I would like to suggest the addition of Anti-tank grenades as an alternative to the boring and frankly LooneyToons-like Explosion Pack.
The best part is every faction can get unique models with different effects and mechanics!
HEAT Grenades
Western Axis
Panzerwurfmine
Country of Origin: Nazi Germany
Weight: 1.36kg
Explosive Mass: 500g
Detonation Mechanism: Impact Fuse
Armor Penetration: 150mm @ 90° (This number should be reduced for gameplay balance)
USSR
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Weight: 2kg
Explosive Mass: 1600g
Detonation Mechanism: Impact Fuse
Armor Penetration: 51mm and severe damage to adjacent internal/external modules at the site of impact.
Western Axis
Tipo L Bomba a Mano Anticarro
Country of Origin: Fascist Italy
Weight: 2.04kg
Explosive Mass: 1500g
Detonation Mechanism: Impact Fuse
Armor Penetration: Unknown (For balance I would make it the same as the No.73 Bomb)
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Weight: 1.2kg
Explosive Mass: 570g
Detonation Mechanism: Timed Fuse, 5 seconds
Armor Penetration: 25mm and damage to adjacent external modules.
Western Axis
Country of Origin: Nazi Germany
Weight: 0.418kg
Explosive Mass: 205g
Detonation Mechanism: Timed Fuse, 4.5 seconds or 7 seconds.
Armor Penetration: 125mm @ 90° (It would always be 90° due to the sticky pad and stabilizing ribbon. However the penetration number on this model is also pretty crazy and should probably be nerfed for gameplay balance reasons)
I was trying to stay away from improvised designs. As for the Gammon bomb, it would be hard to implement and it would be less effective than the Woolworth bomb anyway.
Why use the Gammon bomb if the Woolworth bomb is a better Impact AT option? The main advantage of Gammon, being able to adjust the explosive mass, wouldnt work in Enlisted. It would just be a slightly more powerful No.69 and a weaker No.73.
As for the bundled M24 and RGD-33 they are battlefield-made improvised weapons and therefore their effectiveness is doubtful at best.
The point of my suggestion is to provide unique throwable weapons as alternative to the Explosion Pack, and not simply to re-skin the Explosion Pack.
not sure if the gamon would be that usless if we compare it to a sticky bomb n°74 wich has high sticky problem.
The n°73 were used has demo charge at the end of the war. at the beginning this one could kill or damage the operator it launched as an AT if he didn’t have proper mesure to avoid it.
those both N°74 and N°73 were barely used
That’s a nice idea I must admit, but for thoses listed i’m not sure they have the equivalent TNT nor the the post pen dmg to counter the explo pack, i mean explo pack is most of the time OS the tank while those AT would needed more than 1 to "destroy "the tank
I thought this was a Cold War design, I see now it is a 1943 design. Very good option.
Yes, the Gammon was more effective at Demolition than the Sticky bomb, but, the whole reason I want the sticky bomb is because it is unique and in the game unreliable stickyness shouldn’t be a problem.
My suggestions are not meant to counter the Explosion Pack, they are meant to provide a unique Anti-tank tools for each faction. The Explosion pack will still remain, of course.
For my part I would like that the explo pack would be locked to engi/maybe AT or just remove.
This thing is way too powerfull at low BR you don’t really need AT rifles/ launcher.
Even if this thing is a “short weapon” to deals with tanks it’s overall effectivness is too high
For example at BR I
the one playing the tank (starter player ) can instant be killed by this unlike the antitank rifle wich need 2/3 shot depend of where you aim ofc
Even at higher BR thoses tool like explo and TNT are way too easy to destroy tank (not talking about the tank player who doesn’t know the forward key and stay in his greyzone). The aggressive player who want to close support as much as possible his allied is the most in danger by those. Wich is absolutly not rewarding. (even if staying close to inf would normally prevent you getting thoses tragic death, it’s appears blind people are 70 or more % the population of enlisted )
To conclude, who is really afraid of tank ? only the grey zone camper are boring otherwise it’s most of the time skill issue
The big problem with AT grenades is that explosive packs exist.
If you have a HE based AT grenade then you just powercreep the existing explosive pack for both AT and anti infantry.
Grenades with HEAT can be nice but would be harder to use than that a explosive pack that you just need to land somewhere near the tracks and you are fine.
If DF wants to introduce AT grenades than they have to nerf/replace the explosive pack which might backfire.
But its true what he says. AT rifles should be way more prevalent in BR I and II but who in their right mind would care to run any AT rifles if you can equip all your soldiers with Exp. Packs.
I will say it is a sidegrade. The advantage of HEAT grenade is the instant detonation. So it will be effective against moving target. It also eliminate the risk of being shot while cooking the explosive pack. Moreover there will be situation where you can’t flank so you still can cause some damage by throwing it to the front armor of the tank.
