Germany for example:
BR 1-2 you get the 5 cm Pak 38
for BR 3 you get the already in game 7,5 cm Pak
and for BR 4-5 you get the 8,8cm Pak 43
If you get uptiered from 3 to 4 you get the 8,8 cm Pak 43
15 Likes
I support the idea, the problem is that the construction system is very “xD”
We’re talking about spending 1 minute looking for where to build because due to the totally irregular map and how sensitive the construction system is, it takes you longer than necessary and you end up getting killed.
Especially if the bigger the cannon the longer it takes to build.
Also mention that the bigger the cannon, the more difficult it will be to build it on such a small and irregular map.
Engineers’ weapons are already rarely used by anyone, so in addition to adding this, it would be necessary to “promote” it.
Something like giving you more points for destroying a vehicle with them or for killing x amount of people.
5 Likes
Already been mentioned by developers
1 Like
Man, if I could build a 8,8cm PaK 43 I would be maining engineers together with AT gunners and use them interchangeably xD
I think instead all basic Engineers should build a general purpose AT gun but AT squads can build a heavy AT gun or flak cannon as their unique squad building
Engineers can build a 50mm-something, 40 something in Japan’s case, AT gun that’s obviously good at fighting light tanks and can duel with medium tanks, but the AT squad is the only one that’s supposed to be who you call to fight serious enemy armor
1 Like
I don’t see the point of promoting it. One of the reason some player don’t build at gun is because current at gun is bad against high br tank. Moreover I often see players using at gun to farm infantry.
1 Like
That is why I have suggested Infantry Support Guns be added as a basic Engineer building
It just complicate stuff. I don’t want to nerf the at gun, I am just saying it should not be reward more for killing infantry.
It will just create situation where at squad at gun is too powerful for low br tank and engineer squad at gun is useless at high br.
The Flak Cannon is balanced in that it has strong firepower but it will cost pretty much all of your Engineer points and the crew is extremely exposed and vulnerable, even more vulnerable than the regular AT gun which has the advantage of a smaller profile. Flak cannons would honestly be easy targets
The regular Engineer AT gun would not be useless in that even in high BR you still encounter a variety of vehicles. You just build one off to the side just in case, or build one when the need arises. As I said let the AT squad focus on the truly heavy threats.
I am not talking about the flak cannon I am talking about the heavy at gun.
Nope, unless some clueless newbie bring their tank to high br or some br3 player going to br5.
Why locking it to at squad? It is much needed to counter grey zone tank.
Fairly often, especiatly at low BR games where engineer II squad can build 75mm pak ?
Perhaps to make AT squad relevant, currently its just farm once & forget.
Just to get 5 star AT soldiers to other squads.
2 Likes
I think a better way is to give the engineers of non-professional corps the use of small anti-tank guns and anti-aircraft guns, while the engineers of professional corps can use 75 guns and 4-barreled anti-aircraft guns.
historic?
I guess that stuff isn’t that important
Well they can give other stuff like the flak cannon that guy said. Most people won’t use at squad anyway due to limited amount of slot. Locking heavy at gun to at squad is a miss opportunity for f2p players to counter grey zone tank.
It could be better if it was based on the level of the engeneer, so a engeneer one could only build the 7.5 and the engeneer 2 could build the 8.8 cm
Bad idea, it will allow seal clubber to bring it to low br match, this will give them advantage over newbie that haven’t unlock engineer2. Moreover I don’t see any point for it to be based on level of engineer, you even need to spend extra time to grind for engineer 2 squad upgrade.
Doubt it would be used anymore than currently if the engineer squad gets similar performance heavy AT.
Tbh, doubt big share of ppl uses engineer squad either.
Regardless its arguably most versatile squad and to some extend quite OP.
Yes and no, ever since the angled stalinium armor was fixed years ago, greyzone tanks havent really been issue.
F2p players should have acces to more squad slots either by grinding some silly ass missions or just buying them with silver.
But, dont really see reason to buff engineers any further.
Granting heavy AT to AT squad would be fair trade off.
Especiatly if the pak 43 / flak 88 works as expected.
Having the ability to rotate the gun 360 degree is a major advantage over the heavy at.
I regularly see at gun and aa gun on map so it will not be that little, it should at least be more than the one who use at squad.
lol seem like you only play Germany on low br. They currently have the best at gun in game.
What about US and Japan that have at gun that can’t pen most high br tank?
Very unlikely to happen.
So you want to see pak43 against those low br tank?
Not exactly sure why, tanks rarely move in such circles that 360 degree turn would be necessary.
Guess we play different game, but in that case its even more of a reason to not buff engineer any further.
Quite sure both US & Japs would get the heavy AT gun as well.
Tanks hardly are problem at high BR for murrica.
No other faction spam cas like murrica.
Not really, but regardless is it granted for engineer or AT squad it will happen.
So idl what was your point.
Normal at gun has limited traverse, you might get killed while moving the entire cannon to point towards the enemy tank. Not to mention that it can also kill infantry.
Lol weird logic, you are just contradicting your self. Since it makes your previous argument irrelevant.
You are not even answering the stuff. We are discussing about who should we give the heavy at gun to.
Irrelevant stuff, it has nothing to do with plane.
No, I am talking letting high br engineer squad build the heavy at. You are talking about letting at squad building heavy at.