Low BR needs lower caliber AT guns too

I can’t speak to how much work it is to address this issue, all I can say is that there are already acceptable low BR anti-tank guns in the files at the moment that are more fitting than the pak40. I think the realistic AA guns were far from a waste of time as that change increased HA and made all the factions more distinct, making it so US engineers built US AA guns and not flak guns was a positive change etc.

So we need to wait until the bug is fixed and current AT guns are even more overpowered at low BR to address the issue.

I agree that BR levels feeling different is a great way to increase the variety of gameplay. However achieving this by making AT guns overpowered in one BR and underpowered in another is not the way to go. I think the current plan of giving high BR their own AT to make it more effective is a step in the right direction. AT guns need to be viable sure, but not so viable that they are the go-to tool to deal with all problems. At the moment, the pak40 is that go-to tool in low BR.

I mentioned a 37mm AT gun in the post above, but 45mm and 5cm AT guns would still be effective against most tanks in BR1-2, while also matching the effectiveness of tanks in the BR. The 37mm canon would be more ineffective, and maybe shouldn’t have been included.

This is a fair point, having the stronger AT does help when dealing with tanks that are stronger than they should be facing. I think this is a larger issue though, AT guns shouldn’t be balanced around players being downtiered. I think they are far from the “only” saving thing for dealing with BR3 tanks in BR1-2, outside of the KV1, explosion packs and TNT charges are still just as effective. Maybe the compromise is to adjust the AT guns based on the highest BR in the lobby if possible, but thats almost certainly impossible given the coding infrastructure.

3 Likes