>just hit the periscopes>even though its a point target that would require to get within 100m of the enemy tank, past the infantry protecting it, within the range of its machine guns, and then take careful aim>you just have to be very sneaky with a 16kg, 2m-long piple>and you dont have to be accurate, just volley fire with the entire platoon, getting an entire platoon within 100m of an enemy tank without being spotted and then surviving the return fire is very easy>or just sit in a trench and wait for the enemy come to you, and hope the enemy doesnt fire at your trench with machine guns or mortars
>>65599535Also works against people behind sandbags
>>65599535hitting infantry with this thing in Red Orchestra was fun
idea. just tell your troops they have no hope against anything and im sure they'll be just as motivated.
>>65599552normal troops didnt get this thing, it was issued to dedicated tank-hunter platoonstelling the people whose only job it is is to kill tanks is that their weapon is only able to disable (but not kill) enemy tanks on a tuesday, when the stars are in constellation of virgo, and surviving the encounter is optionalthen that might have the opposite effect of motivation
>>65599535>the enemy has to add armored skirts to his tanks just because of this weapon
>>65599571>the most common soviet AT weapon is defeated a quarter inch of mild steel
>>65599578>anons chance to lose his virginity is defeated by a quarter inch of hard penis
>>65599566There are always stars in Virgo, that is how constellations work.
>>65599535You can hit the tracks too, try to damage the barrel, just be a nuisance.Also, it'll punch a hole clean through any German halftrack. The men inside won't enjoy that.
>>65599654planets are wandering stars and may not be in the same sector of the sky at any given time
>>65599657>You can hit the tracks toogenerally pointless, unless you can hit the sprocket drivetracks have been hit by main tank gun rounds without being severedand most of the time, the track are edge-on to the attacker and do not present a realistic target and even then, hitting the sprocket with a small round 14mm round isnt guaranteed to disable the track, its far too small to actually destroy the wheel and you have to pray that it hits the edge and disrupts the teeth>Also, it'll punch a hole clean through any German halftrack. The men inside won't enjoy that.that would be a good point if this was an anti-half-track rifle and not an anti-tank rifle, which was issued to anti-tank squads who designated to provide protection against tanks
>>65599666>generally pointless, unless you can hit the sprocket driveI assure you that tank tracks don't enjoy 14.5mm AP hits, especially with WW2 tracks which are a fair bit weaker than anything we have today.>that would be a good point if this was an anti-half-track rifle and not an anti-tank rifle, which was issued to anti-tank squads who designated to provide protection against tanksThe PTRD/PTRS will punch holes in Panzer 2's, Panzer 3's and Panzer 4's, depending on the range, angle, and model type.
>>65599674>especially with WW2 tracks which are a fair bit weaker than anything we have today.they conducted tests on the viability of attacking tracks in WW2, and small arms even up to AT rifles required multiple hits to do soeven running up to the tank and placing an explosive did not do so, you needed to use a grenade bundle to guarantee itand as mentioned, if the main gun of a tank did not guarantee track-destruction on the first shot, then you are definitely not guaranteed to do it in a single hit with a PTRD>The PTRD/PTRS will punch holes in Panzer 2's, Panzer 3's and Panzer 4'if we go by the most produced model, the IV, and the most produced variant of that model, the H and Jsthen your range and angle is limited to the sides at 500mbut once the germans installed skirts, then your only option was no the periscopes and vision blocs of the vehicle, which could only be plausibly hit at a range of 100mhence the advice given to the AT platoons of getting to within 100m of the target and praying that you hit a sub-person sized targetincluding the panzer 2 is just dishonest, because it was pulled out of service less than a year after barbarossa
>>65599659NTA. There are also planets in Virgo most of the time. Virgo sits on the plane of the ecliptic and is fucking huge, like, 60 degrees across or something (and there are at least 8 other planets spread over the 360 degrees). Maybe you should look up once in a while, brainlet.>t. amateur astronomy enthusiast
>projectile drops like a thrown rock>projectile is slow as molasses>huge backblast>fragile firing mechanism>propellant sucks in cold temperaturewas it worth the extra inch of penetration?
>>65599691You're absolutely right, they should've just gone without the PTRS/PTRD, that would've been so much smarter.
>>65599733>you should use your spear on the enemy>but it needs me to run into stabbing range past their machine guns>would you rather not use a spear?
>>65599736>Anti tank rifles are medieval weaponsYou're right.
>>65599743your logic is that the PTRD is better than nothing, a statement that equally applies to medieval weapon and even rocks
>>65599748Again, you're right. The russians absolutely shouldn't have made the anti tank rifles. Totally useless.It's just a cohencidence all German tanks including the Panther got spaced armor.
>>65599535>past the infantry protecting itTo be fair, their presence is less of a given than you would think: your average tank commander will send their armor ahead of the infantry, instead of the other way around.
>>65599691Wasn't the Panzer II shoved back into service as the western front broke down? It wasn't even the worst vehicle in Germany's arsenal: that'd be the captured Renault FTs.
>>65599752if the soviet "advice" on how to use the PTRD was to stand dangerously close to an enemy vehicle, while using a gun thats as tall as you, and carefully aim for a tiny viewport, and then be somehow survive the return fire you get the distinct impression that the problem is the weapon not the courage
The threat from anti-tank sniping was significant enough that the vision slits in German tank cupolas were replaced with periscope-style viewing devices.
>>65599768For fucks sake, a shitload of Germans died from getting perforated by 14.5mm slugs going through their tank, halftrack or other vehicle. A sufficient amount the Germans had to hastily shove spaced armor onto their vehicles, to the point of removing shitloads of vision ports from their vehicles which reduced situational awareness.
>>65599778if you have to tell soviet AT gunners that they have to stand at point-blank range and carefully aim for a tiny spot on the enemy tank for effectthe issue might be with the gun
>>65599787You have a more effective option that isn't a HEAT warhead because the Russians didn't like those until well into the war? What's your solution that can be created in a couple months of development?
>>65599763not in any large numbergermans had 1500 tanks and 700 casemated guns, TD or SPGout of these, 1200 were either panzer IVs or panthersthere might have been a few panzer IIs in action, too much of a footnote to be worth writing downbut most of them would have been converted into marders by this point and not fighting as panzer IIs
>>65599801HESH warhead
>>65599732yes, it's too bad the US is shit in all ww2 rts games
>>65599816Soviets didn't have that knowledge.
>>65599732My grandfather said they were really fun to shoot. He'd take other people's practice rounds during boot camp when they didn't want them.
>>65599898>US is shit in all ww2 rts gamesGates of hell ost front beg to differ.
>>65599962on a tangent, i was always mystified as to why the M6A3 rocket got another inch of penetration over the M6A1 rocket even though the only significant change was a rounded nose instead of a pointy noseapparently it was because the rounded nose was stronger than the pointy nose, so it deformed slower and caused the rocket to detonate closer to its optimal standoff rangeit then caused a rabbit hole of apparently no one knowing what the shaped charge liner of the WW2-era rockets were made of because the M6A5 swapped to copper, causing everyone to realize that this implied that the earlier rockets didnt use copper and technical diagrams didnt say what the liner was made of, though it was probably just steel or iron, since changing to copper slightly increased penetration
>weapon was highly effective and forced the Germans to stop fielding light vehicles, change their tactics, and modify existing medium vehicles due to large casualties >this means a weapon was always bad Look the PTRS is certainly a bit over-loved for what it actually was but I think you’re maybe under selling it. Quite a lot of Soviet equipment was responsible for forcing the Germans to drop the PZII and III but the PTRS alone was responsible for the spaced armor which looks freakin cool on a Panzer IV and for that I can and will respect the rifle on that alone.
>>65600196>forced the Germans to stop fielding light vehiclesgermans fielded light vehicles until the end of the wartheir half-track, several armored cars, and several of their TD all being light vehicleswhat they stopped using were light tanks specifically, but not light vehicles in generaland once the germans did start installing schurzen, the PTRD remained the primary AT weapon until the very last day of WW2 with no replacement the soviet counter-measure to schurzen was literally just to tell AT platoons to get good instead of anything tangible
>>6559953514.5mm can pen base model bradley at close range
>>65600210it cant, actuallyat least not unless it was a contrived situation like muzzle pressed against the armorM2 bradley was designed around 14.5mm AP rounds as the standard of protection
>>65600210Bradley uses a combination of spaced armor and thick aluminum plates to be all-round proofed against 14.5mm AP.
>>65599983US is agreed upon as the worst faction in goh. what are you smoking?
>>65600214Waste of money since the Bradley has a turret so the enemy will shoot anti tank weapons at it instead of guns.
>>65600475>garand is standard inf squad firearm>jumbo being nearly unkillable for anything less than a 88 pak 43No
>>65600208>the PTRD remained the primary AT weapon until the very last day of WW2 with no replacement The 45mm gun was the primary AT weapon of the rifle battalion and even regiments throughout the war.
>>65599535Why doesn't anyone make anything like this on the market rn? I mean basically a simple steel 50bmg single shot tube.
>>65600785Serbu is on market.
>>65600503yeah, the garand is less accurate than bolts and runs out of ammo before killing anyone. also only has a bar in standard inf squads rather than an actual mg.wow you cant kill an expensive tank from the front at max range. you either buy a panzershreck/faust and get close or buy a decent at gun. i wish the US had those options but the bazooka has nearly half the pen of the shreck and US at guns suck ass.
>>65599643-2 karma ass post
>>65599535It's like you never played Red Orchestra 2
>>65600618no one is talking about towed AT guns, they are talking about handheld AT weaponsand the AT squad was equipped with PTRDs until the end of the war
>>65599732Mate, I'd move mountains for an extra inch of penetration.
>>65599535yes, it wasn't until well into the cold war that infantry-based anti-tank weapons became a non-suicidal option.even the 'venerable' bazooka, given to several anti-tank teams facing an armored assault, is little more than a last ditch bee sting that is certain to result in the user dying shortly after use.the fact is that these weapons weren't effective farther than 100m. in the case of the anti-tank rifles, it's because they just simply aren't powerful enough. in the case of infantry anti-tank rockets, it's because the likelihood of hitting a tank with the primitive sighting systems and poor accuracy of the projectile beyond 100m is laughable, especially on the first shot, and when ammo carrying capacity is so limited and the firing of the weapon is so conspicuous it's unlikely that an anti-tank team will get a chance to "walk in" the projectiles onto the tank before being cut down by HE shells, coaxial/hull mounted MG, or supporting infantry. and, of course, trying to employ these weapons past 100m just means you are going to miss, and the tank platoon and supporting infantry is going to erase you at the distance which, to them, is peanuts.and even if they score a catastrophic kill, there is still the rest of the tank platoon to deal with, plus infantry, who are likely starting to surround you and close in to kill you in the hole/trench you sit in with grenades.the reason that the panzerfaust was comparatively "successful" is because it optimized and intended for these factors. operators shoot within 50m (likely <30m), destroy a tank, and then die. if they are lucky enough to get away, then great, but we know from history that this tactic is basically suicide for the anti-tank team, but hey, the only loss was a couple of 15 year olds led by a 60 year old, and a weapon that cost 20 marks to produce, meanwhile YOU have lost an entire fighting vehicle and the five guys inside who are either dead or missing limbs.not a good job to have.
>>65601517i should also note that before the days of 15 and 60 year old conscription, the panzerfaust was also effective because you could give them to every other guy in the platoon if you were so blessed.this way, the fighting positions that get cut off by an armored advance have a chance to attrit the fighting vehicles of the armored advance before being killed, thereby giving the rest of the unit a chance to escape to more defensible ground.when every foxhole you try and overrun with a tank platoon might have 1 or 2 anti-tank weapons that get exponentially more effective as you close in, you are going to have to slow your advance and be very, very careful. it doesn't mean that these anti-tank weapons are going to let the guys in the foxhole survive (even if they believe it), it just means that they are going to have a very pronounce delaying effect on the armored advance since they might be able to disable or destroy a tank before they are killed where they stand, which is good for the rest of the defending infantry unit who aren't yet within suicidal range of enemy tanks.
>>65601517the bazooka and panzerfaust were simply handed to regular riflemen to use in an emergency against enemy tanksthe PTRD were issued to dedicated anti-tank squads, whose primary weapon was the PTRDso the PTRD was not a last-ditch anti-tank weapon but a dedicated tank hunter
>>65601528how much ground do you really think a PTRS-equipped tank-hunter squad can cover on foot in the dozens of minutes an armored assault can sweep over a position?it's the same principle, just on one higher level of organization. instead of a single weapon issued to a squad for self-defense, it's a single squad issued to a platoon/company for self-defense. during an enemy armored assault, the squad will reposition a few hundred meters to try and get a flank on the enemy armored thrust in order to attempt a mobility kill or two. and shortly thereafter they will be killed by the rest of the tank platoon. this sacrifice will yield maybe some valuable minutes as they delay the armored advance, but it is still a suicidal action for the team itself.a group of guys with a PTRS aren't running around the battlefield one-shotting tanks like the "tank hunter" in hell let loose.
>>65601535ptrs/ptrd whatever i mean. this is applicable to any anti-tank rifle, and conceivably any panzerfaust/schreck/bazooka team that hypothetically would be deployed similarly as a platoon/company asset.
>>65601535>a group of guys with a PTRS aren't running around the battlefield one-shotting tanks like the "tank hunter" in hell let loose.they cant, because their weapon requires them to attack a very specific part of the enemy tankthe bazooka isnt much better with regards to range, but at least it can defeat the side armor and not just the periscope and it is half the size and weight so you have a better chance to get close without dyingthe panzerfaust even more so for both penetration and size
>>65599732Yes, obviously, considering they could destroy most tanks and didn't care about the range (except as far as it effected hit probability of course)
>>65599752That had more to do with their at grenades as I recall. Peovided we're thinking of the same thing
>>65601616it was for AT riflesthey could have potentially made HEAT worse, because the problem with early mechanical fuzes is that they were too slow, so pre-detonating them would actually cause them to detonate closer to their stand off distance the panther has a noticeably shorter skirt because its a slutthe only weakpoint against the AT rifle was the zettai ryouki between the road wheels and the upper side hullthe upper side hull was 40mm thick at 60 degrees, which was impenetrable to the PTRD regardless of range or angle
>>65601010go back.
>>65601488(in your ass)
>>65601616Common misconception is the spaced armor had anything to do with HEAT warheads. They were designed to tumble the 14.5mm AP cores from the PTRD/PTRS, allowing the thin base armor to absorb the impact.
>>65601629>>65601677I wasn't talking about the schurzen, for aome reason I saw spaced and thought zimmerit
>>65601812>zimmeritOnly existed for protection from magnetic anti tank charges. Which of all the nations, only Germany actually used. Well, and Japan but Germany wasn't concerned with that.
>>65602008it also protected against adhesive mines, the zig-zagging texture sloped downwards to try shed sticky bombsthis one at least made some sense, the british did issue the "toffee" adhesive mine, but they were long out of service by 1943 because the bomb was too easy to get stuck on your own pants and because british troops kept trying to throw them
>>65602114>it also protected against adhesive minesWhich sucked ass and had just as much chance of blowing up their own infantry when used lmao
>>65602008So you mean to say that AT rifles were clearly a big deal because the germans made a new armor system to defend against them, but magnetic or adhesive AT grenades were not at all a big deal despite germany making a new armor system to defend against them? I'm not even saying I disagree, just seems incongruous
>>65602212>but magnetic or adhesive AT grenades were not at all a big deal despite germany making a new armor system to defend against themOne small problem with your line of logic, spaced armor was installed on tanks to defend against a very real threat that was in common usage.Zimmerit was a waste of time because the weapon it was designed against, literally did not exist.
>>65599571>>65599643>Anon is childish>Primary source for claim self-published and from 2003I am convinced.
>>65599695Don't greentext a self-referential t., astonomy bro.
>>65602212and so once schurzen was mass-produced and equipped to every tank, the soviets decided to just tell their units to get good instead of offering an actually useful solution to skirts
>>65599535Still works
>>65604639against lightly armored vehicles
>>65601517>>65601527Feels like they were weapons for the wrong theater: handheld anti-tank rockets had much better success in Vietnam under the NVA where the dense foliage allowed someone to launch and get out of dodge before getting tagged.You see this today in how rarely the RPG is used for tank busting either in the ME or in Eastern Europe.
>>65599535this is a weapon from a time when1. HEAT/HESH launchers sucked2. tanks were not immune to 14.5mm3. other armored vehicles (like half-tracks and spgs) would get oiled and owned by 14.5mmback then it was justifiable. another nice thing about it was that it was much lighter and much easier to operate and maintain than some 20mm anti-tank rifles
>>65604745>1. HEAT/HESH launchers suckedeven the worst version of the M1 bazooka offered nearly double the penetrationand by the end of the war, only the soviets still kept AT rifles as the standard handheld anti-tank weapon>2. tanks were not immune to 14.5mmbeing forced to aim for a tiny point on the enemy tank with a giant weapon to cause minor damage sounds like a trivial difference from just being immune the enemy is not going to wait for you to take careful at a target smaller than a human head patientlyand with the size of the weapon, you are not going to be able to disengage without dropping it and running>3. other armored vehicles (like half-tracks and spgs) would get oiled and owned by 14.5mmexcept its called an anti-tank rifle and issued to anti-tank squads, not anti-halftrack squads
>>65599801interestingly the USSR had already put HEAT warheads on bomblets by 1943, for use by aircraft against tanks and other armored vehicles.For some reason it took them much longer to make their own RPG. They only decided to start making one in 1944 and only got the first mass-deployed version in 1949.
>>65604758>even the worst version of the M1 bazooka offered nearly double the penetrationA year after the PTRD was in service. The Russians needed a weapon now, not a year in the future.>>65604761>For some reason it took them much longer to make their own RPGNot abnormal at all, the Germans fucked up in that respect too. They made the Pupchen, which was a fucking joke of a weapon.
>>65604771>A year after the PTRD was in serviceand yet the PTRD was still in service then, and then the next year, and then the next yearand all they had to offer the troops were platitudes about aiming better
>>65604772>and yet the PTRD was still in service then, and then the next year, and then the next yearWeapon that was good enough, but not perfect, was kept in service??? Also it's role changed during the war, it wasn't hunting tanks in 1943 lmao. That was the job of conscripts with satchel charges and AT grenades.They also got a shitload of bazookas from the US.
>>65604774>Weapon that was good enoughby 1941 standardsbut by the height of the war, it was clearly not sufficient since the troops were being told to aim for small targets as if the enemy would ever let them stay still and carefully line up shots>Also it's role changed during the war, it wasn't hunting tanks in 1943 lmao.PTRD squads were literally designated as anti-tank squads until the end of the warif their purpose was to hunt soft-skinned vehicles, then advice to AT gunners would have been "dont bother with tanks, just go for the half-tracks" but instead it was "allow yourself to die for the small chance of marginal damage">hat was the job of conscripts with satchel charges and AT grenades.if that was the case, they would have dissolved the anti-tank squads and re-issued dedicated anti-tank weapons to the rifle squads which never happenedburden of tank hunting fell to the AT squads who were woefully underequipped for the task
>>65604758>even the worst version of the M1 bazooka offered nearly double the penetrationweapons like the piat and bazooka had other disadvantages though, such as decreased effective range (due to having about 80 m/s muzzle velocity) and probably much less ammo. Not sure how these balance out though >and by the end of the war, only the soviets still kept AT rifles as the standard handheld anti-tank weaponThe USA never used anti-tank rifles to begin with. (The closest thing was the M2 browning machinegun, initially designed to shred tanks, but that's not an anti-tank rifle) Britain and Nazi Germany used anti-tank rifles with significantly worse performance than the PTRD-41.
>>65604788>by 1941 standardsThe Panzer 4 was a fucking 30's tank, oh my god it was still being made in 1945!???You fight with what you have, not with what you want.
>>65604790>Britain and Nazi Germany used anti-tank rifles with significantly worse performance than the PTRD-41.britian replaced the boys with the PIAT because AT rifles suckedthe germans took one look at the bazooka, realized AT rifles sucked, and then went with the panzerfaust and panzerschrekthe soviets decided that aiming for weakpoints is a valid tactic and never bothered to swap out
>>65604792the panzer IV received very significant upgrades such as a gun worth a damn and improved armorif the PTRD had received the same treatment, they would have at the very least given it some kind of counter to skirts that wasnt praying to stalin
>>65604796The soviets couldn't get basic equipment for their infantry and needed literal ship-tons of trucks brought in by the USA.They outright couldn't make a bazooka clone and produce it.
>>65604796how would you do that? best I can think of is handing out better ammo, which maybe they did.>inb4 make it biggerthey already have anti-tank guns of various sizes
>>65604801bazookas were not that great and the first models got steamrolled by nork-crewed t-34 tanks in korea. (granted the ptrd would have also gotten steamrolled if used in the same way)
>>65604809the ammo they were issued was the same as what they were issued in 1941>they already have anti-tank guns of various sizesthen the solution is obvious, stop pretending the PTRD-41 has any realistic role in tank hunting and does not need dedicated anti-tank squadsdissolve the AT squad entirely, hold the PTRD with the HQ as a specialist weapon, and just rely on their battalion AT guns entirely for anti-tank
>>65604811the M1 bazooka could defeat a panzer IV from the side even with schurzen and could at least semi-defeat the panthers upper side hull provided you had a decent anglethe PTRD couldnt even do either of those things, and it was heavier to bootbut the bazooka got the M6A3 rocket which helped slightly against sloped armor and the panthers turret sidethe PTRD got hopes and prayers at the same timeeven if you are just going for mobility kills, the PTRD only has periscope as a valid target while the bazooka has a semi-realistic chance of knocking out the drive sprocket
>>65601535>how much ground do you really think a PTRS-equipped tank-hunter squad can cover on foot in the dozens of minutes an armored assault can sweep over a position?t. never watched Eastern Front footage and how slow those fucking panzers/halftracks/trucks got in the rasputitsa and mudDisregarding your posts now, as everyone should.
>>65600475>>65600980The Germans at least need a Panzer IV G and Pak40 to combat U.S. medium tanks effectively.The M20 and M8 are the best scout and armored cars in the game.M3 Stuart kills any light tank in its class and can easily walk up on unaware medium tanks with their high speed and above average armor penetration. M4 105 M1 57mm is a medium weight AT gun with medium tank range and heavy gun penetration.M4 tanks have offensive smoke. Some M4 call-ins have added armor to match mid war heavy tanks.M18 is the cheapest medium-heavy tank destroyer with anti infantry protection. M36 is cheaper than a Tiger, better than a Panther, can kill both.Good combat replacements with M1 rifle or M1 Thomson SMG.M2HB is the most accurate HMG in the game.Browning 1918A2 is an automatic rifle, not a machinegun, and therefore more accurate than one. U.S. infantry are better defensively controlling points against enemy infantry, and are all strong against SMG squad charges.All Browning M1919's are 250 round belt fed.Strong Mid War Average Late War
>>65605086>M2HB is the most accurate HMG in the game.I mean, there's literally like two HMG's in the game, so at worst it'd be the second most accurate HMG in the game.
>>65599578https://youtube.com/watch?v=hKSDGhjk7Jc
>>65605154>all you have to do is get within 100m to beat their side armor>woops, they have skirts now, so you cant even do that
>>65599772Soviet tanks moved away from vision blocks too, while Germans dropped their AT rifles. Threat to vision blocks was machinegun fire, repeated hits broke through blocks and they was legit tactics.
>>65604794>the soviets decided that aiming for weakpoints is a valid tactic and never bothered to swap outhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_KurchevskyFor Soveits bazooka/recoilless weapons were taboo because of this trial. Recoilless weapons named as "sabotage of traitors against Soveit state"Like in 1944 Soveits frontline military were practically begging Soviet engineers to copy panzerfaust, but engineers were like>nope, not gonna touch recoilless with ten feet pole, you aren't gonna trick me to commit treason >here is the new AT rifles, it weights hundred pounds so we put it on the wheels, very neat!>*military* arhhgggg!
>>65602230>Zimmerit was a waste of time because the weapon it was designed against, literally did not exist.Zimmerit is a camo paint.Similar to these modern camo fabrics that add texture and remove metal glare.
>>65605189Zimmerit's usage as camouflage is circumstantial to it's actual purpose, which was to prevent attachment of magnetic charges.
>>65599691>getting to within 100m of the target>>65599768>stand dangerously close to an enemy vehicle, while using a gun thats as tall as youExcuse me, are you talking about the soviet PT rifles or the bazooka?Anyway, the PTRD was unwieldy and quite heavy (10 pounds lighter than M1919A4 Browning MG with tripod), had hard upper limit on armor penetration of ~40 mm that went down with distance and only limited behind the armor effect.It also had low firing signature, was more accurate than other man-portable AT weapons, could engage thin armored targets out to few hundred meters, was quick to reload and had easy to carry ammo that wasn't temperature sensitive.It's kinda moot to bash PTRD as dangerous to its crew for forcing the gunner to get within 100 metres when bazooka gunners had to get as close or even closer to hit, with a weapon producing a 15 feet flame and taking almost half minute to reload. With PIAT you needed to get even closer, but at least it could be used from enclosed spaces and had low firing signature.IMO the real advantage of shaped charge AT weapons is that it kills what you hit a lot better than a bullet with 28 grains of incendiary compound...
>>65605291>Excuse me, are you talking about the soviet PT rifles or the bazooka?the bazooka has the same range problem, but at least you only have to aim for the side and not a tiny box >It's kinda moot to bash PTRD as dangerous to its crew for forcing the gunner to get within 100 metres when bazooka gunners had to get as close or even closer to hit, with a weapon producing a 15 feet flame and taking almost half minute to reloadthe PTRD is much larger and heavier than the bazooka while also having essentially no payoff for taking such a risk and also being harder to get close to your target to do so>IMO the real advantage of shaped charge AT weapons is that it kills what you hit a lot better than a bullet with 28 grains of incendiary compound...which means the crew can run away after firing their shot because they dont have to carefully line up their shot with a tiny target while also being unable to hide because the gun is so large and unable to run because the gun is so heavy
>>65605267Zimmerit placement against "magnetic mines" makes no sense >let me attach mine to the front of the tank>lent me climb xbawks huge Tiger to attach mine to the turret side (and if you climbed hull why not attach it to the turret top that has zimmerit, right?)But this placement makes perfect sense as cammo paint.Also zimmerit don't work, magnets attach to it ok. "Magnetic mines" is another case of deliberate desinformatiion to hide it's real goal. just like "chobham ceramic armor" and it works, gullible userfull idiots still parrot this desinfo.
>>65605346
>>65605346Are you suggesting that you know more about zimmerit, than the actual people who invented, applied, and used zimmerit?
>>65605350>*citation needed*
>>65604924yes, because the mud season is year round, of course, genius.
>>65605378No he's asking you to explain your schizoid theories. e.g. if it's just camo, why isn't it just sawdust, paint and glue?I for one would like to hear what the Martians tell you about Chobham composite.
>>65605086i would hope the germans would need roughly equal value in AT/tanks to duel my tanks. it would be stupid otherwise.the m20/m8 are okay, but they're far from the best lol.the stuart is good, but it also costs more than most other light tanks, so i'd hope it'd at least be good. while the gun on paper should be able to easily pen most other light tanks, other tanks have a lot more angles to them making rounds bounce more easily while the stuart can still be penned pretty easily.m4 105 i dont have enough experience with to say.57mm does not have heavy gun penetration lol.smoke is pretty shit in this game compared to many other games, but i guess it's a pro.wow, the m18 is best in a class you made up. it also dies to any AT gun or tank gun after missing its first shot lol.m36 is not better than a panther, are you high? having no armor on a slow moving TD means once you miss your first shot youre dead or if they happen to have a cheap AT gun on a flank then youll die too.m1 garand is shit due to decreased accuracy compared to bolt guns and you lose most long range engagements, not to mention other factions get real mgs in their squads letting them dominate ranged combat even more. m1 thompson is ok.as the other guy said, only 2 HMGs in the game lmao so being #1 out of 2 makes the US really good.i would rather have an mg34/42 every single day of the week over a BAR for pushing or defense. i dont know how you could argue that the BAR is good.m1919s are shit.
