The Type 4 90 mm Rocket Launcher
(P.S. The Type 5 Rocket Launcher has even more pen when compared to the Type 4 70 mm Rocket Launcher. But I personally like to have a sight.)
(P.S. The Type 5 Rocket Launcher has even more pen when compared to the Type 4 70 mm Rocket Launcher. But I personally like to have a sight.)
9 Likes
This thing only has 120mm of pen, It should be BR3 at best.
If you mean the type 5 “rocket launcher” in game, that only has 100mm of pen.
1 Like
In an ideal world this could have been the case. But unfortunately the Japanese don’t have anything else to offer. This rocket launcher will be even better than the M9 Bazooka which has got 102 mm of pen. Apart from this I know what is the penetration of the Type 5 Rocket Launcher. I was making that statement in relation to the Type 4 70 mm Rocket Launcher.
It is an welcoming addition for lower br. I just don’t see the point of branding it as a viable at option for BR V Japan when it is clearly not.
1 Like
Most of the stuff which is currently labelled as BR IIi–IV for Japan does not make absolute sense. We should keep in mind the fact that Japan has a severe lack of equipment to begin with. So comparing them with other nations might not be useful. But a difference of opinion is always welcome.
1 Like
funny I just read in another thread how trash the new Pershing is because the Japanese BR 2 launchers can 1 tap it from the front.
(I havent tried myself)
3 Likes
Yep. I took out a Pershing with the Type 4 70 mm Rocket Launcher as well. However, it will take some practice to know where exactly is the weak spot.
1 Like
Why not? What American tanks have more than 120mm of armor?
1 Like
This would actually make it quite good to be honest. Since it can directly pen the Pershing and later variants of the Sherman from the front just like the Panzerfaust.
Jumbo, Pershing and super Pershing in the future.
1 Like
Only certain weak spot which will be hard to hit from longer distance.
1 Like
All those tanks have frontal armor less than 120mm. What is your criteria for a BR5 at weapon for Japan?
2 Likes
You need to use effective thickness instead of raw thickness, those armor are not flat.
Effectively pen br5 tanks.
1 Like
To be honest the Pershing can easily be penned by the Type 4 70 mm as well. But the 90 mm warhead is going to enhance its AT capabilities even further.
Have you tried it before? If you did, where did you shoot?
I tried it in the editor, it is hard to pen it from front even in close range since its weak spot is small.
1 Like
I don’t know exactly. It was a random hit to be honest.
I made a post exactly because of this mindset a while ago. There are other options for Japanese infantry AT weapons, only problem is those weapons are usually very limited in terms of info (way more limited than other current prototype weapons).
Unrelated to high tier but it would also help if certain other weapons were available/working as they should (Missing HEAT rounds for the Ho-I and the 120mm short gun HE round being able to cave in Sherman roof armor for example).
3 Likes
I don’t think this will be a problem they alter ROF and other stuff for balance so this would be no different
1 Like
I checked Killerwolf1024 s post and I found a gem for tier 5 AT so tier 3 AT will be 9cm type 4 rocket launcher the one you mentioned
and for tier/BR 5
-Type 97 with Ji-Te Dan 200mm(estimated) theoretically able to pierce an estimated 250mm of Armor)
It must be a hollow charge grenade with a rod, that was inserted to the barrel of the Type 97 AT rifle. Fired by a blank or better-propelling cartridge without a bullet.
This technique is well known for rifle grenades and German rod shells for several artillery pieces ( Stielgranaten ).
4 Likes
Yep. I made this comment based on the fact that there are very limited hand-held AT weapons for Japan. But as you said there a couple of unique options as in mortars and AT trucks as well. I even made a post in this regard on the forum.