Specialized combat tools divided into BR

[MistrzRozruba]

As in Title. Depending on the BR, other specialized equipment is built by the engineer, both in the sapper teams themselves and when the engineer is in the machine gun, mortar and anti-tank team. But also for other teams.

Sapper (engineer) unit [a sapper is an engineer in the army]:
HMG
Axis:
BR.1. GER
MG08
7,92mm

BR. 1. IT
Mitragliatrice M1914

BR. 1. IT
Mitragliatrice Fiat Mod.35

BR. 2. GER
7,92mm
MG34

BR. 2. IT
Mitragliatrice Breda modello 37

BR. 4. GER
MG42
7,92mm

Allies:
BR. 1.
Vickers machine gun
7,7mm

BR. 3.
Browning M1919
7.62

Red Army:
BR. 1.
Maxim wz. 1910
7,62mm

BR. 2
DS-39
7,62mm

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 1.
Typ 1
7,7mm

BR. 2.
Typ 3
6,5mm

BR. 2.
Typ 92
7,7mm

Large-caliber machine guns:
Axis:
BR. 2. GER
MG 131
13mm

BR. 2. IT
Breda-SAFAT
12.7mm

BR. 3. captured by Germans 1939
wz. 38A
20mm

BR. 3. captured by the Germans 1940
Machine Cannon M/38
20mm

Allies:
BR. 2. GB
Vickers .50
12.7mm

BR. 2. USA

M2 Browning

12.7mm

BR. 3. GB
Besa
15 mm

BR. 3. GB
Polsten 20mm
20mm

Red Army:
BR. 2
DSzK
12.7 mm

BR. 3.
KPV
14.5mm

BR. 3.
SzWAK 20 mm
20 mm

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 2.
Type 99 cannon
20mm

BR. 3.
Type 5 cannon
30mm

Anti-tank guns
Axis:
BR. 1. GER
2,8 cm sPzB 41

BR. 1. GER
3,7 cm PaK 36

BR. 2. GER
5 cm PaK 38

BR. 2. IT
Cannone da 75/32 modello 37

BR. 3. GER
7,5 cm PaK 40

BR. 4. IT
Cannone da 90/53

BR. 4. GER
8,8 cm PaK 43

Br. 5. GER
12,8 cm PaK 44

Allies:
BR. 1. USA
37 mm gun M3

BR. 1. GB
Ordnance QF 2-pounder

BR. 2. GB
Ordnance QF 6-pounder

BR. 3 USA
3-inch gun M5

BR. 3. GB
Ordnance QF 17-pounder

Red Army:
BR. 1.
45 mm anti-tank gun model 1932

BR. 2.
57 mm anti-tank gun M1943 (ZiS-2)

BR. 3.
85-mm divisional gun D-44

BR. 4.
100 mm field gun M1944 (BS-3)

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 1.
Type 94 37 mm anti-tank gun

BR. 1.
Type 1 47 mm anti-tank gun

BR. 2.
Type 90 75 mm field gun

BR. 4.
Type 88 75 mm AA gun

Anti-aircraft defense artillery
Axis:
BR. 1. GER
2 cm FlaK 30

BR. 1. IT
Cannone-Mitragliera da 20/65 modello 35 (Breda)

BR. 1. IT
Cannone-Mitragliera da 20/77(Scotti)

BR. 2. GER
3,7 cm Flak 36

BR. 3. GER
2 cm Flakvierling 38

BR. 3. IT
Cannone da 75/46 C.A. modello 34

BR. 4. IT
Cannone da 90/53 modello 41

BR. 4. GER
5 cm Flak 41

BR. 5. GER
8,8 cm Flak 18

Red Army:
BR. 1.
25 mm automatic air defense gun M1940 (72-K)

BR. 2.
37 mm automatic air defense gun M1939 (61-K)

BR. 3.
76 mm air defense gun M1931

BR. 3.
25 mm M1944 (94-KM)

BR. 5.
85 mm air defense gun M1939 (52-K)

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 1.
Ho-103 machine gun 12.7mm

BR. 1.
Type 2 20 mm AA

BR. 3.
Type 11 75 mm AA gun

BR. 3.
Type 99 88 mm AA gun

Allies:
BR. 1. USA
M45 Quadmount

BR. 2. GB
Bofors 40 mm gun

BR. 3. GB
20 mm Polsten

BR. 3 GB
QF 3.7-inch AA

BR. 3. USA
90 mm gun M1

Anti-aircraft artillery should again be able to lower the gun to at least an angle of 0*, without depression.

There are three ways in which this mechanic can be implemented into the game.

1. A hammer as a tool, i.e. the BR of a hammer and the maximum BR of constructed toys.

2. BR for Engineers. Which would impose the need to specify a battle rank, which is the worst idea.

3. Adding additional slots in engineer teams and fusilier and grenadier teams, the same as those in vehicles.

My other idea

Radio operator and artillery/bomber selection

Idea update 2.0 I thought that the radio operator team should be able to choose the type of artillery and bombers. As in the game after the update, firepower (theoretical on paper [panther is junk]) is supposed to determine lvl/tier/br and I thought that it should be possible to match artillery radio operators and bombers to the team in formation. Power GIMP production [radiooperator projekt] In addition, I also considered the alternative of artillery support in the Pacific Campaign. This…

[VoyoMayPL]

I don’t like that I won’t have access to low caliber AA at higher BRs. I can’t imagine firing 88 at P51 (unless he is flying in a straight line).

[TheUnclaimedOne-psn]

THERE’S A VICKER CHAMBERED IN .50? I am blown away the Brits could even design something like that. Lol

[MistrzRozruba]

After all, no one will come after you for using lower BR weapons on higher BRs.

I gave the large-caliber ones a higher BR because in this suggestion, the anti-aircraft defense weapon should have its gun depressed again, at least to 0*.

I don’t know if you would like to drive a T-60 tank at low BR and get hit by an 88mm shell.

[_i4i]

@MistrzRozruba
bet that took a while to put together, very nice work

[MistrzRozruba]

Thank you. I’ll admit, it took some time.

[Naohmcete]

what a surprise, nothing about japan again…

[MistrzRozruba]

How about Japan? There’s a lot of Japanese equipment here.

[guardianreaper0]

Engineer SQUADS (1& 2): Unique Defensive/ Offensive Structures

Please be courteous and actually read the suggestion, I know I post about engineers a lot, but I’ve taken the time to listen to other feedback and suggestions to make this new refined list. Currently, I don’t think that the engineer squads themselves have enough to make them feel “unique”, in a way that makes anyone other than the most die-hard engineer mains actually use them. I think this list should definitely help with that. Some of these suggestions would be in ADDITION to current options…

I bring your attention to this post, as I suggested a way that I think changing up the AA/ AC weapons would be done in a very viable manner, in addition to other goodies.

[Naohmcete]

meaning of lack of certain guns

[khtk395]

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 1. IT
Mitragliatrice Fiat Mod.35

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 2. IT
Mitragliatrice Breda modello 37

The Mitragliatrice Fiat Mod.35 has better rate of fire, what makes it to have lower br?

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 2
DS-39
7,62mm

This gun is capable of firing 1200 round per minute, you can make it BR4.

@MistrzRozruba

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 1.
Typ 1
7,7mm

BR. 2.
Typ 3
6,5mm

Type 3 has weaker round and similar rate of fire as Type 1. So Type 1 should be br2, Type 3 should be br1.

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 3.
SzWAK 20 mm
20 mm

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 2.
Type 99 cannon
20mm

BR. 3.
Type 5 cannon
30mm

Those are aircraft cannon. You should show picture of them being adapted for ground use.

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 3 USA
3-inch gun M5

BR. 3. GB
Ordnance QF 17-pounder

No high br US or Allies at gun?

@MistrzRozruba

Imperial Japanese Army:
BR. 1.
Type 94 37 mm anti-tank gun

Penetration is too poor to be put on br1.
Maybe consider other alternative like type 1 37mm at gun.

Type 1 37 mm anti-tank gun

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 4.
Type 88 75 mm AA gun

Did you even check its penetration before posting? No way it deserve br4.

@MistrzRozruba

BR. 4. IT
Cannone da 90/53 modello 41

It has similar performance as flak88 and 85 mm air defense gun M1939 (52-K) so they should be at same br.

No aa gun for US and Britain?

[MistrzRozruba]

@khtk395

No aa gun for US and Britain?

I missed it. I added.

@khtk395

No high br US or Allies at gun?

Because the Americans and British focused on self-propelled anti-tank guns.

@khtk395

Those are aircraft cannon. You should show picture of them being adapted for ground use.

I didn’t find anything like that.

@khtk395

Type 3 has weaker round and similar rate of fire as Type 1. So Type 1 should be br2, Type 3 should be br1.

Because they’re Japanese.

@khtk395

This gun is capable of firing 1200 round per minute, you can make it BR4.

For me, the BR 2 is good, because I didn’t find anything interesting that would be suitable for the BR 2 or BR 3, and everything else had a caliber above 10 mm.

@khtk395

The Mitragliatrice Fiat Mod.35 has better rate of fire, what makes it to have lower br?

In addition to overheating, stationary weapons should also have a magazine change system and a preserved weapon overheating system. And for this reason, Breda loaded from a tray is reloaded faster.

[khtk395]

@MistrzRozruba

Because the Americans and British focused on self-propelled anti-tank guns.

Maybe add something like 105mm T8. Or just put the QF 3.7-inch AA. You need something to counter the king tiger.

105 mm gun T8

@MistrzRozruba

Because they’re Japanese.

Lol.

@MistrzRozruba

For me, the BR 2 is good, because I didn’t find anything interesting that would be suitable for the BR 2 or BR 3, and everything else had a caliber above 10 mm.

SG-43 Goryunov

@MistrzRozruba

In addition to overheating, stationary weapons should also have a magazine change system and a preserved weapon overheating system. And for this reason, Breda loaded from a tray is reloaded faster.

It only has 20 round tray. You will spend more time reloading instead of shooting, just like Japan tank mg comparing to other tank mg.

[MistrzRozruba]

@khtk395

You need something to counter the king tiger.

On paper, Tiger B called King was great, but in reality he was trash. But it’s a game, so you ask what counters the king tiger? 90mm M36 Jakson gun.

The British 17 pounder gun was enough.
To make engineers more appreciated on the battlefield, powerful anti-tank guns are at a lower BR than the target opponents.

The T8 is actually a nice option for the Allied BR4 gun.

The SG-43 Goryunov is a cool build. Maybe it would be good, but for the same BR as the Maxim 1910 because it has the same cartridge and the rate of fire ranges between 500 and 700, i.e. the average is 600, which is the same as in the Maxim 1910.

[khtk395]

@MistrzRozruba

On paper, Tiger B called King was great, but in reality he was trash. But it’s a game, so you ask what counters the king tiger? 90mm M36 Jakson gun.

Can’t pen the front unless you have APCR. But APCR will have mediocre post pen damage.

@MistrzRozruba

The SG-43 Goryunov is a cool build. Maybe it would be good, but for the same BR as the Maxim 1910 because it has the same cartridge and the rate of fire ranges between 500 and 700, i.e. the average is 600, which is the same as in the Maxim 1910.

Lol just use the number 700? I don’t know why you use the average number.

[MistrzRozruba]

@khtk395

Can’t pen the front unless you have APCR. But APCR will have mediocre post pen damage.

In games, there is no weld strength or steel hardness. The Tygry II had very soft plates and the front plate tended to fall off when the tank was hit by HE shells. The Americans, in their audacity, used ordinary M4 fronts and fired HE bullets at the Tiger II from a long distance, which caused the Tygra tank to completely fall apart.

@khtk395

Lol just use the number 700? I don’t know why you use the average number.

Because I think it’s better than choosing a higher value.

[khtk395]

@MistrzRozruba

In games, there is no weld strength or steel hardness. The Tygry II had very soft plates and the front plate tended to fall off when the tank was hit by HE shells. The Americans, in their audacity, used ordinary M4 fronts and fired HE bullets at the Tiger II from a long distance, which caused the Tygra tank to completely fall apart.

Lol I’m talking about in game jackson gun still need APCR to pen.

[MistrzRozruba]

In fact, it didn’t even need the M18 because the M18 cannon penetrated the front plate of the Tiger II. The problem here is not in ammunition because the games do not take into account the poor quality of steel in late-war German tanks or in Russian tanks because the Russians did not roll steel. The Germans did not do this anymore either.