Now that I have given the suggestion for the fliegerfaust for the Axis, here’s my suggestion for the Allies.
In game we have the M1A1 bazooka, a decent rocket launcher, but lacking in some areas.
The weapon that I would add is a regular M1A1 bazooka with a special twist. (as an event or gold order weapon) It would have its regular ammo count, but would have three extra, special rounds on top of its ammo count. The ammunition I would give it, is the M10 round, a white phosphorus rocket. Historically the M10 was used to make smokescreens, but also flush out entrenched defenders. This would be useful when there is no flamethrower or tank support for an assault. With only three rounds the user would have to carefully use their rounds. The rounds would be swapped for reloading like a mortar’s smoke and explosive rounds.
They could also improve AT launchers damage against infantry(and structures) to give them a dual purpose and incentivize use of the AT Gunner squad. The PTRS and Type 97 are already good anti everything rifles, so rocket launchers should at least be better versus soldiers.
That’s what rifle grenades are for.
Yes, but it’s stupid that a HEAT rocket can go off right next to someone and not kill them.
All GLs need vast reworkings like reload time, some capacity remakes, visual effects, damage bugs etc. It’s like we play with something made NOT for game really
As long as grenade launcher are noticeably better vs infantry, I’m fine with it.
It was planned for the M9 Bazooka, but it was dropped I guess.
We do not need more phosphorus spam
After they neutered the WP effect, like, legit a worse Smoke grenade, there is no reason to use them again
In my personal experience the only way to goer more than one kill with them is if the enemy is standing on top of each other. I don’t know if everyone else experiences the same thing
I don’t know what you guys are talking about, as I get multi-kills with them rather frequently.
Sure they don’t have the blast radius of a frag grenade, but they weren’t designed to.
The whole point is to use them to accurately hit areas where enemies are clustered, such as through a window, in a trench, etc, at longer range/ straighter trajectory than a thrown grenade.
It does that very well!
What is ridiculous to me is that we shouldn’t even need to incentivize their use by making them useful against infantry.
The PROBLEM is that they aren’t even needed to kill tanks in most situations simply due to the existence of explosive packs, which allow ordinary infantry the power to kill tanks with ease.
You know, the thing that ANTI-TANK soldiers are supposed to be for!
Remove explosive packs (or at the very least change them to sticky bombs that only incapacitate but don’t kill tanks), and AT soldiers will once again be useful.
How does this relate back to the phosphorus rounds you might be asking?
They need to stop making all these different soldiers into jack-of-all-trades troops. They have specific classifications, yet all too often, they are given things that simply let them do the jobs of other troops types, making the other things completely obsolete.
- Radio operators eliminated the use of mortars
- Explosive packs eliminated the use of AT soldiers
- MG squads able to build the HMG eliminated the use of Engineer squads for the standard MG
So rather than “giving AT soldiers a purpose again”, how about they instead make the game to where they can actually do their job rather than everyone else being able to do it better?
Will it is a anti infantry weapon made to take out a lot of infantry at a distance, and it is just a grenade launched with a rifle so I would expect it to operate the same as a anti infantry grenade un less you were firing an anti tank grenade, I am no expert but they just seem a little ineffective if you don’t want to wait for the perfect moment
All this is cool but what does this have to do with my idea?
The ones with a larger warhead, yes, but the ones featured in the game, no. Not on the scale that you are thinking.
These traded explosive yield for longer range and higher accuracy. Which is why the blast radius is actually smaller than that of the hand grenade.
They are intended to be used against precise locations, like pillboxes, trenches, etc, not open ground.
That is what things like mortars are for.
I didn’t mean to get off topic.
As far as how it relates to your topic, its a matter of trading uses between classes. The rifle grenade already does pretty much the exact niche that you are asking for in your suggestion. It seems very unnecessary to add an anti-infantry addition to a weapon that isn’t even being used for its INTENDED purpose very often.
Direct hits are good. They also will down more than they kill so try to follow up. If you can fire it indirectly with an arc it’s far more effective
HEAT’s anti infantry potential is kinda weak to begin with, there is a reason why the RPG 7 uses different types of grenades, like fragmentation instead of HEAT.
Still, no damage at all does indeed seem off.