German magical AT rifle
- Thread starter Krator
- Start date
I can understand that. What I would like to see is a game where "balance" is a dirty word. If the Germans didn't have an AT rifle, but the Russians did, give the Russians an AT rifle but don't give one to the Germans. Of course, then everyone moans about the game being unbalanced.
You can't win.
Let me stand 20 yards away from you with an MP40, a full mag, and a blindfold. I bet you are ****ting yourself by the time I've emptied the mag... if you're still breathing.
You can't complain about AT rifles breaking immersion, then complain about SMG's working as well as they do in the real world. If you want realism, there is a reason the assault rifle was invented - the SMG.
If you want balance, quit complaining about weapons that aren't historically accurate. You simply can't have it both ways.
Mostly due to the "but it's unbalanced" whines.
Theirs a statistic of T-34 loss's by gun type.
From June 1941 to September 1942 ~5% of all T-34 combat loss's where by 20mm based guns, ~10% was by 37mm guns (which would largely be the PAK & KwK), almost 60% by 50mm guns (mostly the L60 guns (which would mostly be PAK at this time frame)). The remainder would be fore larger guns and unidentified weapons.
As for PTRDs taking out "MBTs" well the skirts the Germans put on many vehicles (including the panther), where put their because of the PTRD was capable of penetrating the armor, which the skirts solved by removing the AP caps of the 14.5mm projectiles.
Nvm, im not even going to say whats wrong with that im just going to -1
Statistically German infantry were the best tank-killers of WWII, even before they got their Panzerfausts and Panzershrecks. AT rifles would focus on the tracks, optics and turret rings and infantry would close in to kill at leisure. While I do love the Panzerbuche I'm willing to accept it was outclassed in this theatre. Rifle grenades including shaped-charge grenades for the Mauser would be so nice though. Pretty please?
I think the anti-tank rifle is meant for urban combat. I know it sounds silly but where else in the game's map where you can hide a perfectly big gun without getting noticed and closing enough distance to do damage? And where are you going to aim with the rifle? Rear and turret? Side definitely had some armour.
Wow, I think the safest thing around here is to have no opinion at all. I don't think your argument holds the slightest bit of water though. Talk about a parochial view. Let's face it, the developers are in fact balancing the game. I'd rather they balance it in a more realistic fashion, and welcome asymmetrical balancing which is obviously more realistic seeing as the opposing forces obviously had their respective weak and strong points. It's only my opinion though.
People may have misinterpreted my use of the term effectiveness, regardless take a look at the beta footage again and see if you think the run and gun playing style realistically recreates how SMGs were used IRL during WWII. Just a small factor like the reloading time can dramatically change the way you play. I don't think a real soldier ever would have consider to reload his MP40 with the enemy at point blank ranges. In this game it's fairly viable if you don't have a pistol handy. I didn't comment on the effectiveness from a balance perspective. realsitically speaking I think the rifles are too effective close range compared to SMGs.
Exclusive Red Orchestra 2 Early Beta Footage - July 2011 - YouTube
I was referring to rifle grenades.
Last edited:
As another poster replied to you said, balance does not have to be symmetrical. The sides can have weak and strong points. Typically designers who wish to have both realism and balance will change things about the scenario. Numbers of people in each role, their terrain advantage/disadvantage, mission objectives, time limits. A superior weapon could be put in situations where it is not as superior. Example, the german Flak88 gun and tanks are amazing on open plains, but not so good in urban combat.
Thanks for reading on to where I explained I was being sarcastic. You're #2 to fail to see my dark humour.
Interesting stats! The 20's & 37's must have gotten some hits to the rear. Also re the 20mm, I would have to assume that those would have been from one or more Panzer II's outmaneuvering the T34 & hitting its rear, knocking out a road wheel or tracks, etc. and finishing it off with a rear hit or 2. Also maybe one of the German 20mm AA guns being used in a pinch. Still, nothing there about a 14.5mm anti-tank rifle. Maybe a lucky shot could have immobilized one by damaging a road wheel or breaking a link in the tracks, but destroy it?
Last edited:
Sadly that's what some people do when they read about the game and then picture this guy..
The Max. effective range for the Heat Grenades are 100 meter and accurate shots on lethal Points ~50meter.
The "Gewehrgranatger
The Katana's a nice touch.Sadly that's what some people do when they read about the game and then picture this guy..
EDIT: oh, sorry, I see somebody has already written about those rifle grenades.
@Panzer Jager '43: briliant picture, I'll make box cover for my RO:HOS out of it
Actually there were some nice effective rifle grenades issued in 1942 with around 70mm of penetration. Ineffective against T34 front (unless good angle against frontal 45mm plate or lucky shot at turret), decent against sides and rear. Just like PTRD is effective against sides and rear of Pz IV. Perfect balance, and all historically accurate.
GrB 39 was used, because it provided way more momentum to the grenades, and thus they have flown faster and a bit more accurate probably. Better range/accuracy against tanks is worth a bigger platform IMO.
To sum it up - TWI could have used the easy way - GrB 39 with AT grenades, but they chose the hard way and made another derp rifle firing 14,5mm. I really hope they'll introduce GrB 39 later on and nerf AT rifle to realistic values.
@Panzer Jager '43: briliant picture, I'll make box cover for my RO:HOS out of it
Actually there were some nice effective rifle grenades issued in 1942 with around 70mm of penetration. Ineffective against T34 front (unless good angle against frontal 45mm plate or lucky shot at turret), decent against sides and rear. Just like PTRD is effective against sides and rear of Pz IV. Perfect balance, and all historically accurate.
GrB 39 was used, because it provided way more momentum to the grenades, and thus they have flown faster and a bit more accurate probably. Better range/accuracy against tanks is worth a bigger platform IMO.
To sum it up - TWI could have used the easy way - GrB 39 with AT grenades, but they chose the hard way and made another derp rifle firing 14,5mm. I really hope they'll introduce GrB 39 later on and nerf AT rifle to realistic values.
Last edited:
I repeat: Just give the Germans their S-18 20mm semi auto AT rifle... that thing will make short work of a T-34 from the side.