Absolutely no.
I rather would be that guy that wants a Panzerschreck 54/100mm as event weapon (way more boom compared to the Panzerschreck).
The penetration power is ~75mm at 90° compared to the M6A3 rockets from the Bazooka (~100mm).
(source: Wiki)
m6a3 rocket has 5"(127mm) of penetration, so i take wiki results with grain of salt…
So you’re saying that you can put in the Panzerfaust 250, right? Because you want to put in something that wasn’t used in WW2.
have you played this game? cause it is full of stuff that werent used in ww2.
But the M20 and Korea stuff is a bit too much…
I saw that number on wiki earlier - no idea why the pen is reduced to 100 when opening the M18 article.
I would like to see the 128mm Pak 44 as a heavy gun.
If you’re talking about Japan, it’s an Exception because it doesn’t have enough weapons to be able to confront the Allies in high BR, so it’s up to the developers, not the other factions.
I find nothing about M18 bazooka I get results for just the M18 rifle… And what I find about the bazooka is just something write in the additional rockets for the M9 paragraph, and tell the m18 is a variant of the M9 without difference if not the material used…
There is nothing else to use outside this, lesser evil is better than nothing in my opinion
But WHY? It is not needed, the US/GB have excelent CAS fighters and the M9 Bazooka can pen ~125mm, enough for all axis tanks except Panther and KT. They can be destroyed by aiming on the side/rear.
Axis also have to aim carefully when facing KV-1s. I dont see any problems here except a l2p issue.
No axis haven’t need aim, 75mm of Panzer 4 OHK it, grb can lucky one hit kill it, panzerFaust eat it, and is a joke for forward axis tank or any plane
The whole BR4 and BRV line up…
Enlisted Avarage Engagement is frontally and is a balance issue if side 1 need flank instead side 2 just roll them frontally
Balance issue all factions even Japanese have a rocket launcher able to kill endgame tank, why US should be penalized? I’m okay even for a captured panzershreck for fix the imbalance
personally i dont care if allies get m20 or panzerfaust, but they need to get high penetration AT rocket launcher.
cause people when writing books dont search archives, but are referencing other authors for information. i have seen numerous books who quote bazooka penetration without rocket specified or when it is specified without angle on which tests were performed. i have seen both 100mm and 120mm penetration in books for bazooka and for m6a3. searching US army technical manuals i have only found m6/m6a1 penetration (80mm) and m6a5 penetration (5" or 127mm). someone recently posted document with m6a3 tests that show 5" penetration.
If the M20 Bazooka is considered a historical inaccuracy, the Allied forces had excellent anti-tank weapons with penetration power exceeding 150mm (though some were prototypes).
First alternative: British anti-tank weapon
RCL 3.45in Mk 1
This weapon was developed by the British Army during Operation Overlord to destroy the German’s heavily fortified concrete bunkers. It fired a 7kg HESH round from an 88mm barrel and could damage armor up to 150mm or 180mm thick.
(Developed in 1944)
Second alternative - USA
M9A1 Bazooka using the T59E3 round
During World War II, the U.S. military developed many prototype bazookas or rounds for them, and the T59E3 was one of them. It was tested between June and September 1945.
https://mega.nz/file/i19nDKaI#1_l7xIKmEwooCqUZ4UEHK7jSMp0Rt1XDQqG-ej8bSXg
https://mega.nz/file/Ot9UWITA#J6jrA0OmVtCNqU6g1csQZ-YagxWPrA23MnPhRM7KmpU
https://mega.nz/file/fp1SgDLL#Z6xt3NfnjLH4wlAY5dIpSjdANyDqNvJqjd_LX3JelHA
probably cause it was experimental weapon that was cancelled. from wiki entry it says it is m9a1 made out of aluminium, so it would have same penetration as m9 bazooka cause they used same rockets.
I just find this write in the description on one of the M9 rocket in a wiki… 0 information about it, and usually i can Always find something
btw i just wanna show craziness of finding out m6a3 penetration
On Italian Wikipedia is written M18 bazooka was used even for fire incendiary charge and smoke screen, but I would take this info with a stick
The same can be said of the Axis aircraft in high BR because the BF 109 and FW 190 do not have bombs and rockets and they have not included the Me 262 to be the counterpart of the P-47 with its Spam.
are you sure it is m18 bazooka and not 57mm m18 recoilless rifle? it is easy to mix recoilless launcher(smoothbore) with recoilless rifle(rifled).
Yes they have, when they face the KV-1 with BRII setup.
Then you play false. When a tank is facing forwards you, you have to move. I never kill tanks frontally. As I said - axis need to flank the T-34s and KV-1s when equiped with BRII stuff, the same can other nations do.
I am writing this while sitting in a tank and a P47 with rocket spam is appearing.
Pls give PPSH-41, RD-44 and AS-44 and ofc the P47 as captured weapons to the axis for imbalance fix.
Absolutely great - THATS a good alternative and not this cheap trick aka. “captured weapon”.
Great too, perfect for the TT.
Bazooka with T59E3 rocket in TT and the RCL as event. Perfect.
