Do not give the Allies the Panzerschreck, Instead

Suggestions
1

I disagree with the upcoming addition of a captured Panzerschreck to the Allies Research Tree. Were there captured weapons, yes obviously, but it just feels lazy to copy and paste. I feel every faction should stand out on its own with its own unique arsenal, otherwise we just have Americans running around with Stgs and Germans with M1 Garands.

If you want your enemy’s weapon, just capture it during the battle.

The Allies should receive a more proper AT weapon. This should be rectified before the update, but if its too late then it should at least be a mission to replace eventually just like how the Japanese were using a PTRS for a while before a proper Type 97 model was implemented

The M20 Super Bazooka. The Panzerschreck was found to be a more powerful weapon with more penetration than the Bazooka so America began development of a new bazooka that could counter it. The M20 was developed late in the war but never saw combat during. The M20 would see its first official debut for the Korean War.
image

I think it is perfectly fine having the M20 in game. I believe any and everything can be added to the game as long as it’s from the WW2 period. Mass produced and famous, rare prototype and experimental. As long as it was made, produced, issued, or even just developed.

The Ordnance RCL 3.45 in was a British late war experimental weapon. It had both HEAT and HESH rounds. It was hoped that this weapon would be used in the Pacific after Germany’s defeat with the war still ongoing in the East but the war ended. It would honestly be perfect for the Burma update because it was intended to be used for this theater
image

21 Likes
2

The Tah 183 can be added with that argument to have absolute dominance against the Allied Fighters.

3

It’s not a matter of if, just when

I believe eventually we will get the Me 262, IS 3, and even the Maus

4

I have one friendly objection, imagine me sitting in my tank, I spot this guy from 1 km away… Do you really think he will long enough to get in range?

5

what the meaning ? the result is the same with all AT but try to spot them while they are in building or someting to take cover is another story while you’re in a “box”

6

This Tomfoolery is as big the dude himself, it will be easier to spot than any other AT weapon.
But if it doesnt bother anyone else than fine by me, its better than copy-pasting.

7

this was already discussed. ww2 m20 had worse penetration than m9 bazooka. high penetration rocket was developed in 1948.

has 180mm penetration, which is inadequate for KT

best american alternative is m9 with high velocity rocket (t59) although it is prototype.

8

I would like to know the weights of this beast :joy: i’m agree with you but this depend a lots of the maps and the player if is smart enough to play sneaky etc depend of is balistic capability too. like who is even afraid of a tank when you have an AT launcher and you know that you pen in frontally

9

180 mm isn’t that bad why should we get the need to pen frontally a tank ? imagining they put the tortoise so what we need an AT launcher to pen him frontally aren’t we deleting the efectivness of the role from the tank ?

10

the man whose AT rocket is out of range, but in range for the tank´s weapons.

11

cause germans and soviets can pen tanks frontally with AT launchers.

12

sure for that, but those are pretty rare, don’t have so many long range fights. how many player come in front of you while they have the range for deleting you

13

soviet got panzerfaust for that without it’s a nop and i hate the mechanic about having lots of faust it’s a kind of nonsense how many is the pen for the last allied zooka ?

14

Now, technically, the tortoise was a post-war production vehicle. Granted, it doesn’t matter much since there’s already a few postwar things+the M26 T99 coming, but hey.

15

I believe that can pen the KT and even the Maus from the side. Now of coarse you will say “but the front” and that is a valid point but in this game I can not overstate the amount of vehicles I’ve seen directly on the frontline. It’s practically the standard. Usually they’re never too far out of reach. Plus all the other factors in game like guerillas, planes, new heavy AT guns, etc

16

1945 is the cut off date. It’s fine in my book. It was made for the war

17

they increased it from 101mm to 127mm which is still inadequate for KT.

m9 can penetrate KT from sides, while both shouldnt be able to do side of maus(HESH could probably pen rear)

18

it was just an example taking an ultra armored tank and getting rekt frontally by AT inf we don’t want moving coffin

19

yeah inadequate for the front but you can always flank if the meaning of taking the german at is to kill those spawn camper well it will more penalise the aggressive player that can’t rely on his front armor I would put a bonus or someting for the plane to eradicate his

20

ah… just flank it argument… :rofl: