yes they would just need to first remove two rounds and decrease penetration, the type 97 and solotum should both be br2 as they are far superior to any br1 at rifle (prove me wrong) the only reason the 97 is in br is because the Japanese lack any other br1 at weapon. adding a scope much less removing the prone requirement would be adding insult to injury top both the us and the ussr
1 Like
I hope you’re not serious
Anti-Tank Rifle in BR2 Lol
The only anti-tank rifle that shouldn’t be BR1 is the one the Japanese used a small number Okinawa that had 100mm penetration maybe those German prototype anti-tank rifles but I don’t remember the penetration number
3 Likes
nothing comes close in the allied tt or ussr
we have five and ten round bolt actions with less pen
we have semi autos with five rounds if these were stats for rifleman weapons they would not be the same br
plus i said if they removed the prone requirement or and added a scope as is both are barley br1
Well, in that case, you should definitely forget about shooting this weapon off-hand.
1 Like
It doesn’t matter, they can penetrate enemy Tanks without much difficulty.
Lee enfiend No.4 is the best bolt action rifle in the game, good rate of fire and 10 rounds, Soviet bolt action rifles are not bad,
M1 Carbine with 15 rounds in BR2, no other nation has
and M1 Garand much better than any semi-automatic rifle from Japan TT or Germany BR3
You talk as if the allies/USSR were the worst nations in the game and always want to harm Germany and Japan in unbelievable ways
1 Like
It doesn’t matter, they can penetrate enemy Tanks without much difficulty.
Lee enfiend No.4 is the best bolt action rifle in the game, good rate of fire and 10 rounds, Soviet bolt action rifles are not bad,
M1 Carbine with 15 rounds in BR2, no other nation has
and M1 Garand much better than any semi-automatic rifle from Japan TT or Germany BR3
You only give bad opinions my god and talk as if the allies/USSR were the worst nations in the game and always want to harm Germany and Japan in unbelievable ways
you can tell from context i was talking about at rifle not rifleman rifles weather you are being willfully ignorant or ignorant, ingnorant,
the m1 garand and the Armaguerra Model 1939 can both penetrate a soldier
the kar98 and the garand can both penetrate a soldier
yet they do not share a br not one of them for a good reason
i will be more clear
there are at rifle that are bolt action with 5 and 10 round magazine
there are at rifle that are 5 round sem autos
all of these weapons are far inferior to the solotum and type 97
they suffer from smaller magazine, and or a slower rate of fire along with less armor penetration
the type 97 is only br1 because japan lacks a br1 at alternative
removing the prone requirement and or adding a scope would make what is already the single best br1 at weapon even more op
it would be like moving a bar to br2 and increasing the mag to 40
again show me an at rifle that comes close to the type 97 or solotum. yes add a prone requirement to the type 97 if you feel its unfair for the german supergun to be the only gun with it.
But armaguerra has less ammunition in the magazine and is crap
This is no justification for putting in BR2
and because it makes no sense to put it in BR2
I never agreed to put scope
You want to put the Type 97 in BR2 just because it has 5 more penetration than the PTRS and the soluthurn has 10 more penetration than the PTRS, that makes no sense
Let’s add this to all anti-tank rifles without exception
If I forgot to answer something I couldn’t understand what you meant.
2 Likes
wow its almost like a gun with five rounds should be in the same br as a gun with ten rounds, *(cough boys at)
and not all at gun should not get prone requirement again list one just one at from us or ussr that is as good as the solotum or type 97
you forgot the part where you can’t shoot standing up and that’s really bad in this game
Why? All AT rifles should have the standing fire option removed, if you were to shoot standing in real life with any of these you would get very hurt.
It doesn’t exist and that’s no justification for putting it in BR2
thats my point the solotum at rifle is
only br1 without a scope and the prone requirement
if you a remove the prone requirement or b add it to all other at rifles you would
either have to move the solotum br2 or the solotum and type 97 to br2
its for balance imagine a bazooka with two barrels like a double barrel shotgun
Ok I never disagreed with that
No, if all AT rifles had the ability to fire while standing removed it would be balanced and it would be harder to destroy a tank with any AT rifle.
but if both the boys at and solotum at had to be fire prone they would no longer be the same br level
Ok then just give a prototype anti-tank rifle to the allies problem solved
second one
1 Like
Weapon named Solotum doesn’t even exist.
I guess you meant Solothurn, judging by the pic.
But who knows.
2 Likes
I did as joke
1 Like
I think this should be a separate event weapon. They could add scoped ptrs 41 as counterpart kinda like in cod waw
4 Likes
Id love for the BP solothurn to get a scope, so we could get a TT solothurn which is sorely needed in the TT.
2 Likes
This is how I’d do it:
1 Like