USF AT abilty.

Many already know that usf has a hard time winning a long 2v2,3v3,and 4v4 game.

The main problem is they have trouble dealing with axis armor.

My proposal. Buff bazooka, so its actually useful after 20min.

And add the m5 3" Anti Tank Gun

If they made bazookas cheaper by just 10 munitions i think that would help alot. They are clearly worse than shrecks per entity and the prices of these two weapons should reflect that

(shrecks cost 60 cold immunity costs 30 on volks)

Give us the M9 bazooka

AT guns need to be as useful as they were in COH1. Atm they are just deadweight.

57 is really good. just dies real fast.

Maybe give handheld AT weapons greater penetration the closer they are

I'm sure a guy trained to use a bazooka knows where the weakest armor is on a tank, and the closer he is the easier that weak spot is to hit

It's a bit late in development to make changes like this but I feel like the 57mm AT gun should only be an Airborne drop, and the standard US AT should be the 3" gun. Which wouldn't be as good as a Pak 40 but would be better than the existing USF AT gun.

Since we probably can't change that, the USF AT gun should get APDS ability at vet 0, so that fresh AT guns in the late game can at least be useful if fed munitions against the armor you're usually scrambling to buy it for by that stage.

it think people forget that the us 57 is the best ATG as soon as it reaches vet 1. or that it also has the best TD in the game.

AT guns are simply too costly compared to how easily they die, and because they need vet for AP they are unusable against heavy tanks. The reliance on vet is flat out retarded for something that dies if you look at the wrong way. The COH1 AT gun had AP right out the factory.

one or shots on a medium tank will likely vet it up instantly

already wrote this is another thread, but it keeps coming up

people are way too quick to write off the american AT gun. its amazing with vet. 70 range, forward sight and AP rounds are amazing. AP rounds and vet 3 give a total bonus of 95% to its pen.

thats 224-273 pen depending on range. compare that to a vet 3 pak, which has 247-273 pen.

soo im not exactly sure what you want a 3" AT gun to do that this one wont already.

Maybe give handheld AT weapons greater penetration the closer they are

I'm sure a guy trained to use a bazooka knows where the weakest armor is on a tank, and the closer he is the easier that weak spot is to hit

and that is already how it works.

I got to rank 16 AT with 16 wins to 1 loss with Americans purely by spamming Rifle/LMGs backed up by the Captain's tier with AT-Guns straight into an Easy-8 or Jackson spam with two Soviet support players (One going a Mark Target doctrine and one a B-4 doctrine).

You can have 2 Jacksons to every Axis Tiger. There just isn't any competition what so ever. Your only real threat is the Jagdtiger (But that's what the Soviet B-4 players on the field for).

AT guns are simply too costly compared to how easily they die, and because they need vet for AP they are unusable against heavy tanks. The reliance on vet is flat out retarded for something that dies if you look at the wrong way. The COH1 AT gun had AP right out the factory.

Well, so does this 57mm AT gun in CoH2. It's cheaper as well, just 30 munitions. The Vet 1 ability isn't the AP shells, it's the "Take Aim!" which gives farther sight range and farther firing range (which is damn awesome), at the expense of sight being restricted the cone of fire.

I wouldn't necessarily call the M1 AT Gun the best AT gun in the game - I still personally find the PaK 40 (when Target Weakspot behaves) to be the best AT gun in the game. But back to the USF AT. :3

I got to rank 16 AT with 16 wins to 1 loss with Americans purely by spamming Rifle/LMGs backed up by the Captain's tier with AT-Guns straight into an Easy-8 or Jackson spam with two Soviet support players (One going a Mark Target doctrine and one a B-4 doctrine).

i think people just dont get captains enough. i see lieutenant and AA ht far more often. they have a much bigger impact when they show up since theyre really good AI and there wont be many vehicles at that point.

I wouldn't necessarily call the M1 AT Gun the best AT gun in the game - I still personally find the PaK 40 (when Target Weakspot behaves) to be the best AT gun in the game. But back to the USF AT. :3

id say its atleast the second best if not the best. i think raketen is the worst because of its ready aim time, range, RoF and tendency to shoot the ground. being able to retreat it is nice, but i actually dont like to garrison them.

i think zis is the 2nd worst because of its RoF, though the 6 man squad and barrage make it better than raketen.

its hard to say which is better between the pak and the 57mm. pak has a slight RoF advantage, but its vet ability works maybe 20% of the time for me now. if you have munitions for AP rounds, the 57mm will pretty much match the pak in pen, but having forward sight and 10 more range is a big advantage. theres plenty of times when a tank barely gets out of sight from a pak with 1 hit left. a 57mm would get that kill.

id say as long as target weak point is broken and if the americans have munitions to spare, the 57mm is better. itd probably be pretty much a tie for me if they fix weak point.

I think the real problem is that USF needs a reliable AT option that isn't incredibly vulnerable to getting Stuka'd. Even when I hear/see the Stuka firing as soon as it begins, it's still not enough time to move them to safety. Instant decrew every time.

Jacksons, I love them, but 480 HP with 130 armor is just way too fragile to be considered truly "reliable" imo. Getting scratched by a 2 cm (20mm) cannon, then any 2 AT hits and it's toast.

Bazookas are in a weird place right now, but I don't think tweaking or buffing them is gonna solve the long term problems allied players are having in team games vs heavy axis armor.

I used to believe in the power of P-47s but last two times I've used it, it was just a waste of 240 munitions. One strafe where 2 out of 6 or 8 (dont remember how many it fires per strafe) hit the target, then gets instantly shot down by OKW T4, Ostwind, OKW base turrets, tank turrets, etc.

The american at gun is prtty good, when it hit's vet 2 it get`s higher range and if i'm not mistaken additional sight. With the at rounds the 57mm is able to penetrate even the heaviest vehicles. I don't really see the problem here. And making the bazookas cheaper is no option, cause you are able to equip every unit on the field with it.

The american at gun is prtty good, when it hit's vet 2 it get`s higher range and if i'm not mistaken additional sight. With the at rounds the 57mm is able to penetrate even the heaviest vehicles. I don't really see the problem here. And making the bazookas cheaper is no option, cause you are able to equip every unit on the field with it.

The fact that bazookas cost the same as shrecks says it all.

Also, show me a replay where an AT gun reaches vet 2 and stays alive to be useful.

Also, show me a replay where an AT gun reaches vet 2 and stays alive to be useful.

You're joking, right? You can get vet 2 on those AT guns for killing one tank.
Edit: I was exaggerating some, but it is very easy to get vet 2 on this AT gun.

Bazooka can be cheaper,actually i propose giving usf a sherman firefly commander.50 range,less dmg than jackson but more than sherman,better penetration and good but not godly armor.A specialist good strictly AT tank unlike the e8,bit like the panther but with lower armor and bit cheaper.

I say this because it has been made clear there will be no pershing,and in any case we don't need a third tiger clone after tiger and is-2.

Sure it's easy because you say so. You're joking right?