There you go, as you just admitted yourself some fictional stats are fine for the game, it is only a game for fun afterall and not some archive of 100% accurate weapon representations.
I think this concludes our discussion.
1 Like
It seems like you misunderstood. I was discussing the accuracy regarding penetration, not the accuracy of the armor or engine. My comments were solely about the ‘penetration’ accuracy. I wasn’t talking about the overall accuracy of the game. Please don’t act as if you’ve won the argument suddenly.
from ian v. hogg encyclopedia of infantry weapons of ww2
m6 (or m6a1/m6a2 rocket at 30°) rocket for m1/m1a1 bazooka:
panzerfaust
ofenrohr
Small arms of the world, Smith, W. H. B. (Walter Harold Black), 1955 edition
i am not saying that these numbers are all correct, but there are various sources that claim bazooka could penetrate up to 120mm for m6a3 rocket (currently in m9 bazooka ingame) and that 102mm penetration is actually for standardized 30° testing (most sources dont include angle for armor penetration).
also lets not forget adding 15mm steel armor value to wood for balance.
btw apparently hogg quotes 120mm penetration for m6a3, but i couldnt get the book to actually check it out.
1 Like
Anyway, the important thing is that the 102mm penetration of the M9 bazooka is based on real-world examples, not a completely fictional figure. As this example shows, most of the infantry anti-tank weapons currently available in the game are based on actual specifications.
U.S. Army handbook, 1939-1945, George Forty, 1979
basically penetration was based on rocket
m6 - 80mm
m6a1/m6a2 - 100mm
m6a3 - 120mm
we currently have m6 in m1 bazooka - 60mm and m6a3 in m9 bazooka with 102mm.
1 Like
In the game, the M9 bazooka is said to use a 100mm penetration round, right? If the actual round is the M6A3, it would be nice if it got a buff. Also, differences of about 10-20mm based on real values can occur due to various factors in reality.
1 Like
That’s a MG 08/15
1 Like
i have not seen original documents from testing, but i assume that most numbers are based on 30° standardized testing. when you translate that to 0° you get that penetration difference.
They made stick mags for it too
Plus it being 600 rpm idk
2 Likes
I see MP SS 42/ZK 403 being BR 4 at best. Maybe give Germany the M1923 Thompson since they trialed it in 1924? 
1 Like
Where does this information come from?
It’s in the OP, but I can repost it:
No. Can I have the book itself? Please. Title. Author?
Thanks. Corrected.
was digging little with technical manuals for army and this is what i found for m6
source:
TM 9-1904 Ammunition Inspection Guide 1944, by United States, War Department
source:
TM 9-1950, Rockets (1950)
1 Like
I did a second round of digging, and you are right, the Madsen M/41 would actually work quite well! Another option of course is the Danish licensed Suomi, the Madsen M/42, which were designated as MP 746(d) by the Germans. I couldn’t find anything to confirm whether the Danes actually used the drum mags, but they certainly liked the coffin mags, which would differentiate either/both guns from the Suomi!
1 Like
I think the M1923 model 1 or 2 would more likely be in Germany hands due to more counties had and tested with that gun
Like
Denmark
Belgium
France
But tbh tho not in a Tech Tree role for ether of these guns they fit in maybe a Battle Pass or Event gun probably squad and maybe Premium squads too
Here it mentions that it has 600 rate of fire
1 Like
Even though I’m a big fan of the Mkb 35 because I like the premium version and I’m also interested in the weapon historically, I think the ZK-412 (SS-42) would be better as an assault rifle for the tech tree.
If you compare the data, the ZK-412 would be an assault rifle with more damage than the Stg44 and a higher rate of fire (700 rpm), while the Mkb 35 (early prototypes) would have about 800 to 1000 rpm, but less damage than the Stg44.
And I personally would prefer the ZK-412 because the high rate of fire on the Mkb 35 is hard to handle anyway and I’d rather take the higher damage with a slightly higher rate of fire.