[ALL] Pak 38 vs 6pdr/57mm ATG

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[frsd]

I somehow feel that the balance and pricing of these units is incorrect.
First off as everyone knows the Pak 38 deals less damage than its allied counterparts but also while doing so it costs 10 MU more. Some might argue thats the price for cloak but the 6pdr also has the ability to cloak and even does so automatically. Also it will lose in any straight fight 1v1.

Taken into account that the amount of handheld AT the allies have that easily destroys paks compared to the axis handheld AT this unit in comparison is in my opinion overpriced.

[NightRain]

Unlike British counterpart the ATG itself does not give that Heavy cover for its crew unlike PAK and 57mm. Add in that PAK can buy the medkits to heal the crew, I aint sure if it heals the gun itself

[LeoPhone]

6 pdr cloak is crap compared to pak. it only works in cover, usually some guys dont get in the cover so hes still not cloaked and the gun doesnt give green cover. also no ambush bonus or AP rounds.

dps of pak does seems to be quite a bit lower than 57 but pak doesnt have to fight big tanks with good armor so most of the bullets penetrate while the 57 doesnt.

[Mysthalin]

The damage per shot for the pak38 may indeed be lower than that of the 57mm, but it also has a far superior rate of fire, which - even without cloak makes sure the pak38 has a DPS of just 1 percent less than an AP-rounding 57mm gun.
Now, naturally - going by sheer DPS comparisons is pointless in this situations as they are only absolutely correct in a situation of the exchange of fire lasting ad-infinitum. But what the DPS does rightfully so indicate is that the pak38 is far more likely to get 2/3 shots off than the 57mm is.

Also take into account the fact the pak38 has a faster gun traverse, meaning it can track its targets more efficiently, and thusly less miss-fires occur, and it is less prone to being circle-strafed(at least up to a certain point).
Then there's the ambush, which not only hides the pak anywhere(even on roads), but adds a hefty 1.25 acc 1.25 dmg and quite a bit of penetration to the pak's first shot in the engagement.

Overall, I'd say the pak38 is well worth it's cost at 120 munitions.

[sgMisten]

What Mysthalin said.

Too many people look at the pure damage numbers and conclude otherwise. Pak38 is at least equal, if not the better AT gun.

A vehicle moving too far in front will get hit by 2 shots from a Pak; a 57mm's longer reload only ensures 1 round is fired; the 2nd round can be avoided with fast enough reflexes.

The Pak38 is an excellent AT weapon; you may think otherwise due to arty fire that targets the Pak, and to light vehicle rushes which swarm or evade Pak fire.

[Tymathee]

^ right and the reason that happens is because paks are so dangerous. They're quite annoying and even an uncloaked pak can give a liittle havoc on infantry. i can't tell u how many times i've had paks destroy hmgs and mortar weapons because of their faster rof you're going to get more hits.

[NightRain]

The one and only reason why PAK gets cloak:



Might as well add that PAK sometimes have hard time vs churchill and pershing armor and even the regular M4 Sherman armor...usually pounces from 'em resulting sherman killin' it

[AmPM]

On a side note, why doesn't Rocket Artillery destroy a Triage that it lands directly on, yet all my shit gets insta raped by Allied offmaps?

[Tymathee]

The one and only reason why PAK gets cloak:

Might as well add that PAK sometimes have hard time vs churchill and pershing armor and even the regular M4 Sherman armor...usually pounces from 'em resulting sherman killin' it

Yeah and how many churchill and pershings do axis commanders usually face? they're supposed to have issues and the pak has a higher penetration rate vs shermans than 57s do vs stugs and p4s. also paks have that first shot that'll get thru a pershing nearly every time easy, 57s dont get that luxury as we have to pay for ap rounds and if we lose the crew, we lose the ap rounds while axis can recrew paks and get back their cloak.

also we see more heavy vehicles than the axis do, almost every company has a panther and 57s sometimes have issues against them

i've also seen more tigers lately than I ever have. playing 3v3's where each player has 2 tigers is one of the hardest things to play against and 57s still bounce them.

[NightRain]

Who can possibly have issues fighting vs Tiger companies? They are the most predictable AND the most easiest companies to defeat. Sticky the tiger it has to repair or it crawls and M10 it, or one firefly. PIAT it, Button it, whatsoever. All accessable by allied players. Heck you can knite the Tiger with M10s and Hellcats due to 45 range and Tiger having 40. Anyone who has problems vs Tigers...tsh.

Before the nerf Axis had to face off vs 4 Churchill Crocs with a CCT Wind I'm pointing youu. Now people could just spam up regular Churchills that are crappier but cheaper and you get a lot of 'em, 6 was it?

Panther's never a big deal as it is mainly a anti tank platform that sucks vs infantry more or less its accuracy sucks at ATG crews as well due to the heavy cover. It isn't a reliable platform vs infantry even if it can snipe them everynow and then. The only reason there are a lot of panthers is that there isn't any other reliable platform that can stand up vs Allied mediums at the moment. P4s get pwnd by Upgun Shermans most of the time. Plus at max you can have 3 panthers and that costs you quite a lot of munitions if you go GE, HEAT and Panzer Aces, it was close to 1k munitions to get all the upgrades to make panthers useful. Its not a cheap tank and killing it kills quite a lot of AT from Wehrmacht. 2 ATGs keeps that thing away all the time.

[Illegal_Carrot]

I find the ATGs to be fairly balanced in most regards; the PaK's Cloak makes it a scary thing and gives it a necessary punch on occasion, but the sheer stopping power of the 57mm should never be underestimated. That 150 damage will scare off any Axis tank short of a KT.

[Tymathee]

lol nightrain, you act like it wont have tons of AI support to prevent you from sticking it. a proper tiger company knows howto support his tiger and it usually takes more than one player to take the sucker down.

it's also no fun when tigers can pop a full health at gun and decrew it, the 2x lmgs really make tiger companies hard to beat now and if they have storm support, you dont know whats guarding it, so gl.

[NightRain]

That's theorycrafting or within the borderlines. Every game a tiger gets stickied it is a fact. And support? 16 pop leaves pretty little to offer for support. 2x ATGs only 10 pop and you can still have a infantry squad, lets say BAR squad with a sticky bomb. If that doesn't hold a Tiger company at bay nothing will. Tiger most often has little to nothing defending it.

If it is a PE player defending a Tiger it is often 50mms and Marders. if Wehrmacht expect MGs. Tiger companies are so predictable that it isn't even fun. Hell a Tiger company with volkfaust spam would be more dangerous than any storm/gren groups.

Plus Tiger's AT cabilities are medicore. Deals dmg a lot per shot but still has 40 Range. A properly used M10 and that big kitty is a crying kitty. Everyone who has used a tiger can agree that it isn't good of a tank. It has no fear factor. It is just "O hi look, a tiger!" The games I've seen Tiger's do 'well' are rare in numbers. The latest replay of Tiger FTW showed how shit Tigers were in fact. Only one game was proper in use of Tigers. I think it was Smokaz using it I ain't sure but it got 99 inf kills and it was fighting 3x Ranger spam companies...(which explains why Tigga succeeded in the first place, smgs and zooks leaves no room for atg spam). But that is all I can say. Sure they are easy to vet up through stomps but what unit isn't?

[Tymathee]

lmao theorycrafting? no these are games i've played. Lol at capabilities mediocre? they do a hella lot of damage wow i'm not even going to argue with you you've shown just now you dont have any idea what you're talking about

[smurfORnot]

I think it was Smokaz using it I ain't sure but it got 99 inf kills and it was fighting 3x Ranger spam companies...

noup,it wasnt smokaz,but we played against smokaz that game ,it was Briedis...

[NightRain]

noup,it wasnt smokaz,but we played against smokaz that game ,it was Briedis...

Explains more, Smokaz fails with heavy armor

[Killer344]

That's theorycrafting or within the borderlines. Every game a tiger gets stickied it is a fact.

100% hypocritical ftw?

lol.

[Smokaz]

Then again, He wasn't fighting tanks with it, he was attacking infantry. The tiger is not bad at shooting infantry. Big news?

[Tymathee]

tigers can one hit rangers squads.

[EliteGren]

So can a StuG, and yes I've seen it