Granatbusche Modell 39
- Thread starter Teufel Hund
- Start date
The satisfaction that the Germans are no longer running around with an equal amount of PTRS. Plus the fact that using the GrB39 requires a higher degree of skill than point and shoot.
If the Germans had it and Von Paulus needed it- he got it (before the 6th was surrounded)I am absolutly sure it would of have seen action at Stalingrad-however it needs to be left alone and become a multi-purpose weapon.Most tanks in the city(especialy German) were used to support infantry. The few the Russians had in the beginning were mostly used as static defence because of the urban enviroment. I think it would be great as a grenade launcher.Blowing men out of windows is exactly what German soldiers would had used it for(it made a heck of an explosion and like the assualt guns and heavy artilary Germans brought up to deal with Russians who refused to leave their positions unless on fire) like anything else that had some suppression effect. Keep the standard Russian At rifle for Allies -do not restrict slots and give it some penetration against light cover(the Russians flooded the city with these rifles because German infantry could not use the same cover that would stop small arms fire(wooden homes-etc-and with as many AT rifles the Russians could shove in German tanks did not last long especially with the molotov cocktail being in unlimited supply(the Russians were the only country to manufacture these in factories) and almost every Russian soldier had one thrust into his hand after getting off the barge(one of the many reasons for the never ending fires in the city)and used it for a variety of reasons other than blinding a tank by setting it on fire-burning Germans out of holes etc.. I like it- put it in there.
We have gotten off topic a bit, and yes I'm just as guilty in that respect. So lets get this back on topic. It is clear that the GrB 39 was available, and was fairly common. I feel it would be a very welcome, and balanced, addition to the game. The only thing comparable that the Russians had was the D-32 Rifle Grenade. Which was horribly outdated by this time, but at least had the advantage that it didn't require a special launching round be loaded to use it.
The Russians could be given the option of having anti-tank infantry equipped with a Mosin-Nagan and D-32 grenades instead of the PTRS. It could be useful in maps with no tanks. This would compensate for the GrB 39 being able to fire both AT and AP grenades.
But I do question how common they were...
"We received rifles and grenades which could be fastened onto the rifle barrels. Well we tried them but they proved totally worthless. When you pressed the trigger the grenade flew only about five meters and failed to explode. We then turned all that junk in." Vitjuk I. M., Red Army soldier
"Before commencing shooting you were to place the rifle and the grenade on its barrel on a firm surface on the bipod and aim at the enemy (we could have figured that part out by ourselves) and then shoot with a regular cartridge. It was then that I started regretting having sinned and now being forced to haul the launcher around as extra weight. I threw the contraption away because at no point in the war were we issued any grenades for it."
Bobkov A. A., Red Army soldier, 95th Infantry Division
These quotes would lead me to believe that they weren't very common, or well liked even when available.But for those who insist the Russians get something because the Germans do, then this is it. In spite of that, I'd still use them myself when playing the Russian side on maps with no tanks. For those worried about the so called "noob tube", firing rifle grenades requires the rifle to be braced against the ground, so you would need to deploy it in game terms. Rifle grenades are most certainly not a run and gun weapon, unless you like dislocating your shoulder... ok, I'm exaggerating slightly. But they were almost always used by bracing the butt against the ground and firing at an angle like a mortar.
The Russians could be given the option of having anti-tank infantry equipped with a Mosin-Nagan and D-32 grenades instead of the PTRS. It could be useful in maps with no tanks. This would compensate for the GrB 39 being able to fire both AT and AP grenades.
But I do question how common they were...
"We received rifles and grenades which could be fastened onto the rifle barrels. Well we tried them but they proved totally worthless. When you pressed the trigger the grenade flew only about five meters and failed to explode. We then turned all that junk in." Vitjuk I. M., Red Army soldier
"Before commencing shooting you were to place the rifle and the grenade on its barrel on a firm surface on the bipod and aim at the enemy (we could have figured that part out by ourselves) and then shoot with a regular cartridge. It was then that I started regretting having sinned and now being forced to haul the launcher around as extra weight. I threw the contraption away because at no point in the war were we issued any grenades for it."
Bobkov A. A., Red Army soldier, 95th Infantry Division
These quotes would lead me to believe that they weren't very common, or well liked even when available.But for those who insist the Russians get something because the Germans do, then this is it. In spite of that, I'd still use them myself when playing the Russian side on maps with no tanks. For those worried about the so called "noob tube", firing rifle grenades requires the rifle to be braced against the ground, so you would need to deploy it in game terms. Rifle grenades are most certainly not a run and gun weapon, unless you like dislocating your shoulder... ok, I'm exaggerating slightly. But they were almost always used by bracing the butt against the ground and firing at an angle like a mortar.
Last edited:
I agree with you-it should be placed in the game-I think arguing over equipment availability(except in extreme cases-as you stated Mkb) is not on the table and players who make it for small arms like these are wrong-it is just about gameplay mechanics and a devs time- I have said increase the maps and slots that Russian AT Rifles are allowed as a quik stop complaining measure and introduce the molotov at some point as a general issue Soviet weopon in AT role and as grenades and while keeping all AT grenades for both sides.
F
Field Marshal Rommel
Guest
Incorrect. The F-34 was most comparable to the Sherman seventy five 75 mm weapon or the 50mm L/60 weapon. Look here:
Actually, the F-34 should only penetrate the P IV 50 mm turret/hull front up to about 1,200 meters to be exact:
The 75 mm KwK 40 L/43 on the other hand could penetrate the T-34 45 mm glacis up to 1,200 meters** or the 65 mm turret front up to at least 1,600 meters**.
** # from Panzertruppen & WW2BAAG
Last edited:
Armor penetration discussions are pretty futile in the current state of the game. I play both sides and tanks are botched. On the other hand PzIV can not destroy T34 from 90 deg side between the roadwheels, on the other hand it can destroy the engine from frontal shot without damaging anything else. This is compensated by the fact that T-34 has difficulty killing the PzIV from rear, but can systematically penetrate it's turret from front and kill the gunner.
If the devs were ever concerned about realism, this would be German top infantry At weapon instead of PTRS. Basically Russians would have PTRD and PTRS and for Germans - PzB 39 and GrB 39. Unluckily we were given PTRD/PTRS with 70+mm penetration, which is totally idiotic and a reminder of "good old" RO1 PTRD that went through 80+mm of armor without any problems.
No unrealistic "balancing" would be needed, because GrB has lots of disadvantages compared to PTRS, and since T34 has MUCH thicker sides than Pz IV it would make perfect sense to give Germans something more powerfull with less range, ROF and accuracy. But we have "mirror balance" instead and no realism.
Anyways, this game doesn't need "mirror balance". The more differences between weaponary of each side, the more unique the gameplay.
No unrealistic "balancing" would be needed, because GrB has lots of disadvantages compared to PTRS, and since T34 has MUCH thicker sides than Pz IV it would make perfect sense to give Germans something more powerfull with less range, ROF and accuracy. But we have "mirror balance" instead and no realism.
Anyways, this game doesn't need "mirror balance". The more differences between weaponary of each side, the more unique the gameplay.
Last edited:
I cast necromancy spell lvl 10...
I've surfed internets for a bit and I couldnt find anything about ammount of captured PTRS rifles. Only in 1941 (only after the nazi germany attacked the ussr) the production of PTRS and PTRD began as soviets thought (due to successful propaganda) that german armor was very thick and AT-rifles would be useless against it and so they didnt bother to make AT rifles. In 41 only about 800 PTRS rifles were produced while the production numbers of PTRD reached thousands. BS-41 ammo was introduced in august 41.
What bothers me is how it was possible for axis to get so many rifles, as in 41, when germans attacked, there were none on the frontline, so it was only possible to capture these rifles (after they were produced and delievered) only on a battlefield. While I know that germans used both PTRS and PTRD rifles, its strange that in RO2 every german AT infantry uses PTRS (its also strange that every soviet AT uses PTRS too), which was quite rare compared to PTRD.
So, basically, I agree with Krator (esp the differences part), and considering that soviet engineers could use a bit of SN-42 armor, germans could use a bit (lets just say about 2 to avoid nube-tube) HE rifle grenades on tank maps.
Thoughts? Info on captured rifles?
I've surfed internets for a bit and I couldnt find anything about ammount of captured PTRS rifles. Only in 1941 (only after the nazi germany attacked the ussr) the production of PTRS and PTRD began as soviets thought (due to successful propaganda) that german armor was very thick and AT-rifles would be useless against it and so they didnt bother to make AT rifles. In 41 only about 800 PTRS rifles were produced while the production numbers of PTRD reached thousands. BS-41 ammo was introduced in august 41.
What bothers me is how it was possible for axis to get so many rifles, as in 41, when germans attacked, there were none on the frontline, so it was only possible to capture these rifles (after they were produced and delievered) only on a battlefield. While I know that germans used both PTRS and PTRD rifles, its strange that in RO2 every german AT infantry uses PTRS (its also strange that every soviet AT uses PTRS too), which was quite rare compared to PTRD.
So, basically, I agree with Krator (esp the differences part), and considering that soviet engineers could use a bit of SN-42 armor, germans could use a bit (lets just say about 2 to avoid nube-tube) HE rifle grenades on tank maps.
Thoughts? Info on captured rifles?
