In Normandy, U. S. Paratroopers can get M1 bazooka from supply box. Correspondingly, German paratroopers can use Panzerfraust 60. Although it seems to be “fair” because M1 bazooka and Panzerfaust are unlocked in the same level, M1 bazooka is much less effective than Panzerfaust.
In game, M1 bazooka, which loads M6A1 rockets, only get 60mm penetration while PIAT gets 80mm and Sturmpistole gets 70mm. Grb-39 even get 90mm. That means U.S. Airborne just cannot eliminate a Tiger from almost all directions and the only thing they could rely on is their explosive pack. On the contrary, Panzerfaust 60 can eliminate all allies tanks with 180mm penetartion. This is not fair!
In Enlisted, M1 is definitely the weakest launcher. And even it penetrate PUMA, Panzer. III or IV on the front, it only kill 1-2 crew members and even nobody get hurt (but the AT gunner lost the chance and might die). This is not skill issue, but because M1 launcher gets a much lower penetration than it should be.
For Calibri, M1 bazooka is called 2.36-inch rocket launcher, so the calibri is certainly 60mm instead of 30mm. As for penetration, I have never found any proof in Google that indicates M1 penetration was less than 76mm. So I think it must be a mistake to make this legandary and pioneer weapon something like ‘trash’. The only advantage is it has more straight trajectory.
To be exact, I didn’t include results that are related to M9 Bazooka with M6A3 rockets. And I have to say that 102mm penetration is also too weak for M9 Bazooka.
Since a new paratrooper squad will come soon in the event, it’s time to fix something wrong and give airborne more powerful anti-tank launcher plz. Please rethink M1 bazooka in both Pacific and Normandy. In 1944, M9 has broadly replaced M1, so
if it is too difficult to strengthen M1, then give M9 to paratroopers.
Even paratoopers get M9, 102mm is still far away from 180mm of Panzerfaust.
9 Likes
well, the bazooka wasnt that good when it came to penetrating heavy tanks, tho its close to 80mm of penetration should in theory more or less have the ability to at least damage Tiger tanks from the side.
all that aside, having the bazooka and the panzerfaust as “rivals” is kinda stupid, because one is much stronger.
3 Likes
I think M1 bazooka is already enough for Pacific, you don’t need a M9 to counter Japan tank with weak armor.
6 Likes
Its another of those PPSh41 vs 20 box Beretta situation.
7 Likes
Because there is no other choice. Unless you give them captured panzerfaust. But then there will people coming out and say dev using lazy copy paste captured weapon.
It might be enough before, but when it comes to Ho-I, M9 works better than M1. There is some magic on its armour : ( , just like M3 Staurt with flamethrower.
they could buff the piat, it was actually pretty strong, just a big pain in the butt to reload and shoot, it was basically a massive crossbow with a heat grenade.
1 Like
The performance of Piat is not even close to Panzerfaust. The penetration of panzerfaust is way higher than piat. This is not a problem that a single buff can solve.
1 Like
Just use different class dor destroying tanks. German paratroopers are for example way worse for wiping objectives since they dont have 100 mags and are forced to reload more often.
This is just another post “enemies got better equivalent so I need buff” cry shtt post.
3 Likes
Yea I get it, you hate balance.
I love asymmetrical balance. I hate when both teams has basically the same things with just different textures, especially in casual game that isn’t competitive at all. 
Nice try, troll.
Btw. If balance things out was the thing OP wanted, why he didn’t mention overpowered HVAR rockets?
Nah, he rather chose way more irrelevant thing. It’s not about balance, it’s about buffing things that would suits OP’s playstyle.
3 Likes
Everbody does but the devs not really.
1 Like
But German rifle is 14.4 but M1928A1 is 8.2. Maybe this is a skill issue
you completely misunderstand what asymmetrical balance is.
If one side has faster tanks than the other, but the other side has faster reloading guns, than that is symmetric yet still balanced.
If one side however has overall inferior tanks, than that is pure imbalance.
I dont know how you can’t see that, yet you call me the troll?
they are as OP as the 21cm with the only difference being 1 HVAR being smaller than 1 21cm rocket
The whole idea with the paratroopers getting access to these is that they are supposed to be getting beside or behind the tank, where the armor is much thinner than the front.
As far as Axis vs Ally weaponry, remember that the Axis is generally on defense more, whereas Allies are on offense more. These weapons reflect that. The Panzerfaust in my experience is easier used when defending while the straight- shot launchers are better for offense.
that will be both cancerous and fun
1 Like
Finished my 12000 event today. I’ve been enough of M1 strange sight and weak penetration. I wanna devs really make U.S. Airborne powerful so that the suqad could become more valuable, instead of an instant 50% off. I even don’t know if the price of Airbornes resisted longer than France in WWII.
Cool theory, but the tiger & kt have around 80mm side and rear armor… if you have 60mm pen, the idea kinda falls apart.
2 Likes
