We’ve been asking for the Super Bazooka for a while now
1 Like
technically it started development in october of 1944, that was the whole reason I mentioned the T-74 and RD-44 since both were designed during WW2 and never saw service during WW2, altough I must admit this would be stretch large enough to be seen from the stratosphere and I understand that.
Also please keep in mind this was a crazed wild search from the middle of the night. Thank you.
I have never understood all that talk about grey zone camping to begin with, other than max BR Allies and super early BR anti rank rifles, all nations always had the power to deal with tanks at longer ranges.
Yes it takes some practice, but with Panzerfausts I can reliably take out any vehicle up to 200 meters, yes I usually need a couple of shots, but it is 100% possible to do, and since you always had the option to get up to 100 meters close to your target, hitting at those distances is very easy.
The best argument against tanks has always been hand held AT weapons. The US getting the M9 bazooka has kinda already been cause for a debate here on the forums, since the US never really mass deployed better launchers than their regular 80mm pen bazookas.
Still… the US needs something that is comparable to German late war launchers, and historical accuracy is kinda already a forgotten topic… so balance should be a priority anyways.
1 Like
I fully understand your concern but right now that allies have almost nothing to deal with KTs (other than the P47 which I have almost never seen post merge) and also I know that the pershings that are able todestroy them will become available very soon.
That leaves Infantry with almost zero fighting chace other than the occasional TNT charge suicide run, the very slim chance that the tank will run over an AT mine or the M9 bazooka that is not so good when the enemy tank is in the corner of the map you have noacces to because of grayzone.
1 Like
The accuracy went out the door right after the chance to meet Tiger II (H) and the production versions of StG in Stalingrad.
liquid motivation is a great thing
1 Like
All these fake ass prototypes and yall are really trying to shoot this down? I’m a German main and welcome this wholeheartedly. Prototypes are the rage in Japan but the US cant have one to fight the Tiger II? The Ofenrohr is literally a copy of the damn super bazooka lol.
2 Likes
We’ve gone past the point of historical accuracy.
Balancing should take priority.
5 Likes
I’m gonna play a little bit of history police, shoot myself to the leg in the process and say that the RPzB43 did not copy the T74 (M20) since the “Sup-Baz” was adopted after WW2.
essetnialy it went something like this:
USA starts producing the M1 Bazooka → Germans capture the M1, they test it and said “This is good, but we can German engineer this shit to levels unheard of” → the Ofnerohr got created → allies capture the Ofenrohr, took it out to test it, after which they possibly said something along the lines of “This is amazing!! We need that!”–> the T74 prototype development started and ended with the creation of the M20 “Super-bazooka”
TL:DR - the M20 is a copy of a copy of the original M1 Bazooka
no they didnt. gray zone camping mostly affects f2p players that are at start of the grind and are forced to play against end game vehicles cause game forces mostly frontal confrontation between tanks with its map design.
- hand held AT weapons one reason
- iirc engineer AT guns could not penetrate big cats in normandy
- tanks frontally couldnt penetrate end game tanks for majority of grind (e.g. US normandy <76mm vs big cats, 85mm vs KT(H) etc.)
but they deployed better rockets with better penetration which were interchangeable with old rockets. also m9 or m9a1 is least controversial weapon for US.
1 Like
Believe me or not, but I remember a time where there was no Tiger II H, and also no Panther in Normandy and even no T34 in Moscow.
I dare to say that for the majority of time hand held AT weapons did their job well.
Piat has been enough to deal with Panzer IV H and J.
And Soviets with their Panzerfausts also had no problem dealing with Tigers abd Panthers.
I know you are completely right when you say that low lever players had always problems dealing with armor, still… I think Berlin has always been the best example of armor vs infantry balance done right. The starter Panzerfaust is excellent.
before my time, so i cant really comment on state of the game then. but most problematic thing about gray zone camping is basically indestructible tanks to almost any low-mid tier weaponry (besides planes). if they can be destroyed with other means (that dont require second vehicle slot), then they are really not a problem.
That means that you didn’t play US high BR at all, they are in every single match.
1 Like
I mostly play high BR with Allies and Germans. sometimes I mix it with Sovits but thats about it.
Yes, yes it is. It is also the reason why I went to sleep around 1AM after doing my “research” that can be also called “Caffine crazed search for proves and knowledge to add pixels into a game.”
I know I’m writing this a long time after this suggestion went silent BUT 40%of the times I see P-47 it kamikazes into the nearest group of enemy without taking out the tank/s, those are usually the guys who just unlocked it.
Another 40% are semi-competent pilots that know how to bomb/rocket things without going into the ground right after and are able to shoot down some enemy pilots, these are the guys that unlocked it let’s say 1,5-2 months before the merge.
And the last 20% are really good pilots that are fighting like gods that can even dogfight German fighters with their very angry flying barrels with 8 50.cals. These are the guys that have it for 4+ months to lear every quirk of the P-47.
But Germans had problems with T-34 
that was such bad aim when aiming for t34… few times he aims for ammo rack, but then just moves it away to aim for another either non critical part or part that he cant penetrate…
1 Like
Yeah, sloped armor is still overperforming in this game