Profile of Maret

It already recieved the needed "rework" in the last patch with the penetration and accuracy changes.

Penetration nerf the most needed tweak for all light TD... With old su-76 i never had problems with accuracy and rotation and i don't say that change from 30 to 32 rotation make su-76 more mobile. It still the same very fragile thing as it was before.
Ostwind was tweaked and returned to OST roster, SU-76 was tweaked...and where it is? I saw many games where OST player build stugs to deal with armor (especially after panther lost), but i never saw even one game, where su player build su-76 after su85 lost. If you have T4 you better build su-85 to deal with armor, no one never will be build 2 su-76, even if their overall damage higher than 1 su-85. Much safer way is build Zis-3, not su-76.
Window of possibilities to su-76 very narrow. To deal with light vehicles you could use penals with PTRS and 1 zis. In every possible situation zis will be much more safer option that su-76 (with the same abilitties to selfspotting and barrage). You could build one, if you t-70 was very quick killed, but if you will do that, you will dealy your T4 and your overall position could become more fragile.
That's why i want to see su-76 rework. It need or stats changes or completely another role than current.

My dreamlist:

For SU:
1. Mark target
2. T34-85 or IS-2
3. Skill planes or AT arty from commisar
4. Tank crew repair
5. Any weapon upgrade for cons

For OST:
1. G-43
2. Relief infantry
3. Tiger
4. AT stuka
5. Arty officer

For USF:
1. Pershing
2. M1919
3. Combined arms ability
4. Priest
5. Sandbags and mines for riflemens

OKW:
1. Com Panther
2. HEAT rounds
3. Crit repair
4. Grenade assault
5. IR stg-44

If you don't believe me that's fine, but if you do even a little bit of research you will see that I'm not talking about this stuff without proof. I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove something to someone that doesn't want to hear anything else on the internet.

Yea, Panther don't get influence from sloped armor of t-34, 120 mm german mortar wasn't copy of soviet 120 mm (soviet one have origins from frenche system). G-43 not was by influence of svt. Shrecks not have bazooka design in origin.

Looks like you have little representation how real engeeners work. Every engeener bases his work on what was invested before him. You always study other mechanics and decisions. It like artist work, you see paintings from other artists and make your own. You could use similar composition, color, value decisions but your painting will be not copy (only if you don't make strict copy or master studies). The real good engeener could combine all good old decision in such way, that you get not only good quality product, but also product that will be very good in production too. Like Koshkin (IRC) said: "Even fool could make complicated thing". Try to make product that will have good quality and production possibilities. First who open power of powder were Chinese, but in which level of technical design they were in start of WW2? First who make first working tank were British and they lead way to others countires, but they level of tank design was too outdated in WW2. Firs who make strategic bomber were Russian Empire, but who has the best strategic bombers in WW2? There are more and more examples, that technical discoveries not suddenly pop-up from void.

In game we could see text "Hit in Rear Armor" it means game engine somehow know difference between front and rear. At least some event and checker in code exist.
I think idea with damage multiplier the most effective. But IMHO it should afect on all armor. I also include damage from deflected shells too.

Like:

Inflicted damage if armor not penetrated:
1) 45mm guns and lower deals 10% damage from initial damage of gun
2) all medium guns deal 25% damage from initial damage of gun
3) guns of all heavy armor deal 50% damage from initial damage of gun

Rear bonus:
The same as deflected damage. It makes flanking very rewarding.

Also one experimental idea about heavies (those who limited to 1): they couldn't be destroyed fully. Only abandoned with heavy crits and destroyed tracks. That makes pushes with heavy very risky, if you lost it in enemy territory and enemy have enough time to repair it. If you have more than 1 heavy, repair speed of all your units decreased on 50%.

I would really like to find or hear something about PIAT's exept their wiki page. I wonder, why they are spring-loaders? Even germans in final periods of war had AT rockets literally everywhere, but Britain is still using giant springs to take down tanks.

Special british way, like in tank production)) Only british did tanks like train tanks, when armor plates used rails to mount. Only comet was really succesfull tank (as medium tank) if looking on technology and used experience, but comet went in war too late.
PIAT decision also gives you possibility to shoot from buildings and trenches without danger to get wounded from blast wave like bazooka, faust of pshreck. Also overall length of weapon lesser than other variants (especially if compare with AT rifles). It very closer to mortar design, where length of tube don't affect on fire distance.
Two links abot british AT small weapon. On russian.
https://warspot.ru/238-s-rogatinoy-na-medvedya
https://warspot.ru/10296-britanskiy-variant-boys-i-piat