The Cromwell I is one of the (few) new vehicle being added to the game as part of the next major update. It is a British Medium tank with decent armor, decent gun and good mobility.
The Cromwell I uses the 57mm QF 6 pdr Mk III gun which is identical to the gun used by the Crusader at BR2 and slightly worse than the Mk V used by the Churchill at BR3. Currently in the dev server it is equipped with three different types of ammo :
This means the the Cromwell will have two distinct ammunition dedicated to fighting enemy tanks. Most vehicle that share this feature usually have two ammo with very different properties :
AP : standard shot with or without explosive filler which usually offer a good middle ground between armor penetration and damage.
APCR : Subcaliber round that offers greater penetration on flat armor but lower damage
HEAT : Usually used by guns with a lower muzzle velocity to compensate for the lower penetration of their AP rounds
However, in the case of the Cromwell, the APCBC is just a strait up upgrade over the standard AP : an APCBC is an AP shell with a Cap (C) which allow the round to be more efficient against sloped armor and a Ballistic Cap (BC) to improve the ballistic performance of the round at range.
At BR3, the AP round would be quite mediocre, particularly taking into account the fact that it does not have any explosive filler. The Cromwell should be a clear improvement over the Crusader at BR3, and for that I think that it should exchange all of its mediocre AP for the slightly better APCBC “Shot Mk.9”.
There was already a suggestion regarding the use of the APCBC in the Cromwell (courtesy of @ GasMasters-live). This is one of the very few suggestion with a 100% approval rate but it seems that it was not carried out entirely in the current state of the game, thus I must ask the food community of the enlisted forum :
Should the AP be entirely replaced by APCBC in the Cromwell ammunition loadout ?
Silly that this is even nessesary in the first place…
We already had to go through this once, and apparently “pleace replace the AP with APCBC” got translated as “please replace some of the AP with APCBC”…
I would prefer it to be moved to br2 with regular AP than to be in br3 with solid apcbc. With AP in br2 it actually has some trade offs with other tanks, especially if other tanks get he filler AP rounds in br2. I’ve always rathered having different options with trade offs for all equipment making the player think about what they want to use than for it to be no brainer picks in every category
The 75mm Cromwell will most likely be worse than the 57mm version if it is on br3. It has no explosive filler on its Apcbc round, so the post pen effect wouldn’t increase much compared to the 57mm version. The 75mm gun penetration is mediocre, it couldn’t pen panthers and tiger from the front while 57mm gun can.
Not really, 6 pounder has two variant. This is the penetration value for the longer barrel variant (l50), Cromwell 1 has shorter barrel(l43). So you need to find the performance when being fired from shorter barrel.
Sorry to say that, despite there being two written topics on the subject, and overwhelming support for both, the Cromwell I still got loaded with a bunch of subpar AP.
What happened…?
The original change occurred before the test server was even live, why wasn’t there a follow up after the change test server…?
In fact, the biggest problem is the number of fragments.
Until a certain critical point is reached, the fewer fragments, the less infantry to kill for (because there’s a emptying part)
The corresponding critical point depends on the range in proportion to the number and range of fragments.
For aircraft bombs, it doesn’t mean much because it crosses this threshold, but for tank HE Shell, the difference is quite large.
Because all the fragments is sprayed in all directions at 360 degrees, most of the fragments is lost.
That’s why 75mm HE can kill infantry more effectively than 57mm HE.
Even considering reload time.
