Anti-tank rifle vs infantry

[Tank!]

I just loaded up my old tank range map, and I could take out the Panzer IV F1 and F2 frontally with a single PTRD round from under 200 meters.

That should not be happening.

The PTRD was ineffective against med-late war tanks.

more of the realistic penetration HoS will have

Did anyone at Tripwire mention yet the capability & performance of the PTRD/S vs. tanks in RO2? ie Will the PTRD/S be toned down from RO1 to realistic levels?

in order to understand it penetrated a certain amount of steel under regular circumstances

The two tanks confirmed so far (IIIJ & IVF2 @ 50 mm) should be frontally impenetrable to the PTRD/S if everything is depicted correctly armor codewise.

 

[Placebo Cyanide]

Before the TWI guys can agonize over how realistic the game is or how many rivets a tank has they must ensure the game is fun to play. Let us not forget that this is a Video-Game, not a DeLorean.

Depending on the map designs a PTRD gunner may never have the opportunity (regardless of skill) to get perpendicular to enemy tank's side armor. That would lead to an extremely boring AT role for most people. It is also exactly why many people never pickup the AT Rifle in Ostfront. Most people do not know or are unwilling to take the time to learn where to hit the enemy tanks with the PTRD. It has a far steeper learning curve than a SMG or Semi-Auto, and so it must have a proportionately fair reward for that learning curve. Same thing goes for tanking. With all of these new hit-boxes inside of the tank that learning curve will become even more steep I imagine.

 

[u-s-e-r]

Before the TWI guys can agonize over how realistic the game is or how many rivets a tank has they must ensure the game is fun to play. Let us not forget that this is a Video-Game, not a DeLorean.

Depending on the map designs a PTRD gunner may never have the opportunity (regardless of skill) to get perpendicular to enemy tank's side armor. That would lead to an extremely boring AT role for most people. It is also exactly why many people never pickup the AT Rifle in Ostfront. Most people do not know or are unwilling to take the time to learn where to hit the enemy tanks with the PTRD. It has a far steeper learning curve than a SMG or Semi-Auto, and so it must have a proportionately fair reward for that learning curve. Same thing goes for tanking. With all of these new hit-boxes inside of the tank that learning curve will become even more steep I imagine.

That's why it is important that there is proper and accessible documentation within the game to get the game properly going for new players too, see the in-game wiki suggestion thread for more talk about this.

I really think this would be the proper way to go at first instead of making it unrealistic.

 

[213]

disagree. the best part about a game that is complex and intuitive is learning how to play it and overcoming challenges. there's no fun in revealing all the secrets right up front.

if people had the habit of playing sp before jumping into multiplayer, i suspect half of the "mommy, this game is too realistic/hard" problems would disappear.

different games require different mindsets. this isn't call of duty. that's my argument to your request to turn this into a hand-holding fest.

 

[Crni-Wuk]

well there are sure many ways how to get realism and fun at the same time. If people are worried about the effectivness of the anti tank rifle on the battlefield then it is the job of the developer to create situations where it is efficient. Like to give the player the oportunity to attack the tank from the flank and shoot the weak side. Or to have halftracks which could be easily penetrated by the AT rifles (usualy). And more.

I do not believe that "realism" and "fun" have to be mutally exclusive.

If we have a Tiger 1 which can not be penetrated by the front by the 76mm guns and you have no chance to flank. In a realistic game. Will you complain about that it has realistic balistics and penetration or that the map has no room to manouver ? If you play Orel redux with countless Panthers and Tigers against T34 there is no reason to complain about realism but the guy which changed the map to be played like an orgasm for a wehrmacht fanboy.

As someone once said. It is the artist that makes the tools. Not the tools the artist.

 

[[5GTA] Juan]

The concept of Anti-Materiel rifle is as old as the big caliber rifles itselves:

The origins of the anti-materiel rifle go back to the First World War, during which the first anti-tank rifles appeared. While modern tanks and most other armoured vehicles are too well protected to be affected by anti-materiel rifles, the guns are still effective for attacking unarmored or lightly armored vehicles. They can also be used against enemy aircraft, small watercraft, communications equipment, radar equipment, crew served weapons and similar targets. Their value is in being able to precisely target and disable enemy assets from long range for a relatively low cost.
Anti-materiel rifles can also be used in non-offensive roles for safely destroying unexploded ordnance. (Wikipedia)

I take that weapon sometimes specially for taking of german APCs, but in case of necessitiy you can use it against infantry. Aiming with the binoculars can be somewhat accurate...

The single shot action was designed to reduce the number of moving parts and allow for extreme precision, five hits out of five shots fit in a 25 centimeter radius circle at 1300 meters.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gepard_anti-materiel_rifle#cite_note-0

Those data are for the Gepard M1 antimateriel rifle, similar to the PTRD in being a single shot bolt action firing the 14.5x115 ammo...
In Tsaitsev Memories the use of the PTRS as sniper weapon is refered...

 

[VariousNames]

Before the TWI guys can agonize over how realistic the game is or how many rivets a tank has they must ensure the game is fun to play. Let us not forget that this is a Video-Game, not a DeLorean.

Depending on the map designs a PTRD gunner may never have the opportunity (regardless of skill) to get perpendicular to enemy tank's side armor. That would lead to an extremely boring AT role for most people. It is also exactly why many people never pickup the AT Rifle in Ostfront. Most people do not know or are unwilling to take the time to learn where to hit the enemy tanks with the PTRD. It has a far steeper learning curve than a SMG or Semi-Auto, and so it must have a proportionately fair reward for that learning curve. Same thing goes for tanking. With all of these new hit-boxes inside of the tank that learning curve will become even more steep I imagine.

Keep two things in mind.

One, the AT rifle will always make people explode. That is as satisfying as it is utilitarian. The PTaRD always included a gross effective range surpassing any other rifle, extremely high shell velocity, and the advantage of a bipod to distinguish it from its other drawbacks...limited ammunition, single shot function, etcetera. I always liked to think of the PTaRD as an extremely stable and powerful, if slow, bolt action.

Two, HoS isn't going to include supertanks like the IS-2 and Tiger 1. It's going to include a Panzer IV and a T-34, and, if we're lucky, maybe they'll patch in a Panzer III. And as anybody who's ever played Leningrad knows, that means dead tankers.

And as a side note, Stalingrad is an urban environment, and that means you gon get flanked. Don't presume that the AT rifle will be useless just because it can't penetrate the frontal armor of a KV-1.

 

[Panzer Jager '43]

One, the AT rifle will always make people explode. That is as satisfying as it is utilitarian. The PTaRD always included a gross effective range surpassing any other rifle, extremely high shell velocity, and the advantage of a bipod to distinguish it from its other drawbacks...limited ammunition, single shot function, etcetera. I always liked to think of the PTaRD as an extremely stable and powerful, if slow, bolt action.

I'm glad you're not making this game, since we just went over 5 pages in which it was discussed heavily and then ultimately proved both that the 14.5mm would NOT explode people, and that it has very, very poor accuracy for a Rifle.

That's the exact opposite of what you just said.

 

[timur]

Keep two things in mind.

One, the AT rifle will always make people explode. That is as satisfying as it is utilitarian. The PTaRD always included a gross effective range surpassing any other rifle, extremely high shell velocity, and the advantage of a bipod to distinguish it from its other drawbacks...limited ammunition, single shot function, etcetera. I always liked to think of the PTaRD as an extremely stable and powerful, if slow, bolt action.

Two, HoS isn't going to include supertanks like the IS-2 or supertractors like the Tiger 1. It's going to include a Panzer IV and a T-34, and, if we're lucky, maybe they'll patch in a Panzer III. And as anybody who's ever played Leningrad knows, that means dead tankdrivers.

And as a side note, Stalingrad is an urban environment, and that means you gon get flanked. Don't presume that the AT rifle will be useless just because it can't penetrate the frontal armor of a KV-1.

Fixed.

 

[TT33]

In terms of realism technically 1-2 PTRDs or PTRS shouldn't be much of a threat to the Panzers (Pz 3J and Pz 4 "f2") being depicted in Hos as even the thinner plates (that can be hit by a PTRD(S)) approach very close to the very limits of the penetration of the weapon in fact only very close range shots from ~100 meters and under would have a "chance" of penetrating the side hull plates armor. Keep in mind that being close is not always a good thing generally speaking a small outmatched and uncapped caliber such as the 14.5mm PTRD(S) should have a fairly high rate of failure vs these plates.

It's going to include a Panzer IV and a T-34, and, if we're lucky, maybe they'll patch in a Panzer III. And as anybody who's ever played Leningrad knows, that means dead tankers.

The Penetration data for the PTRD is incorrect in RO1 as has been discussed as nauseum. That is what really accounts for most of Panzers scrap heaps in Lenningrad as one can easily shoot from the AT building into the spawn exit and usually get a 1 shot kill through the frontal armor of the Pz IV F and Panzer III L. Actually if you know when to duck you can keep the German tankers stuck in the spawn for most of the map if not all of it.

And as a side note, Stalingrad is an urban environment, and that means you gon get flanked. Don't presume that the AT rifle will be useless just because it can't penetrate the frontal armor of a KV-1.

The PTRD(S) under ideal conditions pierces 35mm at 100 meters at 0 deg with its standard round, which is pretty inadequate. It in fact can not penetrate the frontal armor of most tanks in service in 1942 not just the Heavy tanks as you stated.
It's much like trying to make a case for the P.z.B 39 vs the T-34 while both the P.z.B 39 and PTRD(S) performed adequately vs lighter or earlier vehicles they could not deal with the next wave of change.

Something that is sort of missed is the fact the ATR's can shoot through pretty thick walls, sand bags and other light fortifications mappers could always make a map that features this. There's a few good accounts/scenarios of this in the Stalingrad area.

 

[hockeywarrior]

I agree with Placebo Cyanide here (lol-worthy name, btw). A big part of the RO experience has always been accepting the fact that the game has a steeper learning curve than other first person shooters.

This is where "accessibility" comes in. To me accessibility has nothing to do with dumbing down the features themselves but presenting said features to the player in such a way that the complexities are easier to understand and learn, hence making them easier to "access." This is why all of the little things the RO devs have put into RO2 such as more smooth movement and streamlined systems that still deliver the same depth of content are a great way to make RO2 a much accessible experience than its predecessor.

In regards to the PTRD, or any gun that requires complex operation, I agree that it should remain a difficult weapon to master and use effectively, but that does not mean learning how to use it should be totally inaccessible. Things such as proper training missions, comprehensive (and easy to understand) documentation, and other tools are all ways of helping players to learn the inherently complex nature of some of the weapons in RO2. It's also the game's job to give players the right kind of feedback to help them realize when they are doing something the right way. These are all ways in which I found RO1 to be utterly lacking (even for myself) and made learning how to use such features really difficult.

 

[Tank!]

Two, HoS isn't going to include supertanks like the IS-2 and Tiger 1. It's going to include a Panzer IV and a T-34, and, if we're lucky, maybe they'll patch in a Panzer III. And as anybody who's ever played Leningrad knows, that means dead tankers.

The thing is that RO-leningrad is a bad example because 50 mm thick tanks historically were "supertanks" to the PTRD/S. Realistically, both German tanks in that map would be impenetrable frontally to it even at point blank. They are just too thick. But unfortunately in RO, this is not the case as both are one shot killed by it very consistently through their front. This is why I am very curious/worried about how much the PTRD/S will penetrate in RO2 as other tankers are as well.

That would lead to an extremely boring AT role for most people. It is also exactly why many people never pickup the AT Rifle in Ostfront. Most people do not know or are unwilling to take the time to learn where to hit the enemy tanks with the PTRD.

If that is the case then those people should not take PTRD/S class to be a detriment to their team. To compensate by overpowering the PTRD/S to kill frontally is a big step in the wrong direction. Such a move would relagate the German armor in RO 2 (J & F2) to paper armor joke status (like in RO 1) when in reality their frontal armor was more than proof against PTRD/S. This also affects the unconfirmed German AT rifle in RO 2. Assuming its the Panzerb

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Seriously, did some of you guys develop problems with reading comprehension in the last month?

NOBODY ever stated that it's impossible to hit anything at 800m, heck, I didn't even want to get involved in this debate about the accuracy of the weapon itself but simply stated that with the sights of the PTRD it would be hard to hit a barn at 800m, let alone a human sized target and that the ranges where you'd benefit from the high powered round are well beyond the "effective range" of it's sights.

Seriously, some of you guys are absolutely overreacting.

1: The PTRD was ineffective against med-late war tanks.
2: Why do you say the PTRD can't penetrate any tank?
1: It's hard to hit a human sized target at 800m with the crude PTRD flip sights.
2: Why do you say it's a physical impossibility that any round could possibly hit at 800m?

*Facepalm*

Seriously, I've run into this phenomenon at last 10 times in this thread alone.

Unfortunately some people just don't want to listen LemoN.

 

[TT33]

Didn't see his post however I would edit on thing:

1: The PTRD was ineffective against med-late war tanks.

Should read: PTRD was ineffective against 1942+ applique*/uparmored tanks such as the vehicles currently depicted in Hos (Panzer III J and Panzer IV "F2")

Mid-war + tanks (1943+) I suppose you mean side-skirted tanks well the side skirt panels made the tank completely impenetrable to the PTRD so it is proof rather than "ineffective".

* Panzer III G-H for example it quickly received a 30mm applique plate (30mm+30mm <--this is proof vs 37mm at all ranges) in 1941 the next variant the J came with 50mm thick front/rear standard from the factory.

 

[LemoN]

That wasn't a statement or a post but simply an analogy.