides. The higher velocity is also great though.

Rothnang · 2013-03-19, 11:13 PM

HE does plenty of damage to tanks. I mean, think of it this way, how much harder is it to hit infantry with AP over HE? 3 times? 4 times? 5 times? How much damage does AP do to tanks compared to HE though? Maybe twice as much if that.

I would love to have the Dalton on the Liberator be more like an AP cannon, with higher accuracy and less drop, but little splash. Unfortunately all the Liberator belly guns seem to be stuck in infantry farming mode, whether that's what you want to do with them or not.

Sledgecrushr · 2013-03-20, 12:15 AM

Im pretty sure th AP rounds do an extra 250 points on a direct hit. Theres a lot of modifiers on where you hit so not all of that damage is actually applied to the target.

DeltaGun · 2013-03-20, 03:06 AM

They did a really good job balancing the AP rounds. Faster + A little extra damage means they really fulfill that role in the sense of a side-grade.

Tthe tradeoff of being so ineffective vs. infantry is pretty severe, though. When I use AP I really feel like I should do more damage than HEAT, and I'm not really getting that. It is a VERY careful balancing act.

Emperor Newt · 2013-03-20, 03:52 AM

It depends on the vehicle and gun. But in many situations the problem is not that AP guns are too weak, but that the difference in hits required and ttk to HEAT doesn't cut it to decide to give up almost all your AI capabilities.
The same also applies in many situations to HEAT vs HE. Also AV damage of HE is pretty neat for being described as an AI weapon.

The either have to buff AP/HE or nerf HEAT. Don't know which way would be better.

I use AP on my Magrinder (mainly because I don't have anything else) and the damage very often feels really underwhelming for being almost useless against AI (compared to AV and AI damage of HEAT). The tradeoff is not wort the small buff in AV damage.

MaxDamage · 2013-03-20, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by Guplup

HE does hardly anything to tanks, but yeah, HEAT on MBTs is a little too good at everything.

This was fixed in GU4 or thereabouts.
It is now crap against infantry.

Rothnang · 2013-03-20, 06:00 AM

The problem is a bit more complicated than that.

Roughly 40% of a tanks damage potential comes from the secondary weapon. Anti-infantry secondaries deal absolutely no damage to vehicles, and aren't really all that great against infantry either. The anti vehicle secondaries, with the exception of the Saron are ok against infantry. The Basilisk is mediocre against infantry, since its too inaccurate to really do a lot of damage to it. The tank mounted AA guns are bad against ground vehicles and pretty crummy against infantry too due to not being able to angle down.

The AP cannon is better against vehicles than the HEAT or HE cannon, but it's really bad against infantry, since it takes direct hits to kill infantry.

The vast majority of targets you will encounter as a tank are infantry, and at least a third of that infantry will have some way of effectively harming you, and kill you if you don't either flee or kill it first. There is absolutely no way around having a good anti infantry weapon as a tank unless you are part of such a large vehicle column that someone else can take care of it guaranteed.

So that just doesn't leave you with a whole lot of viable configurations for a tank. If you go with an AP cannon you pretty much need to put an anti-vehicle capable secondary on the tank, because there is no way the AP cannon alone can make up for the extra damage an anti-vehicle secondary can inflict, and giving up all your anti-infantry power on the main gun isn't worth it if you don't go all the way. The secondary ALSO needs to be your anti-infantry option though. That basically leaves you with four viable choices: Basilisk, Helberd, Vulcan or Enforcer. The Vanu have one fewer choice than the other factions because the Saron sucks against infantry.

The dedicated anti-infantry secondaries all suck, there isn't one of them that is commonly used. For one, the four weapons I mentioned above are so strong against infantry still that there really is no reason to go for a dedicated anti-infantry weapon, and secondly, a tank that packs multiple hybrid weapons is overall stronger against all kinds of targets than a tank that packs two specialized weapons.

That's IMO where the problem s. A tank with a HEAT cannon and Helberd on top will demolish enemy tanks and infantry alike. A tank with an AP cannon and a Cobalt on top is only a fraction as useful against both. You simply aren't gaining anything by equipping an AP cannon unless you already have anti-tank potential in the secondary. Trading an anti-vehicle capable secondary for a pure anti infantry secondary while trading your hybrid main gun for a dedicated anti vehicle gun simply doesn't produce a strong vehicle, it just ends up with a vehicle that can't bring overwhelming firepower to bear against any type of target.