Good suggestion, I agree with everything said.
1 Like
Until you get screwed over by having 2 people in starter tanks constantly cycling them so you can’t.
And AT Guns can be put in some really interesting places , being less visible to really cause some hurt.
Trust me, killing tanks is what I do.
And having more tools to get it done with will not just benefit me, it will benefit all those players whom have dealt with that frustration.
Plus, on quite a few maps that have heavy Air Support , and players who know the lanes Vehicles come in, its many times more practical to sneak your engineers in, build , kill and move on.
But since Japanese can have type 90 field gun on higher level, so I think 6pdr for Japanese is ok.
But its not there gun.
What is the point of having a US gun in their hands?
They had their own gun, and it was quite adequate for the tanks we have right now.
The point of each nation is to be distinct and have and use their own equipment. Otherwise its just playing an alternate US faction…
I feel the same way about the PTRS right now in place of the actual Type 97. Its just odd, and not right.
So you want to encourage powercreep? You want the scenario like US Allies that can’t pen panther and tiger with their 6 pounder.
Id still want an actual Japanese AT gun instead of a copy paste placeholder even if it can’t pen a bigger better armored tank, I still want it. Same with the AA. But I sorta understand the situation with the ATR being the PTRS with it being semi auto mag (Or if it’s a cover to put a clip in, can’t remember) fed like the Type 97.
Your not making any sense.
How am I encouraging power creep by asking for the current Japanese AT gun to be the 47mm instead of the 57mm?
Right now, not talking about the future because we have Zero idea what the future will hold, right now the 47mm would be able to kill anything the Allies have. How is that power creep?
And guess what, Normandy would be better off if the Devs put Better AT guns on later stage Engineer squads as I’ve suggested.
Its not power creep. It progression.
Puma < PZ4 < Panther =/= Tiger.
That is just standard progression in a campaign. Its been that way since the beginning with all weapons and will continue to do so.
The only thing that hasn’t advanced is the AT gun and the lack of imagination when it comes to AA options for all sides.
So you don’t think about your future, just thinking about current thing? The game file already have pacific m4a1 and pacific m4a3 105 in it.
It will have very little impact since most people didn’t reach that level.
Pak38 help Axis very much in Moscow when facing superior Soviet armor because it can pen endgame tank. Japan which will meet superior US armor must have thing like pak38 that can pen endgame tank.
Authenticity can’t help you in battle.
Le Sigh - If we really want to split hairs, the 47mm Firing AP (Not APHE) could take out the Sherman in the Pacific. Maybe…do some reading?
Anecdotal, you have no proof.
One Campaign out of 6 does not make for a good scientific Metric.
That actually shows a failure more than a success IMO.
If that is from Wikipedia, that page didn’t even have the Ap shell on the ammunition section. That source is suspicious.
I played Normandy a lot, I rarely see M2 carbine(on engineer 2 level) and gun above its level.
Tunisia, Moscow, Pacific, Berlin. The at gun in those campaign can pen all tank.
Nope. From a few books actually all state something very similar (I own everything from the Vickers Books on Firearms to Coyles Books on Equipment and everything in between). That the 47mm was capable of taking out the M4 at the ranges it engaged them at. They just never had enough. And Materials (like how the Tungsten Shortages in Germany) lacked to make better penetrators at later stages.
Luckily, we can put that small detail aside and give the 47mm its Due. (The problem , which is a lot more proficient I think now that we have the Pacific is the immense amount of conflicting info and data on Japanese weapons, at least from what I’ve read, where as the German Weapons have a lot more correct data, and had a LOT of post war and during the war tests done as equipment was captured. I don’t think that happened nearly as much in the Pacific Theatre of war. i.e. the 47mm some places state it used 2 Shell types, others 3. Who do you believe at that point? But because it did indeed knock out Shermans, I intend to err on the side that it fired 3 types. Unless combat reports are off).
I’ve got 3000+ games under my belt now and I’ve seen all the end level stuff at a regular pace. So who is right?
Neither of us.
Its Anacdotal.
Not even close to effectively. Heck even in Moscow vs the new T34, and the T50 if it has even the slightest angle you’re basically screwed (totally ignoring the fact that the gun bounces likes it on ballon wheels which makes lining up that critical Cheek Shot very challenging). Where as you give a second Tier of AT Gun and suddenly you become much more effective.
And going on the US to Normandy, most of the later stage stuff can Tank the US 57mm. Heck I’ve tanked the 75 in my StuG (and got it on Video as I managed to take out 9 tanks before someone with a PIAT finally got to my sides).
I know I’m hours late, better now than ever. Anyways, it’s not the authenticity part it’s the uniqueness of it that I’m going for & not copy placeholder stuff to to fill in the blanks (Except the PTRS which Darkflow is working on the right model) I do think this campaign was rushed & is still not finished (obviously with the sudden release out of the blue) it’s good that it was added yes don’t get me wrong I love it, but I want both sides balanced & all players for each playerbase to be satisfied (Hence this post), it could be a 47mm AT Gun or even a 75mm AT Gun. Either way you’d still face light tanks/SPAA regardless if Shermans/other Medium Tanks get added that’s just the way it is with other campaigns, so just add the accurate equipment & be finished with it. To add you don’t need to rely on the AT guns where you can whip out det packs, tnt, or even the lunge mine to deal with the problem. That’s my piece. I hope you understand.