Bazooka and Piat in real life better.
Bazooka and Piat in real life better.
Wut? Destroys high end gear from the side.
The PIAT is actually really good. It can kill at German tanks, even the Tiger (with some skill and a lucky shot). The M1 is somewhat lackluster compared to the PIAT (in penetration values) but it has longer range. I would like a larger blast radius for the M1 for better anti infantry though. (or its M10 WP rounds.)
faust might kill any heavy from the front. yanks might only walk at sides. should we cut german peercing by half?
Nah, the penetration is fine, I would just like a larger anti infantry blast radius for my M1.
penetration is not fine
No for the German AT weapons the pen is fine.
idk about german AT, but m1 and m9 need buff. also in some campaigns m1 needs to be replaced with m1a1.
They do their intended roles pretty well as is.
The PIAT is actually a lot stronger than most people think. Due to the lobbed projectile you can easily punch through the upper armor of many tanks.
The M1 bazooka may seem lackluster to some, but at that point you are simply using it wrong. Its not supposed to punch through the front of a tank. Even the sides of some tanks are too much. However, if you get up on a higher location than the enemy, you can easily punch through a lot of upper armors, or even hatches, killing occupants.
It also works very well for detracking tanks.
it seems lackluster cause they have wrong pen values ingame. m1 needs to have 80mm instead of 60mm right now, m1a1 should have ~100mm pen value and m9 should have ~120mm pen value instead of 102mm.
Ehm Yes because your description is pretty much a “just pick PIAT” because why bother with M1 if you can do same job with PIAT without looking for the high ground?
I mean the M1 Bazooka is just that, is already obsolete when they landed on the beach in 1944 against any German tank but sub Pz III
The PIAT in other hand, its performance IRL is just not great but is the only british AT available so they cope with it
You might hate the Panzerfaust but remember the German need to beat their head to figure it out in the hard way due the Soviet tanks are just far more armored than they expected in the early-mid war while the US though the German was a piece of cake in Africa and Tigers are just a minor issue
The fact is the german grabbed the M1 Bazooka and improve it to get the RPzB 54/Ofernor, and also doesn’t help the Versailles Treaty forbit them building any sort of artillery and shells so they bypass it with literal rocket lmao
The point is, they adapt the problem fast, even using improvised weapons as AT, the US wheelchair generals just doesn’t until their casuality increase, hell the Marines took 2 more years to convince them to use M1 Garands over the M1903 springfield
I do like the M1 Bazooka more than PIAT though, I can consistently one shot tanks at any range except the Tiger I, but I have a funny way to kill a clueless Tiger I by climb on top of it and aim at the ammo from the top, which is guaranteed kill, better than throwing the bouncy det pack or drop a TNT, if they are too far I just pull my P47D/P38 or the 76w
Still need to grind the M9 Bazooka though
WW2 generals fought in the first world war and most never bothered to check on the front lines themselves to see if warfare changed however it has indeed drastically and became unrecognisable for ww1 veterans.
Italian, French and British generals almost all fell victim to short sightedness during the start of the war.
But from their perspective we must also understand that the new Blitzkrieg warfare seemed like nothing but a dream until the fall of France and even then the Italian high command refused to adopt.
No one told generals that warfare has changed nor countries that were considered powerful before the outbreak of the war even considered lightning fast wars.
In their eyes ideal equipment must be 100% reliable because soldiers will crawl in the mud with them.
Even the Sten designed in 1942 had side mounted magazin with that in mind.
But lets cut some slack for generals and other high ranking heroes and look at tank designs from interwar period.
Light tanks with 2 or 1 man turrets with small guns that must be shorter than the hull of the tank were the norm and no one questioned why, only the Germans and Soviets dared to think outside the box and even then it was a trial of error with designs being tested in the Spanish civil war.
m1 wasnt used in normandy, but m1a1 and m9. and you could argue that actually bazookas on its own werent obsolete, but the rockets were. in “the encyclopedia of weapons of ww2” there is even quote that m1 used m6a3 rockets and that m1a1 penetration was 120mm at 0° (consistent with other sources about m6a3). although i wouldnt trust this book as authoritative source.
it was irrelevant since 1930s. they were forbidden many things in army/navy and they violated it repeatedly before ww2.
they didnt need convincing, generals were perfectly aware of advantages of m1 garand. US had general lack of weapons considering their army size. they pulled springfields from reserves and even started making new ones even though it was retired from production iirc in 1918 or 1919. they used old worn out tooling that was retired in 1918/1919 to start making new springfields cause that was how bad shortage of guns was.
marines and pacific were just on low priority on getting best equipment. all best equipment went to army and europe.
Well not really, just indicate their focus and early adaption for rockets, the 88mm rocket exist before the RPzB 54/Ofernor, just like the Nebelwerfer and Wurfrahmen
Yep, most of the high command expect a WWI v2 in early stage but the german and soviets, even part of the french changed that, multiturret tanks become single turret tank manned with more people with better coordination, actual AT gun exist, so planes, automatic weapons and new doctrine…
It can one tap Panters
regular bazooka was pretty weak, it was not designed to shoot frontally at German Tanks.