• 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/

New Weapons Discussion (Merged)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#541
Cuddles said:
plus the king tiger..............:rolleyes: well I dont even need to say what it did.
Click to expand...

Actually it was less reliable than a 30 year old Fiat, thoose 'killing machines' were breaking so often they didn't have much of an influence on the field.

Germans produced the first jet airplane, which due to Hitler's dumb orders wasn't used as it was intended to, same for the rocket airplane (although this one killed the pilot himself)

Russians on the other hand, had simple cheap and reliable weaponry.
 
Upvote 0
#546
Cuddles said:
Well there were Panthers and Tigers and many other tanks on the german side that were more reliable and could still whoop both russian and american tanks.:D
Click to expand...
Well, yeah...but the Allies had more tanks. A LOT more tanks.

The Tiger and Panther both were produced in comparatively small numbers, at least compared to the hordes of tanks the Allies were churning out. In any case, by the time the Germans really needed their heaviest armor, they didn't have enough resources left to effectively produce them.
 
Upvote 0
#547
Kumagoro said:
Actually it was less reliable than a 30 year old Fiat, thoose 'killing machines' were breaking so often they didn't have much of an influence on the field.

Germans produced the first jet airplane, which due to Hitler's dumb orders wasn't used as it was intended to, same for the rocket airplane (although this one killed the pilot himself)

Russians on the other hand, had simple cheap and reliable weaponry.
Click to expand...

THe Tiger II was a fearfulyl weapon cause of its gun and armor, but with heavy dissadvantages on the other hand. There was no real use for a Tiger II in long battles, and for germany anyway, since they had not the ressources for such fights, the only succses for germans would be a fast and agile tactic, which is not the actual strength of the Tiger II. In short the Tiger II was not a good offensive weapon at all.

The only rocket plane I can think about, germans used in somewhat higer numbers is the Me262, which was from its design and technic a extrem effective weapon if used as interceptor. Though orders from Hitler, to convert the aircrafts from interceptors to fighter bombers, reduced the output from this planes. Enough to be shoot down from the allies. It was a heavy tactical mistake to convert the planes. The fighters that not have been converted, called "Schwalbe" (swalow), have been to fast for allied aircrafts and aa-weapons. The fighter bombers "Sturmvogel" (albatross) or blitz-bomber, had to be slown down though, because of their heavy weapons (2x250kg bombs). Slow enough to be vulnerable for most allied weapons. This and the superior forces of the allied planes (many Me262 have been shoot down while landing or starting where they have been slow enough to be attacked by allied planes) have took away the technical advantange of them. Possiblites to use the plane, have been already made in 1942-43, but been overruled in the favour for the already existing fighters. Later Hitler ordered to convert most of the already existing planes to fighter bombers, and to only produce them and it was impossible to convince him in favour for the interceptor.

If used proper way, as fast fighter, the Me262 had a high advantage over any allied air craft because it was usualy provided to be used as interceptor, never as bomber.
 
Upvote 0
#548
Kumagoro said:
Actually it was less reliable than a 30 year old Fiat, thoose 'killing machines' were breaking so often they didn't have much of an influence on the field.

Germans produced the first jet airplane, which due to Hitler's dumb orders wasn't used as it was intended to, same for the rocket airplane (although this one killed the pilot himself)

Russians on the other hand, had simple cheap and reliable weaponry.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have read that Hilter had nothing to do with the bomber conversion. This is just an old blame game rumor that started years ago.

I don't remember the source but I think it was said by some Higher up officers after the war that it was the Lufwaffe itself that insisted on the 262 being converted to a bomber variant. Not Hitler.

We could argue the point but I don't think either one of us will have the proof. I just wish I could remember the source of this information.
 
Upvote 0
#550
GonzoX said:
Actually, I have read that Hilter had nothing to do with the bomber conversion. This is just an old blame game rumor that started years ago.

I don't remember the source but I think it was said by some Higher up officers after the war that it was the Lufwaffe itself that insisted on the 262 being converted to a bomber variant. Not Hitler.

We could argue the point but I don't think either one of us will have the proof. I just wish I could remember the source of this information.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that Hitler's involvement with the 262 and bombing was that he wanted development resources allocated for jet bombers, rather than jet fighters. As an interceptor, especially a high-altitude anti-bomber interceptore, the 262 was pretty damn good. It had 4x30mm cannons nose-mounted and could chew a B-17 up pretty well. It could outrun most escort fighters, too. Where Hitler screwed the Luftwaffe was in NOT developing OTHER jetfighters as much.
 
Upvote 0
#551
Kaneohe said:
Sure the PPSh-41 owned on the Tommygun. But as far as I know, the M1 Garand far outstripped the SVT-40.
Click to expand...
Based on what? The SVT-40 loaded from box magazines which carried a superior amount of rounds, allowed for tactical reloads, and did not auto-eject like the en-bloc clip did, giving away your position, letting the enemy know you were reloading, and occasionally clonking friendly's in the head. Yes, the SVT-40 had some reliability issues, but that was more due more to soviet troops not being trained to maintain automatic rifles. Had soviet troops been issued Garands, you probably would have seen the same reliability issues in the M1.
 
Upvote 0
#553
Solo4114 said:
My understanding is that Hitler's involvement with the 262 and bombing was that he wanted development resources allocated for jet bombers, rather than jet fighters. As an interceptor, especially a high-altitude anti-bomber interceptore, the 262 was pretty damn good. It had 4x30mm cannons nose-mounted and could chew a B-17 up pretty well. It could outrun most escort fighters, too. Where Hitler screwed the Luftwaffe was in NOT developing OTHER jetfighters as much.
Click to expand...

exactly. He stoped the prodcution of any me262 interceptors. Actualy that was the target, for what the me was designed, not as bomber. Anyhow it served in that role also "good".

the svt40 is for the role it was designed a reliable and accurate weapon. It needs a soldier that is somewhat trained or at least experienced in use with weapons. But that is no difference with the M1. The Garand might be in some circumstance a bit "steadier". But its not that much a difference. Well trained stoviet troops showed that the svt40 is a formidable gun.

Though, from a personal point of view, I think the G43 was a better weapon. But thast more or less oppinion. And in the end the G43 based in some ways on the Svt design.
 
Upvote 0
#555
hello to you :)
i say i do agree with idea of mortar, of stationary anti tank and stationary machine gun. is good idea!
germany army did use much flamethrower i think? maybe is too strange to put in game. but is idea (yes i know is already been said!)
is this idea been said? a soviet is have molotov bomb? this alternative to grenade in some map with supply low. or maybe is "pick up" weapon like is panzerfaust in some map.
in world war 2 is germany soldier hit a enemy with shovel like he is do in world war 1? this i do not know. but maybe give him a shovel.
this idea i know is said but please to make for "open" soviet APC ability soldier inside to shoot with gun at enemies. why not? is possible for soldier.

also i ask, is PTRD only anti-tank weapon is have by soviet? panzerfaust does seem so much stronger! maybe to give soviet anti-tank PTRD soldier extra weapon, like molotov cocktail, this he can use on tank of german enemy to break a tread or to hurt enemy inside of tank. i see this in movie maybe is not for reality :( but he come to tank and he pick up lid of tank and he throw bomb inside and german inside are dead of explode.

goodbye i thank you!
 
Upvote 0
#557
loveydovey said:
a soviet is have molotov bomb?

in world war 2 is germany soldier hit a enemy with shovel like he is do in world war 1? this i do not know. but maybe give him a shovel.


also i ask, is PTRD only anti-tank weapon is have by soviet? panzerfaust does seem so much stronger! maybe to give soviet anti-tank PTRD soldier extra weapon, like molotov cocktail, this he can use on tank of german enemy to break a tread or to hurt enemy inside of tank. i see this in movie maybe is not for reality :( but he come to tank and he pick up lid of tank and he throw bomb inside and german inside are dead of explode.

goodbye i thank you!
Click to expand...

Molotovs were used a lot. They have been discussed alot and I
 
Upvote 0
#559
jedinstven-o crni Wuk said:
exactly. He stoped the prodcution of any me262 interceptors. Actualy that was the target, for what the me was designed, not as bomber. Anyhow it served in that role also "good".

the svt40 is for the role it was designed a reliable and accurate weapon. It needs a soldier that is somewhat trained or at least experienced in use with weapons. But that is no difference with the M1. The Garand might be in some circumstance a bit "steadier". But its not that much a difference. Well trained stoviet troops showed that the svt40 is a formidable gun.

Though, from a personal point of view, I think the G43 was a better weapon. But thast more or less oppinion. And in the end the G43 based in some ways on the Svt design.
Click to expand...
Thought the G43 was the SVT40 modified to take the caliber made for the original g41?
Click to expand...
The G43 is basically a G41(W) with a SVT40 gas system.

I've read some post war comparisons and they usually rank the SVT40 above the G43. The latter seems to be a bit more accurate, but that's always questionable because the ammunition used plays a major role (they tend to use Russian surplus vs. brand new 8mm Mauser, guess who's going to win?). On the other hand the SVT seems to be more comfortable to shoot and more reliable overall, although it should be said that the G43 wasn't exactly "built to last" and quality varies greatly between individual G43s.
 
Upvote 0
#560
another idea :)
there is now model and animation for make plane fly above i think? i see this in map!
please to make way (smoke grenade or binocular plus radio) of have airplane make strafe run on enemy. is much different from artillery explosion i think. much big area of effect but not impossible to take a cover to survive.

i see this in game is name of "combat mission". is turn base strategy. much fun !
 
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