ZiS-3 vs Pak-40

Lmao, yay for digging old posts up

Lmao, yay for digging old posts up

unlike wine they don't get better with age.

unlike wine they don't get better with age.

Or cheese

I think one reason why we are repeatedly seeing people say something like "I'd rather take <other faction's AT gun>" stems from faction design:
Ostheer does not have as many indirect fire options as Soviets. Their main source of indirect fire are mortars and then nothing at all until (if) they go T4. Everything they have is rather squishy (flames, explosions) and because of this and other reasons (no Oorah, more expensive mines) they have a harder time defending their AT gun. The things they'd use an AT gun for are mainly T70/T34 against which survivability is arguably more important than rate of fire. Against a Su-85 it just serves as a deterrent and can be taken out by the Soviet indirect fire solutions available in these situations (Su-76, Katyusha, 120 mm mortar).

Soviets already have potent indirect fire options or do not require them as much (survivable snipers, M3 flamers for taking/weakening positions). The squishyness of a Pak would not mean much to them because they could support it easier (mines, AT grenade, Oorah, merge, easier recrewing, doctrinal cloak). Rather, they'd take more potent non-Su-85 AT solutions because their amount and relative power of them is a bit lower (currently: combination of solutions less potent on their own).

And I think this is completely intentional from the design Devs.
Still, both lack from poor accuracy... their scatter stats should be improved so they are better against disabled and immobile (lack of enemy awareness) vehicles as well as against frontal charging vehicles.

Expanding on this, the ZiS crew is essentially a Conscript squad, they share the exact same health and armour. There's 6 men, they can be instantly reinforced from any nearby Cons squad, and are faced against Armour that's average at taking on Infantry, so Tank flanks are less threatening.

Now the PaK 40 crew, is not like a Grenadier squad, as they lack the 1.5 Armour that Grenadiers have, making them more like Conscripts. There's also only 4 of them, they also can not be reinforced from infantry squads, and are facing Armour that is above average at killing Infantry, so even a tank from the front is a threat (in one extreme but rare example, a T-34 decrewed a fresh PaK in one hit + 2 Grenadiers bunched up next to it).

The threats they face are also different, a PaK is more far less sustainable under fire than a ZiS. A PaK can be molotov'd, grenaded, mortared, or even artillery'd by a ZiS! The weakness of the crew members and small size make it more difficult to keep alive on the front. A ZiS on the other hand, is threatened by rifle grenades and mortars, but has a larger squad that can be reinforced on the fly at the cost of another squad. This makes the ZiS overall far more sustainable even after multiple attacks.

Overall, unless the PaK is recrewed by Grenadiers*, I don't think the 30% faster RoF makes up for all of its' shortcomings. I personally think the ZiS is the better gun in this case.

* Only Grenadiers. Panzergrenadiers are the same as Grenadiers except for their weapons and abilities, which are lost when you crew a weapon. This would mean you pay more to reinforce the PG's AND PaK, but gain no benefit for using PG's over Grens. Osttruppen are much weaker than the original crewmembers, and would not last half as long. Pioneers would be totally identical to the crew they replaced.

Would it be TOO CRAZY moving the artillery barrage to vet1 (45muni - 4 barrages), reducing the crew to 5 and increase a bit ROF.

Personally I would have suggested giving the PaK crew armour bonuses instead, to make them more survivable.

The problem with field reinforcing is another issue entirely though, and I won't touch that here.

Just delete Pak40 and bring Pak38 from France, all problem solved.

And the 25 muni mines please.

Expanding on this, the ZiS crew is essentially a Conscript squad, they share the exact same health and armour. There's 6 men, they can be instantly reinforced from any nearby Cons squad, and are faced against Armour that's average at taking on Infantry, so Tank flanks are less threatening.

Now the PaK 40 crew, is not like a Grenadier squad, as they lack the 1.5 Armour that Grenadiers have, making them more like Conscripts. There's also only 4 of them, they also can not be reinforced from infantry squads, and are facing Armour that is above average at killing Infantry, so even a tank from the front is a threat (in one extreme but rare example, a T-34 decrewed a fresh PaK in one hit + 2 Grenadiers bunched up next to it).

The threats they face are also different, a PaK is more far less sustainable under fire than a ZiS. A PaK can be molotov'd, grenaded, mortared, or even artillery'd by a ZiS! The weakness of the crew members and small size make it more difficult to keep alive on the front. A ZiS on the other hand, is threatened by rifle grenades and mortars, but has a larger squad that can be reinforced on the fly at the cost of another squad. This makes the ZiS overall far more sustainable even after multiple attacks.

Overall, unless the PaK is recrewed by Grenadiers*, I don't think the 30% faster RoF makes up for all of its' shortcomings. I personally think the ZiS is the better gun in this case.

* Only Grenadiers. Panzergrenadiers are the same as Grenadiers except for their weapons and abilities, which are lost when you crew a weapon. This would mean you pay more to reinforce the PG's AND PaK, but gain no benefit for using PG's over Grens. Osttruppen are much weaker than the original crewmembers, and would not last half as long. Pioneers would be totally identical to the crew they replaced.

Ive had so many ZiS3-Guns flanked and they just run away from Vet 2-3 grens with G43's, which i kinda showcased alot vs. CaptainPrice which just made me laugh of how tanky they actually were compared to PaK's.

Expanding on this, the ZiS crew is essentially a Conscript squad, they share the exact same health and armour. There's 6 men, they can be instantly reinforced from any nearby Cons squad, and are faced against Armour that's average at taking on Infantry, so Tank flanks are less threatening.

Now the PaK 40 crew, is not like a Grenadier squad, as they lack the 1.5 Armour that Grenadiers have, making them more like Conscripts. There's also only 4 of them, they also can not be reinforced from infantry squads, and are facing Armour that is above average at killing Infantry, so even a tank from the front is a threat (in one extreme but rare example, a T-34 decrewed a fresh PaK in one hit + 2 Grenadiers bunched up next to it).

The threats they face are also different, a PaK is more far less sustainable under fire than a ZiS. A PaK can be molotov'd, grenaded, mortared, or even artillery'd by a ZiS! The weakness of the crew members and small size make it more difficult to keep alive on the front. A ZiS on the other hand, is threatened by rifle grenades and mortars, but has a larger squad that can be reinforced on the fly at the cost of another squad. This makes the ZiS overall far more sustainable even after multiple attacks.

Overall, unless the PaK is recrewed by Grenadiers*, I don't think the 30% faster RoF makes up for all of its' shortcomings. I personally think the ZiS is the better gun in this case.

* Only Grenadiers. Panzergrenadiers are the same as Grenadiers except for their weapons and abilities, which are lost when you crew a weapon. This would mean you pay more to reinforce the PG's AND PaK, but gain no benefit for using PG's over Grens. Osttruppen are much weaker than the original crewmembers, and would not last half as long. Pioneers would be totally identical to the crew they replaced.

This is really an excellent point about the pak crews. I find them totally unreliable against armor. I never had this problem in vCOH. They did their job and they did it well (as you would expect from a specialist), but they were not over powered. I would really like to see the pak be better at doing its job.

It should also be noted that paks can be deployed at about the same time as their very hard counter the Kats. If a Soviet goes T4, and the Ost player is unsure if they are going T3 or T4 they often build a pak, at which point they just sunk 320 mp into a great Soviet AT gun.

Expanding on this, the ZiS crew is essentially a Conscript squad, they share the exact same health and armour. There's 6 men, they can be instantly reinforced from any nearby Cons squad, and are faced against Armour that's average at taking on Infantry, so Tank flanks are less threatening.

Now the PaK 40 crew, is not like a Grenadier squad, as they lack the 1.5 Armour that Grenadiers have, making them more like Conscripts. There's also only 4 of them, they also can not be reinforced from infantry squads, and are facing Armour that is above average at killing Infantry, so even a tank from the front is a threat (in one extreme but rare example, a T-34 decrewed a fresh PaK in one hit + 2 Grenadiers bunched up next to it).

The threats they face are also different, a PaK is more far less sustainable under fire than a ZiS. A PaK can be molotov'd, grenaded, mortared, or even artillery'd by a ZiS! The weakness of the crew members and small size make it more difficult to keep alive on the front. A ZiS on the other hand, is threatened by rifle grenades and mortars, but has a larger squad that can be reinforced on the fly at the cost of another squad. This makes the ZiS overall far more sustainable even after multiple attacks.

Overall, unless the PaK is recrewed by Grenadiers*, I don't think the 30% faster RoF makes up for all of its' shortcomings. I personally think the ZiS is the better gun in this case.

* Only Grenadiers. Panzergrenadiers are the same as Grenadiers except for their weapons and abilities, which are lost when you crew a weapon. This would mean you pay more to reinforce the PG's AND PaK, but gain no benefit for using PG's over Grens. Osttruppen are much weaker than the original crewmembers, and would not last half as long. Pioneers would be totally identical to the crew they replaced.

Very good analysis. Personally I still prefer a PaK because of how much better it is against armor, and like Barton I find the barrage to be very underwhelming for 60 munitions. (Example - watch Barton barrage Hans' position in game 2 of the most recent SNF. Hans has like 4 squads in the area, loses 3 total models and walks back about 5 feet. Yeah, not worth the price). Ultimately I believe that ZiS/PaK comes down to personal preference for many reasons already stated in this thread.

However, I believe that when a squad re-crews a weapon, it keeps all properties of that squad? As in, if you recrewed a ZiS with Pgrens (not sure why you'd actually do this but... for the sake of discussion) I believe they'd keep their armor and guns. Unless I mis-heard PQ on the most recent SNF stream he was saying that re-crewing a HMG42 with Shocks will result in a 2.25 armor crew... with PPSH-41s... and the HMG. Yeah, have fun trying to kill that.

Anyone else have better clarification on this matter though? I'm not positive I heard PQ correctly, but I do think that re-crewing (not merging) keeps all properties of the squad that re-crews.

I re-crewed an MG42 with shocks yesterday and the supporting crew members retained their PPSHs.

Very good analysis. Personally I still prefer a PaK because of how much better it is against armor, and like Barton I find the barrage to be very underwhelming for 60 munitions. (Example - watch Barton barrage Hans' position in game 2 of the most recent SNF. Hans has like 4 squads in the area, loses 3 total models and walks back about 5 feet. Yeah, not worth the price). Ultimately I believe that ZiS/PaK comes down to personal preference for many reasons already stated in this thread.

However, I believe that when a squad re-crews a weapon, it keeps all properties of that squad? As in, if you recrewed a ZiS with Pgrens (not sure why you'd actually do this but... for the sake of discussion) I believe they'd keep their armor and guns. Unless I mis-heard PQ on the most recent SNF stream he was saying that re-crewing a HMG42 with Shocks will result in a 2.25 armor crew... with PPSH-41s... and the HMG. Yeah, have fun trying to kill that.

Anyone else have better clarification on this matter though? I'm not positive I heard PQ correctly, but I do think that re-crewing (not merging) keeps all properties of the squad that re-crews.

Yes, they retain all their stats. This includes reinforcement costs, so while the HMG squad will be tough to kill, it will also be very expensive for the soviet player to reinforce. Considering that support weapons can't move, using rifle grenades will cause a huge MP drain against a soviet player using shocks to re-crew support weapons.

Fun fact for soviets: If you have Penal troops, use these to re-crew weapons and use conscripts to merge with them instead of using regular reinforcing. It will cost less, and give you better weapons without weakening the squad with lower armored units.

Fun fact for soviets: If you have Penal troops, use these to re-crew weapons and use conscripts to merge with them instead of using regular reinforcing. It will cost less, and give you better weapons without weakening the squad with lower armored units.

This is a great tip, that I have used in the past to devastating effect. Penals with MG when you need it, conscript cost when you don't wanna pay for it.

Penal troops? Do you mean Shock Troops?

Either way, this doesn't really work:
Penal troops have only 1 armor (the same as Conscripts). Therefore, using them to recrew support weapons doesn't achieve anything and has the potential to waste lots of manpower when you do not use Merge to reinforce.

Conscripts added to other squads via Merge get the squad's weapons but keep their 1 armor. Therefore, using Merge to reinforce on a squad of Shock Troops means they get the PPSh SMGs but they keep their low armor, ultimatelly making the Shock squad squishier.
It is great for reinforcing Penals and Engineers to save manpower and keep them on the field, though.

@rofltehcat: They're saying that the resulting support weapon squad will have SVTs instead of the regular Mosins for the crew members, resulting in more DPS when they are engaging at close range or getting flanked.

@rofltehcat: They're saying that the resulting support weapon squad will have SVTs instead of the regular Mosins for the crew members, resulting in more DPS when they are engaging at close range or getting flanked.

Exactly.

Recrew the pak with penals, and then merge conscripts with penals.
That's the best way to steal support weapons.

Exactly.

Recrew the pak with penals, and then merge conscripts with penals.
That's the best way to steal support weapons.

So basically soviets should have a penal squad just to cap support weapons?
And PGrens to cap soviet support weapons?

Simply, never buy a pak40... Is no good... Better is stolen the Rus Art....

So basically soviets should have a penal squad just to cap support weapons?
And PGrens to cap soviet support weapons?

The advantage of using penals over conscripts to re-crew weapons is that, provided you use merge, you get better weapons at no extra cost. Using PGrens to capture weapons gives the crew better guns, but germans can't merge so it will be very expensive.

Fun fact: The best unit to steal soviet support weapons with is the Artillery Field Officer! Why? There is a bug where sometimes all reinforced members of a weapon crew are officers! Officers have roughly the same DPS as grenadiers, cost the same, but have a whopping 4 armor.

Barrage is not useless what the hell are you talkng about?! It is so effective at decrewing German weapons and stopping an infantry advance. I use it all the time, ZiS is my fav.