Maybe thay can get towed 76mm for Engineer instead of 57mm gun.
Perhaps a bomber 2 is a good idea for the Panzerfaust 30 since it has 200mm of penetration ā¦
which means i can pen the front of a Jumbo.
1 Like
Yet the Allies have no such requirement. 
Panzerfaust 100 was avaiable on normandy closed beta test.
Panzershrek variants are shown on a devlog.
So we might expect both on bomber 2 or even bomber 3 if they go as far as current sniper 3 levels.
Both of them, will improve anti tank as inf Alot, but, as panzerfaust 100 on normandy cbt and panzerShrek on berlin alpha shown, they ill make tanks as strong as a pack of cigarrets.
Imo, there is no reason to run bombers in normandy on axis sideā¦ Piat itās an OK anti tank weaponā¦ For axis, tnt packs are so far the only avaiable option as inf.
If they add a new AT weapon to the Germans I think it should be at a lower level.
No excuse to have the relatively reliable PIAT at level 7 or whatever and then the actually usable German AT at level 30+
6 Likes
By the time of Normandy 1944 over 200.000 Panzerfaust were produced and given to Units all around, since production began in 1942ā¦
2 Likes
I might be wrong here. But the panzerfaust 30(first variant) was in production in 1943. Not 42.
Faustpatrone was indeed a 42 version.
As a side note we saw panzerfaust 100 on normandy cbt, but the 100 model enter combat in November 44ā¦ We might receive another weapon that wasnāt even in d day just for gameplay sakeā¦
Heavily misrepresenting both weapons.
if gaijin really giving german Panzerfaust, Schreck or something then it probably for bomber II or III and german low level will still stuck with sturmpistole until lv 30+. so yeah it doesnt really change anything but at least, right
1 Like
Yees, at least for germans it should be Panzerschrek, XD, as we know it is a copy of the bazooka
please elaborate
Overall, the Panzerfaust (30-60) still looks like a good idea, because the Sturmpistole does not fight the heavy tanks that the Allies have at all. The PIAT is even redundant sometimes for the Allies, because the Pz4 can be beaten head-on by it without any problems.
Actually I wanted to point out the detail of why the Berlin Panzerfaust has a projectile velocity of 25m\s, even though wikipedia says about 50. Now the flight of the missile looks comical from the side, the feeling is that the fighter is throwing this projectile rather than launching it from the launcher.
It looks like a mistake, but no one said anything about it.
1 Like
Berlin has the PzFst 60
1 Like
They both operate on the same principle of being dedicated HEAT grenade projectors.
Just the sturmpistol ignites the projectile in a more traditional manner while the PIAT hits the primer with a spring.
I know how both weapons work dammit. But Iām saying, you want to have a flare gun that shoots small heat propellant as your anti-tank and let the Americans have an anti-tank weapon based on the spigot mortar system? I wasnāt even trying to describe both weapons that much, they both shoot heat projectiles, I did not describe the mechanism.
Youāre implying the sturmpistole has an especially small projectile and that spigot mortars are inherently better in comparison, both of which are entirely false.
???
whatā¦ itās so obvious the sturmpistole has a smaller projectile, i said small but i didnāt mean that small but itās definitely smaller than the PIAT. the Sturmpistole projectile weighs 600 grams whilst the PIAT is 1.1 kg. And of course the PIAT would be better than the Sturmpistole? Jesus, just look at the damn thing, that thing is big and a literal pure god damn anti-tank. The Sturmpistole is a flare gun that can fire grenades (including the 600 gram heat projectile), other grenades, and a flare cartridge. Comparing that to the PIAT - that is again, a literal anti-tank weapon with the sole purpose of destroying tanks - would be better in comparison than the Sturmpistole, you want to elaborate in that?
" both of which entirely false "
Elaboration:
-Relative to its contemporaries, the Sturmpistole was more than sufficient for AT
-The PIAT did a good job of proving that spigot mortars donāt make good AT weapons. It was especially unreliable when fired and difficult to use in general.
Overall point is that just because the Sturmpistole is performing worse in game right now doesnāt mean it has to be replaced entirely, just reworked to be a viable alternative.
No need to throw away a model when this is a game and values can be changed.
I can agree that the Sturmpistole is more sufficient for AT, it is small meaning that it is easy to be carried around and can be fired easier than the PIAT. I do hear that the PIAT was not really that much of a good anti-tank weapon and was not really preferred as it is heavy and setting it up is a little hard, especially during combat. But it is not the scenario in game. But weāre talking about the game here right? you want to change the reworked means you want to rewire the historical stats, this gameās is based on historical stuff, even if they donāt do it so well, i believe the Sturmpistole has the realistic stats in this game, muzzle velocity, range, and penetration power. If you wish to rework the Sturmpistole by changing itās stats or any other of itās performance, you compel to the historical information of this weapon that is implemented to this game. It is better to replace it, not only to balance it with the PIAT, but also to satisfy the players of the Axis that they can have a weapon seemingly par with the PIAT.
First, the Sturmpistole looks incomplete on its own. Ridiculous appearance, secondly the problem is that Panzerfaust is a PIAT analog, and why should it be at campaign level 30+ if you get PIAT at 8?
It seems to me the Germans should get both Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck eventually, but there arenāt enough levels for everything. So itās worth giving up the stupid grenade launcher with twice the reload of the PIAT.
There should be a Panzerschreck at level 30+ because itās iconic and it should fit in the rest of the campaign levels.