• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

German anti-tank weapons

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#21
Redit said:
Also, molotovs could be used on most tanks to set the engine and gasoline on fire which would also immobilize the tank.
Click to expand...


Only most of the German tanks. And the protection got better also on German tanks later in the war. Not any of later Soviet tanks (T-34, KV-1 etc.) run with gasoline. German tanks had gasoline engines through the war, so molotovs had much better effect on German tanks than on Soviet ones.


RedGuardist said:
Molotov is not really an option, since diesel engines and better design on air intake pretty much rendered molotovs useless on T-34 and KV-1. Later on war (at the times of Stalingrad) molotovs were good pretty much only for blinding the tanks. Well, they worked better on German tanks, which had benzin engines.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#22
Redit said:
If you were on a second or third story building using an antitank rifle to shoot at sloped armor at 0 degrees it would work.
Click to expand...

Yes, it would greatly increase the chances of penetrating but it would still borderline the point would it actually penetrate or not. Besides that it would still raise the problem of how practical it is to shoot 30-60 degrees down from a building considering 1. AT rifles are quite heavy and big, 2. it would be very nose heavy and 3. the obvious effect what happens once you press the trigger. It's by no means impossible, but most of the time it would be just very difficult thing to do unless you would have a proper slope, specifically built entrenchment that allows you to do so or alternatively just stack some boxes\rubble\barrels so you can stand upon them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#24
Uffz.Juschkat said:
Pak guns aren't really good offensive weapons unless the Russians are making a counter attack with tanks, in which only the Pak40 would be useful. It takes some strength to get those moving. It took 4 of us to move a Pak 36 at a good pace.
Click to expand...

Give the attacking team more tanks then the defending who instead gets pak guns instead.

How hard is pak36/40 to move compared to this:
http://www.artillerimuseet.se/bilder/pjas/bild42.jpg ?

It's easy to move that with two people on good terrain and three on bad (one rides on the barrel the other one/two pushes).
 
Upvote 0
#25
Forssen said:
How hard is pak36/40 to move compared to this:
http://www.artillerimuseet.se/bilder/pjas/bild42.jpghttp://www.artillerimuseet.se/bilder/pjas/bild42.jpg ?

It's easy to move that with two people on good terrain and three on bad (one rides on the barrel the other one/two pushes).
Click to expand...

PaK40 had 8+1 crew and with that it was somewhat easily movable (8 pulls/pushes and 1 rides on the barrel) for short ranges, depending on terrain ofcourse. But it was not that easy or fast to move it. I seriously doubt that cannon you posted was movable by two/three men...
 
Upvote 0
#26
RedGuardist said:
PaK40 had 8+1 crew and with that it was somewhat easily movable (8 pulls/pushes and 1 rides on the barrel) for short ranges, depending on terrain ofcourse. But it was not that easy or fast to move it. I seriously doubt that cannon you posted was movable by two/three men...
Click to expand...

I have moved it on a gravel road with one person on the barrel, it wasn't very heavy once you got it rolling. Two people pushing made it a piece of cake. Ofcourse it would be extremely heavy to move it this way great distances.

In addition you would have to transport the ammunition for it.

A cannon that needs 9 people to move clearly wouldn't work as a moving object ingame. Hopefully the officer can place them out in an area around certain objectives or something.
 
Upvote 0
#28
Mormegil said:
It could work with an "AI" gun crew, like the tanks.
Click to expand...

That's a very good idea. It could simply be treated as a vehicle with AIs moving and loading with a human slot for aiming/firing/move orders. I'd go so far as to say you should be able to take over the loader spot if the AI is killed, but if the extra crew are killed there would be no moving it.

Edit: When halftracks come out it could be feasible to have a towed PaK. I doubt any of this will be in the game, but it's something for modders to think about.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#29
Oldih said:
Yes, it would greatly increase the chances of penetrating but it would still borderline the point would it actually penetrate or not. Besides that it would still raise the problem of how practical it is to shoot 30-60 degrees down from a building considering 1. AT rifles are quite heavy and big, 2. it would be very nose heavy and 3. the obvious effect what happens once you press the trigger. It's by no means impossible, but most of the time it would be just very difficult thing to do unless you would have a proper slope, specifically built entrenchment that allows you to do so or alternatively just stack some boxes\rubble\barrels so you can stand upon them.
Click to expand...

The fact that you think taht At rifles wouldnt be used on second/third stories of buildings shows how little you know about Soviet AT troops in Stalingrad, Pavlov's house is the best example as they put the AT troops in the highest stories because the turrets on the German tanks couldnt raise their guns that high to hit above the second story and also they had better shots at the top of the turret / motor as the armour was minimal in those spots.
 
Upvote 0
#30
Direct said:
The fact that you think taht At rifles wouldnt be used on second/third stories of buildings shows how little you know about Soviet AT troops in Stalingrad
Click to expand...

I never claimed they wouldn't have been used that faction, merely that it is pretty inconvenient under common circumstances. With Pavlov's house (and some other more fortified areas) they probably had all the time in the world to make firing positions so they are not firing 17kg 80
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#31
Im pretty sure the German waited for the Russian tanks to break down :) If you look at photos of the larger early Russians tanks, most appear to be intact...not to say they were not knocked out somehow...but in theory if all the infantry protecting your tank are dead...you could use all kinds of tactics to kill the tankers inside...
 
Upvote 0
#32
Oldih said:
I am fully aware of their reports and what is claimed (and possible to some degree), but just mounting AT rifle E.G. on a window in an angle so you could properly penetrate a roof or weak part of a tank would require alot of physical strenght due the size and weight of the PTRD and eventually you would find an angle you can't aim anymore downwards since the space wouldn't really allow you to do that.
Click to expand...

I don't see why that's so. You could easily rest the bipod against the wall, and let the barrel sit on and protrude over the window sill. When shooting downward, the bipod would rest against the wall / window sill, so you don't have to hold up the gun. You may have to grab a box or something to stand on, so you can elevate the rear of the gun high enough to get a really high angle shot.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#33
Mormegil said:
You may have to grab a box or something to stand on, so you can elevate the rear of the gun high enough to get a really high angle shot.
Click to expand...

Which usually isn't just spontaneously improvised in middle of a battle. Sure if you need a box and you would happen to find one around you'd probably use it, but inbetween any real engagements it's far more easier to setup firing positions which makes it more than possible. Of course the term "usually" must be emphasised as there's plenty of weird stuff done in middle of combat under some odd cirumcstances, but how they would fit in RO:HoS would be interesting question.
 
Upvote 0
#34
Oldih said:
Which usually isn't just spontaneously improvised in middle of a battle. Sure if you need a box and you would happen to find one around you'd probably use it, but inbetween any real engagements it's far more easier to setup firing positions which makes it more than possible. Of course the term "usually" must be emphasised as there's plenty of weird stuff done in middle of combat under some odd cirumcstances, but how they would fit in RO:HoS would be interesting question.
Click to expand...

That's for a really high angle shot. A 30 degree shot (60 degrees on top armor, or 30 degrees on front/side armor) wouldn't require elevation of the shooter. If that is needed, than a chair would suffice. Those should be rather easy to find. It would be up to the mapper to put the chair in place, or make them movable.
 
Upvote 0
#37
Mormegil said:
I don't see why that's so. You could easily rest the bipod against the wall, and let the barrel sit on and protrude over the window sill. When shooting downward, the bipod would rest against the wall / window sill, so you don't have to hold up the gun. You may have to grab a box or something to stand on, so you can elevate the rear of the gun high enough to get a really high angle shot.
Click to expand...

I don’t think what you are suggesting is as easy or practical as you seem to think. Standing on a box in window trying to aim down at the street… Well for one that sounds very dangerous, 2 it sounds like a very time consuming process. But best of all using something like a PTRD in that way just sounds like a lot of broken collar bone fun to me!

Hoffmann
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu