M42 change ideas - Winter Patch 1.2 / 1.3 / 1.4

That is why you want very powerful, fully AI Penals (not this current shit) with support of M-42.

No i want good AI penals not this shit with option to go either good AI or mediocre AT, remeber that PTRS always deal damage. Mobile penals with PTRS are more interesting than some AT gun. Also it gives you choice of upgradement and also some munny sink

No i want good AI penals not this shit with option to go either good AI or mediocre AT, remeber that PTRS always deal damage. Mobile penals with PTRS are more interesting than some AT gun. Also it gives you choice of upgradement and also some munny sink

More interesting becasue you can use one type of squad instead of combined arms? Becasue you ca blob Penals?

@FalseAlarm - you still have superior maxim+zis so what's the problem?
Plus they already lost veteracny and flamethrower which made them OP.

More interesting becasue you can use one type of squad instead of combined arms? Becasue you ca blob Penals?

@FalseAlarm - you still have superior maxim+zis so what's the problem?

Yes it is interesting because you can get good AI penls or shitty AT penals, so tier1 is still good Ai tier and have some ability to defend against vehicles on its own at cost of weaking squads

Yes it is interesting because you can get good AI penls or shitty AT penals, so tier1 is still good Ai tier and have some ability to defend against vehicles on its own at cost of weaking squads

The same way you can get good AI Penals or crappy AT gun so Tier 1 is still good AI and have sme ability to defend agasint vehicles...

But opposite to Penals, M-42 provides combined arms instead of pure spam of 1 type of unit.

But opposite to Penals, M-42 provides combined arms instead of pure spam of 1 type of unit.

It creates a broken synergy instead.


Negating axis light vehicle play for 200MP is not desired. Powerful T1 AI specialists don't need such an early, inexpensive AT support in the same tier either.

Not to mention that people won't be building T2 ever again. M42 into Dshk and HM38 (which might not be even necessary) will be the new soviet cheese.

It creates a broken synergy instead.


Negating axis light vehicle play for 200MP is in not desired. Powerful T1 AI specialists don't need such an early AT support either. Not to mention that people won't be building T2 ever again. M42 into Dshk and HM38 (which might not be even necessary) will be the new soviet cheese.

But point is, it's not anymore powerful AI with nerfred veterancy and no flamethrower.
Right now it's cheese tier which relies on powerful Penals to get advantage to rush for T70.

After patch, Penals won't be that good -> game will be more equal. Completly different situation while you still think of M-42 for live version of T1, not the coming one.


And good luck relying on M-42 in late game.

Tho, I haven't noticed this cheese you talk about ATM (with powerful penals) so I hardly belive in this "cheese" after nefr of Penals.

It creates a broken synergy instead.


Negating axis light vehicle play for 200MP is in not desired. Powerful T1 AI specialists don't need such an early AT support either. Not to mention that people won't be building T2 ever again. M42 into Dshk and HM38 (which might not be even necessary) will be the new soviet cheese.

LIL, i play with this soviet cheese a lot, and its not a cheese. So many MP fore units, no late game ability.

But point is, it's not anymore powerful AI with nerfred veterancy and no flamethrower.
Right now it's cheese tier which relies on powerful Penals to get advantage to rush for T70.

After patch, Penals won't be that good -> game will be more equal. Completly different situation while you still think of M-42 for live version of T1, not the coming one.


And good luck relying on M-42 in late game.

Tho, I haven't noticed this cheese you talk about ATM (with powerful penals) so I hardly belive in this "cheese" after nefr of Penals.

Though nerfing their Vet3 RA solved their late game invincibility against small arms, it didn't address their highly accurate rifles, which is buffed further at vet level 2, + "to the last man" gimmick.

So, penals are still too accurate, and will retain their squad wiping potential.

M42 was not designed for late game. It costs 200MP and I don't expect it to be the hard or even soft counter to stuff like Vet 2 panthers or KTs.

Wikipedia article for the M42 says it had canister.

Listen I'm not gonna change my opinion a 3rd time so figure it out by yourselves.

I just want a not so useless unit, that's all.

Ontopic:

Keep in mind the following:
- AT guns are meant to be a sustainable cost-efficient way to counter vehicles
- Even if an AT gun crew gets wiped you can recrew the gun for a bit of MP cost (reinforcing the squad)

1. Due to how things work, no matter how we change things, recrewing an abandoned M-42 will still cost 120 MP/6 popcap to operate.

For comparison, a Zis-3 gun would require 120 MP/9 popcap to operate.

Thus, even if we go for a crappy-for-crap's-sake design, we can't circumvent that part. (Yes, we can give a reduced reinforcement cost for crew, but that might lead to recrew-with-shock-troops cheese).

2. If penetration is bad, there will be no way for the M-42 to gain vet from attacking vehicles in the late game. Thus it will suffer the same fate as the soviet mortar; if its vet is wiped, it won't be worth to replace it.

3. Regarding anti-infantry

You have to keep in mind that Soviets can also get the Zis-3 gun that has an expensive, but decent barrage ability.

- Giving M42 direct-fire anti-infantry (T70-like) might be problematic depending on the map and obstacles available. The performance of the gun might range from terrible (hills etc) to OP in closed space maps. Unlike T-70, M42 is not mobile enough to manoeuvre

- Giving it Focused Fire (i.e., turning it into a short-duration sniper) might end up being a bit cheesy (e.g., using it to snipe MG teams, or even snipe the sniper). This is not a bad idea per se, however it requires care given that it hurts low-member squads the most

- Canister shot seems like an OK proposition. It can combine the best of both worlds outlined above, but also the worst of either of them. At the very least it costs munitions but doesn't guarantee kills, which is fine in my books.

So to summarise:
1. It needs reasonable pen to be relevant in late game
2. It should function primarily as an AT gun (i.e. no T70 AI cannon)
3. Focused Fire might be too effective against expensive low-figure units
4. Canister shot (for a muni cost) would offer some AI as a bonus

So, M42 =
Pen: 120/105/90
Damage: 100 to 130
Cost: 220
Utility: Retreat
AI: Canister shot

How does that sound

And using Raketen43s performance as an argument to buff a perfectly balanced unit is close to trolling.

If we talk about zero's opinion, yeah he mostly trolls in favor of SU. If we talk about Zis, it's fine. If we talk about LIVE version of M42, it's bad either due to commander or performance (which could be improved on the utility department rather than raw stats).

Other AT guns enjoy the benefit of green cover. Green cover is not useless against AOE units.

Unfortunately you are wrong. At least on 90% of the cases and for what it matters most of the time.

1-The AT gun does not provide green cover for the guys operating the weapon. You do full damage (i can't test accuracy outside of making a mod) either through small arm fire or explosives (grenades or mortar shells for example). Easy to check by either killing the crew with a grenade/mortar or activating the dmg indicator on cheatmods.

2-The AT gun ITSELF does create green cover and each of them has a hitbox (which can blocks incoming shots). The thing is, it's mostly irrelevant for the crew due to formation.
Check the pic (for some reason the rak 4th guy spread out)
Show Spoiler
So yeah, green cover on the AT gun for the crew is useless, cause a shell landing on top of it will kill the 2 operating guys and heavily wound the 3rd guy which might be nearby.

That been said, it's not worthless putting AT guns behind cover, cause that will protect the operators.

So to summarise:
1. It needs reasonable pen to be relevant in late game
2. It should function primarily as an AT gun (i.e. no T70 AI cannon)
3. Focused Fire might be too effective against expensive low-figure units
4. Canister shot (for a muni cost) would offer some AI as a bonus

1. It doesn't. For late game you've got zis, Su85, and Su76.
2. Good point.
3. Another logical point.
4. Refer to point 2 and 3.

So, M42 =
Pen: 120/105/90
Damage: 100 to 130
Cost: 220
Utility: Retreat
AI: Canister shot

How does that sound

All those overbuffs justified by a 20MP cost increase?

1-The AT gun does not provide green cover for the guys operating the weapon. You do full damage (i can't test accuracy outside of making a mod) either through small arm fire or explosives (grenades or mortar shells for example). Easy to check by either killing the crew with a grenade/mortar or activating the dmg indicator on cheatmods.

2-The AT gun ITSELF does create green cover and each of them has a hitbox (which can blocks incoming shots). The thing is, it's mostly irrelevant for the crew due to formation.
Check the pic (for some reason the rak 4th guy spread out)
Show Spoiler

So yeah, green cover on the AT gun for the crew is useless, cause a shell landing on top of it will kill the 2 operating guys and heavily wound the 3rd guy which might be nearby.

That been said, it's not worthless putting AT guns behind cover, cause that will protect the operators.

So, in the end, do they provide green cover for the crew or not? I am kinda confused, how does it work?

So, in the end, do they provide green cover for the crew or not? I am kinda confused, how does it work?

The 2 guys manning the weapon? No.
The 2/4 guys which are spread far away from the gun? Yes.

Now you realize why it's pointless ?

I'm not saying people should be forced to go t1, just making the point that players will have more options and t1 would be more attractive if ptrs penals or m42 was added. I agree that penals should get an AI upgrade of some sort if a player would prefer to have them in a solely AI role since svts alone don't really cut it. Maybe a 4x ppsh upgrade or 1 dp28 at a certain level of verterancy.

I agree. Maybe u can try to remove dp28 from guards and give it to penals at a certain level of veterancy. Penals would be strong AI unit and guards can deal with light vehicles. I don´t think it´s necessary to have an AT gun or any AT unit in T-1.

Add me on Steam if you want to discuss something. @Budwise

Forum back and forth is generally futile and lost in translation.

1. It doesn't. For late game you've got zis, Su85, and Su76.
2. Good point.
3. Another logical point.
4. Refer to point 2 and 3.

All those overbuffs justified by a 20MP cost increase?

Canister shot is not an AI 'weapon', just as a grenade is not an AI 'weapon' - it's an ability that costs munitions. So points 2 and 3 don't apply.

Point1: it surely needs to be of some use against mediums. At the moment it really isn't.

Cost 220 might actually make sense, as Smith pointed out, the cost of AT guns is one thing and the reinforcement price is another... plus it's the price Miragefla recommended after an even longer list of buffs that the ones I have here lol

Another idea for the ones who care about m-42 being viable:

- Current m-42 stats on most things.
- Penetration up to 120-110-100
- Sherman-like AI/AT toggle that allows it to shoot 37mm AI shells (for example t-70 shells) with 5 second ammo change time.
- price about 280-300 mp
- possibly retreat

The aim is to make it usefull without overlapping with zis-3 in case someone wanted to go both tiers. With AI shell toggle, it can be worth about as much as maxim in AI role.

AT gun with canister shot now I've seen everything ^^

AT gun with canister shot now I've seen everything ^^

These guns had so many different ammo types becouse they were used not only as AT guns, but also infantry support guns, where there was no tank support.

AT gun with canister shot now I've seen everything ^^

This is normal - explosive shells 45-57 mm guns were weak - canister was effective.
antitank ZIS-2 - had canister.
ZIS-3 - one canister shell and four shrapnel shell.