Tank destroyers - Shoot on infantry or not?

How does the SU-76 perform against infantry?
I assume it's not too bad since it is a multi-role artillery piece/tank destroyer

The only useful thing against infantry that the SU-76 can do is its Light Artillery Barrage. It'll hit infantry with its main gun as often as a Pak or Zis.

The StuG is the only tank destroyer with an HMG mounted on the top. It has only recently become a tank destroyer though. The HMG is clearly a holdover from the old "Assault Gun" days before relic basically abolished the existence of such vehicles.

I often skip the HMG on the StuG. It is rarely worth it. It makes such a small difference against infantry which it should never be close to anyways as the low health of the StuG makes it very vulnerable to AT grenades.

I would probably skip it on other fixed gun tank destroyers such as the SU-85. I don't think TDs really need the MGs. I might pick it up with a Jackson, Firefly or M10. These tanks have enough mobility to crush infantry in a tight situation.

For the most part it is simply a balance issue. A tank destroyer should be scared of infantry. It refines its role as a specialist. Even if the infantry, such as an engineer squad, cannot hurt the tank destroyer then it should be scared of being spotted. A good MG on most tank destroyers would dilute this role. Invulnerability to small arms fire is no small deal.

Not a tank but memorable mention to the raketenwerfer, specially when inside a house.
To say that once i lost an engagement with a Penal squad (no flamer) against it.

It's a curious affair that the Puma and Panther have effective mg's in this game while Jackson and Wolverine have none... even though both were historically fitted with .50 mg's...

Fitted with MG's on the rear of the turret, facing backwards. How often would that help you, exactly? How often does the KV-1's rear turret MG make a difference? Does the IS-2's rear facing MG even get noticed?

Fitted with MG's on the rear of the turret, facing backwards. How often would that help you, exactly? How often does the KV-1's rear turret MG make a difference? Does the IS-2's rear facing MG even get noticed?

M36 Jackson


M10 Wolverine



M18 Hellcat



Facing backwards you say?

Facing backwards you say?

I will admit it didn't occur to me that the gunner could swivel the gun forward and sit on the counterweight. Very dangerous, and not the intended use, but doable. The one on the M10 looks like he's standing on the engine bay, which would mean they cannot turn the turret while he's there. The M10's second mount with the M1919 looks like it's right over the main gun, so I doubt you'd be able to use both at the same time.

Mobility is huge in CoH2 due to the scaled down engagement ranges, so that would not be very favourable. The M18 had a turret ring unlike the M10 and M36, but the M18 isn't in the game so that's a moot point.

I will admit it didn't occur to me that the gunner could swivel the gun forward and sit on the counterweight. Very dangerous, and not the intended use, but doable. The one on the M10 looks like he's standing on the engine bay, which would mean they cannot turn the turret while he's there. The M10's second mount with the M1918 looks like it's right over the main gun, so I doubt you'd be able to use both at the same time.

Mobility is huge in CoH2 due to the scaled down engagement ranges, so that would not be very favourable. The M18 had a turret ring unlike the M10 and M36, but the M18 isn't in the game so that's a moot point.

And the Hetzer had a remote-controlled MG, JPIV gets Predator cloaking... Shermans can take multiple rounds from a Tiger... COH2 is barely about realism, this is about functionality for Allied Tank Destroyers within the game. Stug and Panther get mg's I don't see the issue with .50 upgrade.

They could just add a guy standing on the back off the vehicle. Or for gameplays' sake just mount the mg on the front of the turret.

I will admit it didn't occur to me that the gunner could swivel the gun forward and sit on the counterweight. Very dangerous, and not the intended use, but doable. The one on the M10 looks like he's standing on the engine bay, which would mean they cannot turn the turret while he's there. The M10's second mount with the M1918 looks like it's right over the main gun, so I doubt you'd be able to use both at the same time.

Mobility is huge in CoH2 due to the scaled down engagement ranges, so that would not be very favourable. The M18 had a turret ring unlike the M10 and M36, but the M18 isn't in the game so that's a moot point.

And the Hetzer had a remote-controlled MG, JPIV gets Predator cloaking... Shermans can take multiple rounds from a Tiger... COH2 is barely about realism, this is about functionality for Allied Tank Destroyers within the game. Stug and Panther get mg's I don't see the issue with .50 upgrade.

They could just add a guy standing on the back off the vehicle. Or for gameplays' sake just mount the mg on the front of the turret.

Didint JAGDTIGER have a MG mount on the back of it on COH 2 (a guy standing on top of the engine manning the machine gun)
Even Found stats for its MG http://www.coh2-stats.com/small_arms/jagdtiger_mg34_hull_mp

Didint JAGDTIGER have a MG mount on the back of it on COH 2 (a guy standing on top of the engine manning the machine gun)
Even Found stats for its MG http://www.coh2-stats.com/small_arms/jagdtiger_mg34_hull_mp

Sure, why not. Funny that the Priest, named for it's big ol .50 pulpit can barely scratch infantry with its namesake...

And the Hetzer had a remote-controlled MG, JPIV gets Predator cloaking... Shermans can take multiple rounds from a Tiger... COH2 is barely about realism, this is about functionality for Allied Tank Destroyers within the game. Stug and Panther get mg's I don't see the issue with .50 upgrade.

For the most part, Relic's been pretty good at not fictionalizing vehicles. And if they give Tank Destroyers too much AI, then there will be no reason to build actual Tanks. Imo what they should have done is just included the 76mm Sherman (currently the Soviet Sherman) as a stock unit, then the M-36 could be a much stronger doctrine limited unit. As far as the Sherman's M2 HMG's go, those are already fictionalized as far as I can tell, Sherman's M2's were also mounted at the back of the turret. The mount in CoH2 featured an M1919 instead.

They could just add a guy standing on the back off the vehicle. Or for gameplays' sake just mount the mg on the front of the turret.

That image doesn't work, hotlink blocker. As for standing on the back, that would mean you could not turn the turret since it'd pull the gun away from in, or worst case he'd be in the way of the gun. It'd be really interesting as an optional mechanic though; the MG is active but the main gun is limited to aiming straight forward, or the MG inactive but turret allowed free rotation.

Sure, why not. Funny that the Priest, named for it's big ol .50 pulpit can barely scratch infantry with its namesake...

I wouldn't mind if the frontal MG's on the Panzerwerfer, Stuka, Priest, etc were better. There'd be a huge amount of risk to using them in an offensive role.