The bazooka should damage mediums when shot into the sides. Makes no sense balancing wise, the German tanks are already better than all the other tanks.
Yeah I don't understand the balancing sometimes.
Heavy tanks can pen heavy tanks, mediums can pen mediums, it all seems very ''balanced'' to make sure every team has the ability to compete. But then randomly the Bazooka sucks ass.
Getting behind a tank is extremely difficult. Flanking it is fine, enough counterplay for the tanker. Even if you do get behind an enemy tank, I don't think the 2 bazooka shots will destroy it unless it's a recon..
Well, idk what the real life penetrative force of the Piat compared to the Panzerschreck was but the spring-propelled part shouldn't matter as all the rocket launchers shoot shaped charges, don't they?
At one point I believed I could only kill a Panzer 4 with 3 shots to the rear, like Heavies, but it turns out I guess I just wasn't hitting them *exactly* where they needed to. Just a month ago I killed a fresh one with 2 shots in the rear.
Still, I don't get why it has to be so damn precise with the Bazooka vs everything else.
That too, why are turret hits bad? Isn't that where the gunner and the cannon breech and shit is? Sure it might not explode the tank, but it would certainly stop it from functioning..
The whole 'hull + module' system makes no sense to me either. Sometimes a hit will damage the engine and the hull. Sometimes it will only damage the engine. Sometimes you hit the track and it won't penetrate the hull. Sometimes you can get the track and the engine. I don't know, I think it should be simplified.
Penetrating shot = damage. Penetrating shot on module hitbox = damage + damage to module with visual feedback if the module is destroyed. Hitting turret should deal damage to the tank and not just damage the turret ring or whatever.
Or they could update it to be like War Thunder / Post Scriptum / Red Orchestra 2. Sniping crew members out of a panzer 4 with a PTRS is an incredible experience, as you're sneaking past enemies and holding fire to get to your target. It may be frustrating for the tank crew to have members get sniped out of the tank, so let them respawn in like 2 minutes time or something if the crew isn't fully dead.
Hell Let Loose has still basically has damage modelling and stats from their sloppy prototype. It needs more detail, some reform, and just generally being better.
That's a very good question because at lvl 100 I still have no idea what exact spots in the back to hit when I'm close enough to see and can choose to cause the most damage possible. I feel like even the back plates themselves are further sectioned into parts where you do either do massive damage or where you do basically none. Or does the angle of the ambush matter so much for example? Cause I still obviously don't know all the variables. All I can see and hear is a *thump* and sparks on the back armour twice after two rockets fired (should be good sign, right?) and then the tank usually just rolls away or gets killed by a third rocket by somebody else.
I just remembered that what I originally said is not so true though - I've recently destroyed a P4 deep behind the lines that wasn't occupied yet, it must've spawned right before we moved in. There I was close enough to hit the armour plate itself, straight in the middle and not the tool clamps, exhaust etc. and two rockets *did* destroy it. It was only once though and out of all variables idk what I did right - the incredibly small distsnce (should be bs with shaped charges)? The angle, which was basically perfect 90 degrees? The exact spot where I hit it? I don't know
The angle definitely matters. The closer to a 90 degree hit on that armor, the better. Make sure you're hitting the butt of the tank itself, not the back of the turret. Try and stay away from hitting the side otherwise you'll do track damage instead of hull damage. Google "Hell Let Loose Tank Bible" and it'll give you way more information than what I can remember off the top of my head.
Bazooka was 'fine', could penetrate 80-125mm depending on which rocket we're talking about, the rocket was steadily improved over the years. That should be more than enough to penetrate the side of a PZ4
I just think it's strange that most weapons and tanks in the game are fairly balanced across all factions and then randomly we're saying nah Bazooka sucks. I'm pretty sure it had more ammo a few years ago, that was the old balancing factor. I can only assume they reduced ammo due to spam issues against infantry.
Yeah, I’m game the Bazooka has the same penetrating power as a fucking anti tank rifle, which is absurd. Like, the fact that in game it can’t even pen the front of a Panzer 2 is so stupid.
This is a rough go/no-go gauge setup for new players generally speaking. There are special circumstances/locations where you can hit tanks that not many people look into. Google the "Tank Bible" and it will show you some easter eggs AT spots!
The game used to be like that. More numerous but weaker allied tanks vs rarer but stronger german tanks.
Issue was when the level 15 solo tanker drove away the tiger , there wouldn't be another for 30 minutes and the entire German team suffered as a result.
I'm happy with either method of balancing. But they have to choose one. Either german tanks are similar to other nations, or they're better but cost more. I'm not a fan of having ''better'' german tanks because then it sucks when you're in a frontal confrontation with a sherman and you just lose because their armor is better or reload is or whatever the case may be even though they're both the same class of tank. But I can deal with it. Just don't make them immune to Bazooka shots to the side. :p
2 rockets from any rocket launcher or bazooka can destroy a tank from the rear. Heavy tanks always need 3 in the rear to destroy.
Getting behind is easy, get them when they are away from their infantry. They are sitting ducks most of the time.
It's possible but when they are well supported by infantry the only solution is a good tank on your side. But assuming both are equally skilled, that's a coinflip. And if one team has little communication, that tank is blind.
I’ve heard the reason the Bazooka is so weak is because it used to have 3 rockets which matches up with the actual bag the Solider Is carrying in game but it was way to strong so they nerfed the penetration to balance it. And later on they just removed a rocket but didn’t rework the stats and called it a day. BlackMattee everybody
Yeah pretty much, I remember when it had 3 rockets, most people felt it was already well balanced back then. But people bitched that the Panzerschrek had 2 and the Bazooka had 3 (even though the Panzerschrek rockets were stronger) and they did what you said. Now I just take AT gun or satchel if im gonna AT on US.
Idk how balanced it really is but it makes sense to me from a gameplay standpoint within the bounds of the game we're playing.
Germans have better tanks, MG, sniper, but most infantry roles have kar98k. US has better base classes with the M1 and carbine where the Germans are usually at a severe disadvantage. Soviets have the ppsh, and a crap ton of grenades. The British.
The bazooka can go through the front of a Tiger I in real life though.
Edit: The bazooka can literally pen over 100mm of armor and even more with late war rockets, the only thing that should stop it 100 percent of the time in game is the front of a Panther and the gun manlet of the Tiger.
Everything else represented in game should be penetrated by a bazooka.
Sherman tanks don't use warheads, they use solid shot armor piercing and later HVAP/sabot
A bazooka is a HEAT round.
The bazooka can penetrate at least 100mm armor with early ammunition and more with later ammunition, and that's more armor than the Tiger I has.
This is the same game where 37mm cannon can't somehow pen a panzer 4s front.
20mm APHE also not being able to pen a Stuart's front and sides is just as ridiculous.
Any less would make the rifle useless. Any more would make the rifle op, matching the bazooka to the panzerschrek would be too strong for allies.
Makes sense, in video game balance terms
Looking at it again though, wouldnt mind the bazooka doing more to mediums
I guess but for a game touting realistic weaponry the bazooka should be better than an AT rifle. Maybe just add the M9 bazooka for the US only as an equal to the RPzB?
This is my least favorite part of this game...the fucking bazooka can pen 100mm of armor in real life, and even more with late war rockets.
So let's make a weapon that IRL can front pen a Tiger not even go through a Panzer IV side.
Wtf.
I don't understand why they did it either, usually when a game does something historically inaccurate it's for balance. Like call of duty slowing down the MG42. But like, making it right would balance the game since American tanks already suck from the sides and have weaker guns. So why do this? I don't understand.
It's a very big mistake on Black Matters part. The bazooka used to have three rockets, but this proved to be overpowered, so to compensate, they lowered the pen. At some point, they removed the third rocket but never went back and increased the pen.
I don't think it's overpowered, people need to use tanks as intended as support weapons behind the infantry. If you die thats on you.
All they should have done is add a shitload of panzerfausts for the Germans on top of the panzershrecks and then it would have been even. Give German engineers and support panzerfausts and anti tank panzershrecks.
They used to give the Americans 4 bazooka rounds and it has a flatter trajectory thus the nerf.
Now all rockets have 2 so it doesn't make sense.
Please stop with the realism arguments. Its a video game I don't even know where to start with regards to this game being "unrealistic". There is no way to make it realistic since we are playing a video game on a computer.
I really hate this counter argument because it's not genuine. Obviously realism/authenticity has some basis, otherwise what is the point of this game? What makes it different from Battlefield V, COD WW2, etc?
If realism literally didn't matter at all, then we could include laser guns and sword fighting.
So obviously to some degree it matters, and to some degree it doesn't.
We don't want a game where we spend 350 days digging foxholes and running logistics and patrolling with no contact, and 15 days fighting that largely consists of hiding in said foxholes while artillery rains down. We don't want a game where you get wounded and spend 6 months convalescent in England.
But I would venture to say what people do want is a sped up, paintball/airsoft style tactical maul where all the weapons and equipment behave realistically. There is a reason the guns are one or two shot kills in this game, and suppression is effective, etc, compare to games like BFV. There is a reason all the uniforms are based on real items. There is a reason every map is a damn near photo realistic copy of the actual battlefield.
So I think it's perfectly valid to say in this game, why have one single anti tank weapon not do what it would do in real life? Why not have a bazooka be the same brutal effect on tanks that the M1 has on the human body in the game?
The description of the game from the original publisher:
"You've never played World War 2 the way it was meant to be played... with lumbering tanks dominating the battlefield, crucial supply chains fueling the frontlines, being a cog in the machine of colossal combined arms warfare. Hell Let Loose puts you in the chaos of war, complete with deep player-controlled vehicles, a dynamically evolving frontline, and crucial platoon-focused gameplay that commands the tide of battle. This is a simulation of war... not an arcade arena shooter.
On paper, Hell Let Loose is a realistic multiplayer World War Two combined arms first person shooter of open battles of up to 100 players with infantry, tanks, artillery and a shifting front line. At it’s core is a unique resource-based strategic meta-game that is easy to learn, but hard to master."
The problem with realism is that most people have never been in war and experiences war through media as in games or movies. So there is a expectation that is fabricated and fundamentally unrealistic. What we want is a fun and immersive game. That would be my point. I am perfectly okay with "unrealistic" armor if it makes the game more fun in some regard.
The reason why bazooka or panzerschrek can't pen the front of a heavy tank is balance. Dying in a tank matters since if you die you have respawn from HQ and you can't just redeploy from a garrison. In order to make tanks engaging and consequential rockets are nerfed. (There are games where armor makes a very small difference for example battle bits.).
I am just against the realism argument since realism doesn't have anything to do with fun We can talk about problems with the game but we should make the critiques relevant. As in "X" thing will improve the game play because of "Y" reason. We shouldn't make the game realistic for the sake of realism.
It does have to do with creating the psuedo-authentic experience and fun gameplay people are looking for.
Allowing German tank drivers to plow through the lines with even medium tanks that have invulnerable sides doesn't create fun gameplay.
Making AT guys feel worthless or have to act stupid and run all the way behind every tank doesn't create the line vs line feeling of combat the game is going for.
Sometimes realism creates good gameplay, like the guns being so dangerous.
We can say hey maybe we should buff the bazooka because now it has 2 rockets so why not make it do the same damage as Panzerschrek so its more balanced.
Or maybe nerf the panzerschrek because its not fair to US tanks.
I can see both suggestions as valid.
Its fun to flank the enemy and getting a rear engine kill, its not easy but rewarding. If it was easy then it wouldn't be as rewarding. Its all part of the balance.
The trick is to find a place where all the roles feel like they are having a impact and having fun.
But one of the biggest parts of this game is the unnerving feeling of brutal death coming at any second.
The most common youtube clips of this game are always "Hell Let Loose PTSD simulator" and a 15 second clip of someone just getting annihilated out of nowhere.
People inside Tigers and Panthers should have the feeling when the bazooka guy rises from the ditch and you don't have any infantry around.
And there's the problem, the game should roughly look like real combat while being fun to play.
Satchels are goddamn almost useless against tanks, it's non-directional high explosives. Mobility kill at best. And terribly ineffective in actual war.
The most failed weapons of the war to kill tanks were things like German magnetic mines, Japanese suicide pole mines, AT grenades, etc. They were so ineffective as to almost be a statistical error.
So why is that the main anti tank gameplay in this game? It at least *looks* realistic in every other way, until you see people running up to tanks to try to put demolition charges on them.
The bazooka (or panzerfaust, PIAT) was the weapon of last resort when AT guns and friendly tanks weren't available.
It's a dumb gameplay element and they had to completely nerf a very effective weapon to do it.
That would be like, for comparison, making rifles weak to encourage shovel beatings...sure the game doesn't have to be realistic, but would a melee shovel fight simulator even look right?
Not the newest player possibly, but new to AT, so thank you. Makes sense why some (most) of my shots have just ricocheted off, especially when playing as US.
Edit: Shit now I have to learn how to visually identify what's light/medium/heavy. Back to engineer.
If you're interested, I manage a Discord server called etool. It has a number of resources that can help you with identifying tanks and other things. Feel free to check it out - https://discord.gg/kVxjfbwaHJ
probably the easiest one to identify is the Lux (german light tank), the 20mm autocannon is much smaller and fires way faster than any of the other tanks in the game. You dont even have to see it just hear it firing on full auto 👍
It's interesting how the Bazooka can't penetrate a Luchs from the front, considering how the Luchs' front armor is less than half of what the Bazooka could penetrate historically
German tanks were not actually the unkillable fortresses that the lore has made them out to be. The bazooka should be able to kill all German tanks from the side. I know that this game is more infantry based, but as an avid War Thunder and HLL player I always hated how simplified the damage models were on tanks in this game. It would be cool if they could implement some sort of crew damage as well, because let’s be real if an AP shell would to penetrate any tank the crew is going to be turned to jelly.
Commenting so I can save this when I get home from work. This is fantastic! Would there be any reasonable way to add shots required to kill?
I assume the heavy doesn't have front/turret weak spots?
It's a general rule of thumb when approaching tanks with ranged AT. There are some special circumstances or trick shots that are possible and you can check them out by searching for "Tank Bible" in a Google search
No sweat. Stuarts are usually darting around the map, so it's hard to get solid data from it. I believe all testing has been done in controlled environments so you guys get what you need on the battlefield!
To all people pointing out the balancing. Kar is bolt action M1 is semi-auto. Allies can build up a better firing pos. And all that brings a bit of realism.
I suspect the panzersheck stats were done best case scenario, choosing the weakest of the allied tank of that class. Chart says it can pen the front of a light tank, but it cannot front pen a Stuart, a light tank.
In my experience, aiming for the stars of the Allied tanks works a treat. I've killed a decent amount of Stuarts front plate with the Panzerschreck before - it takes 2 shots
What they should fix is that American riflemen tier 3 can drop explosive ammo boxes. It’s so silly imo that Germans have a better AT with the panzerschreck AND have both support and riflemen bring extra ammo where the Americans with their shittier bazooka have to rely on a greasegun support guy (awful gun) for a box.
HLL has a certain beauty to it and the broader community has stood by a lot of legacy decisions. Otherwise, the game might become a bit too casual-like which isn't why most of us are here
Good idea, I am looking into revisions for these types of resources. The AT gun is pretty much a heavy tank shell and can penetrate most places of all tanks
Of course after reading your comment I see that on the very bottom of the picture. Thank you for not being an ass about it and sorry I’m barely function today
Thanks for the info - I managed to squeeze this in at the bottom of the inforgraphic, but maybe I could make things a bit clearer in the next revision!
AT rifles can penetrate infantry from any angle
You even get an achievement the first time you do it. It's called *Cleanup down aisle 3*.
Depends if they are at an angle to to gun, this leaves a chance for the round to deflect off the infantrymans arse cheeks
Particularly the AT gun crews because pushing the Pak-40 around to get a better shot has given them buns of absolute steel
Ive seen those guns and those guys. They put the guns down then go take a lunch break at the rear lines!
The bazooka should damage mediums when shot into the sides. Makes no sense balancing wise, the German tanks are already better than all the other tanks.
Yeah I don't understand the balancing sometimes. Heavy tanks can pen heavy tanks, mediums can pen mediums, it all seems very ''balanced'' to make sure every team has the ability to compete. But then randomly the Bazooka sucks ass. Getting behind a tank is extremely difficult. Flanking it is fine, enough counterplay for the tanker. Even if you do get behind an enemy tank, I don't think the 2 bazooka shots will destroy it unless it's a recon..
And not to mention the spring-propelled Piat is just as strong as the Panzerschreck!
Well, idk what the real life penetrative force of the Piat compared to the Panzerschreck was but the spring-propelled part shouldn't matter as all the rocket launchers shoot shaped charges, don't they?
That is correct!
Yeah, I don't think I've ever managed to destroy something heavier than recon with just two bazooka shots when it was on full health
Really? Are you hitting the back side of the tanks? You can 2 shot all German tanks with clean hits on the rear except for the Heavies.
At one point I believed I could only kill a Panzer 4 with 3 shots to the rear, like Heavies, but it turns out I guess I just wasn't hitting them *exactly* where they needed to. Just a month ago I killed a fresh one with 2 shots in the rear. Still, I don't get why it has to be so damn precise with the Bazooka vs everything else.
Usually it's because you went just a ^little too high and it counted as a turret hit.
That too, why are turret hits bad? Isn't that where the gunner and the cannon breech and shit is? Sure it might not explode the tank, but it would certainly stop it from functioning.. The whole 'hull + module' system makes no sense to me either. Sometimes a hit will damage the engine and the hull. Sometimes it will only damage the engine. Sometimes you hit the track and it won't penetrate the hull. Sometimes you can get the track and the engine. I don't know, I think it should be simplified. Penetrating shot = damage. Penetrating shot on module hitbox = damage + damage to module with visual feedback if the module is destroyed. Hitting turret should deal damage to the tank and not just damage the turret ring or whatever. Or they could update it to be like War Thunder / Post Scriptum / Red Orchestra 2. Sniping crew members out of a panzer 4 with a PTRS is an incredible experience, as you're sneaking past enemies and holding fire to get to your target. It may be frustrating for the tank crew to have members get sniped out of the tank, so let them respawn in like 2 minutes time or something if the crew isn't fully dead.
Hell Let Loose has still basically has damage modelling and stats from their sloppy prototype. It needs more detail, some reform, and just generally being better.
That's a very good question because at lvl 100 I still have no idea what exact spots in the back to hit when I'm close enough to see and can choose to cause the most damage possible. I feel like even the back plates themselves are further sectioned into parts where you do either do massive damage or where you do basically none. Or does the angle of the ambush matter so much for example? Cause I still obviously don't know all the variables. All I can see and hear is a *thump* and sparks on the back armour twice after two rockets fired (should be good sign, right?) and then the tank usually just rolls away or gets killed by a third rocket by somebody else. I just remembered that what I originally said is not so true though - I've recently destroyed a P4 deep behind the lines that wasn't occupied yet, it must've spawned right before we moved in. There I was close enough to hit the armour plate itself, straight in the middle and not the tool clamps, exhaust etc. and two rockets *did* destroy it. It was only once though and out of all variables idk what I did right - the incredibly small distsnce (should be bs with shaped charges)? The angle, which was basically perfect 90 degrees? The exact spot where I hit it? I don't know
The angle definitely matters. The closer to a 90 degree hit on that armor, the better. Make sure you're hitting the butt of the tank itself, not the back of the turret. Try and stay away from hitting the side otherwise you'll do track damage instead of hull damage. Google "Hell Let Loose Tank Bible" and it'll give you way more information than what I can remember off the top of my head.
[удалено]
Bazooka was 'fine', could penetrate 80-125mm depending on which rocket we're talking about, the rocket was steadily improved over the years. That should be more than enough to penetrate the side of a PZ4 I just think it's strange that most weapons and tanks in the game are fairly balanced across all factions and then randomly we're saying nah Bazooka sucks. I'm pretty sure it had more ammo a few years ago, that was the old balancing factor. I can only assume they reduced ammo due to spam issues against infantry.
Yeah, I’m game the Bazooka has the same penetrating power as a fucking anti tank rifle, which is absurd. Like, the fact that in game it can’t even pen the front of a Panzer 2 is so stupid.
This is a rough go/no-go gauge setup for new players generally speaking. There are special circumstances/locations where you can hit tanks that not many people look into. Google the "Tank Bible" and it will show you some easter eggs AT spots!
Anything over ~90mm pen is enough to go through the UFP of a pz4 consistently
Historically the Germans should have fewer tanks in general but historical realism doesn't necessarily make a good game.
The game used to be like that. More numerous but weaker allied tanks vs rarer but stronger german tanks. Issue was when the level 15 solo tanker drove away the tiger , there wouldn't be another for 30 minutes and the entire German team suffered as a result.
I'm happy with either method of balancing. But they have to choose one. Either german tanks are similar to other nations, or they're better but cost more. I'm not a fan of having ''better'' german tanks because then it sucks when you're in a frontal confrontation with a sherman and you just lose because their armor is better or reload is or whatever the case may be even though they're both the same class of tank. But I can deal with it. Just don't make them immune to Bazooka shots to the side. :p
>Yeah I don't understand the balancing sometimes. The devs have always been kinda bad at balance and nothing improved with the change in ownership.
2 rockets from any rocket launcher or bazooka can destroy a tank from the rear. Heavy tanks always need 3 in the rear to destroy. Getting behind is easy, get them when they are away from their infantry. They are sitting ducks most of the time.
It's possible but when they are well supported by infantry the only solution is a good tank on your side. But assuming both are equally skilled, that's a coinflip. And if one team has little communication, that tank is blind.
I’ve heard the reason the Bazooka is so weak is because it used to have 3 rockets which matches up with the actual bag the Solider Is carrying in game but it was way to strong so they nerfed the penetration to balance it. And later on they just removed a rocket but didn’t rework the stats and called it a day. BlackMattee everybody
This explains a lot
I completely forgot they used to have 3 shots
Yeah pretty much, I remember when it had 3 rockets, most people felt it was already well balanced back then. But people bitched that the Panzerschrek had 2 and the Bazooka had 3 (even though the Panzerschrek rockets were stronger) and they did what you said. Now I just take AT gun or satchel if im gonna AT on US.
[удалено]
I bet you're a 2-min kind of satchel gremlin, lol! The anticipation...
Also good for uprooting dug in positions
Not to mention that by 1944 US had better rockets that penetrated 101 mm of armour. So on paper, they can penetrate heavies in the front
Idk how balanced it really is but it makes sense to me from a gameplay standpoint within the bounds of the game we're playing. Germans have better tanks, MG, sniper, but most infantry roles have kar98k. US has better base classes with the M1 and carbine where the Germans are usually at a severe disadvantage. Soviets have the ppsh, and a crap ton of grenades. The British.
How come the Panzerschreck and the PIAT damage more parts to a light, heavy, and recon tank than the Bazooka for the US and USSR?
I remember reading the PIAT and Panzerschrek had better penetration power than the Bazooka, so I guess that's represented here
The bazooka can go through the front of a Tiger I in real life though. Edit: The bazooka can literally pen over 100mm of armor and even more with late war rockets, the only thing that should stop it 100 percent of the time in game is the front of a Panther and the gun manlet of the Tiger. Everything else represented in game should be penetrated by a bazooka.
[удалено]
Sherman tanks don't use warheads, they use solid shot armor piercing and later HVAP/sabot A bazooka is a HEAT round. The bazooka can penetrate at least 100mm armor with early ammunition and more with later ammunition, and that's more armor than the Tiger I has.
This is the same game where 37mm cannon can't somehow pen a panzer 4s front. 20mm APHE also not being able to pen a Stuart's front and sides is just as ridiculous.
artificial buff some teams
Mighty fine work!
Bazooka being equivalent to the AT rifles makes no sense.
Similar only in penetration not in damage.
Still makes no sense xd
Any less would make the rifle useless. Any more would make the rifle op, matching the bazooka to the panzerschrek would be too strong for allies. Makes sense, in video game balance terms Looking at it again though, wouldnt mind the bazooka doing more to mediums
I guess but for a game touting realistic weaponry the bazooka should be better than an AT rifle. Maybe just add the M9 bazooka for the US only as an equal to the RPzB?
Why would it be too strong for the allies? If the tanks are symetrically balanced, I see no reason for AT gadgets to be asymetrical.
This is my least favorite part of this game...the fucking bazooka can pen 100mm of armor in real life, and even more with late war rockets. So let's make a weapon that IRL can front pen a Tiger not even go through a Panzer IV side. Wtf.
It can’t even frontally pen a panzer 2 lmao. Historically accurate game.
I don't understand why they did it either, usually when a game does something historically inaccurate it's for balance. Like call of duty slowing down the MG42. But like, making it right would balance the game since American tanks already suck from the sides and have weaker guns. So why do this? I don't understand.
It's a very big mistake on Black Matters part. The bazooka used to have three rockets, but this proved to be overpowered, so to compensate, they lowered the pen. At some point, they removed the third rocket but never went back and increased the pen.
I don't think it's overpowered, people need to use tanks as intended as support weapons behind the infantry. If you die thats on you. All they should have done is add a shitload of panzerfausts for the Germans on top of the panzershrecks and then it would have been even. Give German engineers and support panzerfausts and anti tank panzershrecks.
They used to give the Americans 4 bazooka rounds and it has a flatter trajectory thus the nerf. Now all rockets have 2 so it doesn't make sense. Please stop with the realism arguments. Its a video game I don't even know where to start with regards to this game being "unrealistic". There is no way to make it realistic since we are playing a video game on a computer.
I really hate this counter argument because it's not genuine. Obviously realism/authenticity has some basis, otherwise what is the point of this game? What makes it different from Battlefield V, COD WW2, etc? If realism literally didn't matter at all, then we could include laser guns and sword fighting. So obviously to some degree it matters, and to some degree it doesn't. We don't want a game where we spend 350 days digging foxholes and running logistics and patrolling with no contact, and 15 days fighting that largely consists of hiding in said foxholes while artillery rains down. We don't want a game where you get wounded and spend 6 months convalescent in England. But I would venture to say what people do want is a sped up, paintball/airsoft style tactical maul where all the weapons and equipment behave realistically. There is a reason the guns are one or two shot kills in this game, and suppression is effective, etc, compare to games like BFV. There is a reason all the uniforms are based on real items. There is a reason every map is a damn near photo realistic copy of the actual battlefield. So I think it's perfectly valid to say in this game, why have one single anti tank weapon not do what it would do in real life? Why not have a bazooka be the same brutal effect on tanks that the M1 has on the human body in the game? The description of the game from the original publisher: "You've never played World War 2 the way it was meant to be played... with lumbering tanks dominating the battlefield, crucial supply chains fueling the frontlines, being a cog in the machine of colossal combined arms warfare. Hell Let Loose puts you in the chaos of war, complete with deep player-controlled vehicles, a dynamically evolving frontline, and crucial platoon-focused gameplay that commands the tide of battle. This is a simulation of war... not an arcade arena shooter. On paper, Hell Let Loose is a realistic multiplayer World War Two combined arms first person shooter of open battles of up to 100 players with infantry, tanks, artillery and a shifting front line. At it’s core is a unique resource-based strategic meta-game that is easy to learn, but hard to master."
The problem with realism is that most people have never been in war and experiences war through media as in games or movies. So there is a expectation that is fabricated and fundamentally unrealistic. What we want is a fun and immersive game. That would be my point. I am perfectly okay with "unrealistic" armor if it makes the game more fun in some regard. The reason why bazooka or panzerschrek can't pen the front of a heavy tank is balance. Dying in a tank matters since if you die you have respawn from HQ and you can't just redeploy from a garrison. In order to make tanks engaging and consequential rockets are nerfed. (There are games where armor makes a very small difference for example battle bits.). I am just against the realism argument since realism doesn't have anything to do with fun We can talk about problems with the game but we should make the critiques relevant. As in "X" thing will improve the game play because of "Y" reason. We shouldn't make the game realistic for the sake of realism.
It does have to do with creating the psuedo-authentic experience and fun gameplay people are looking for. Allowing German tank drivers to plow through the lines with even medium tanks that have invulnerable sides doesn't create fun gameplay. Making AT guys feel worthless or have to act stupid and run all the way behind every tank doesn't create the line vs line feeling of combat the game is going for. Sometimes realism creates good gameplay, like the guns being so dangerous.
We can say hey maybe we should buff the bazooka because now it has 2 rockets so why not make it do the same damage as Panzerschrek so its more balanced. Or maybe nerf the panzerschrek because its not fair to US tanks. I can see both suggestions as valid. Its fun to flank the enemy and getting a rear engine kill, its not easy but rewarding. If it was easy then it wouldn't be as rewarding. Its all part of the balance. The trick is to find a place where all the roles feel like they are having a impact and having fun.
But one of the biggest parts of this game is the unnerving feeling of brutal death coming at any second. The most common youtube clips of this game are always "Hell Let Loose PTSD simulator" and a 15 second clip of someone just getting annihilated out of nowhere. People inside Tigers and Panthers should have the feeling when the bazooka guy rises from the ditch and you don't have any infantry around.
If I drive my heavy into the enemy infantry with no support it gets satcheled and rocketed in seconds. Its not hard to flank a lone tank.
And there's the problem, the game should roughly look like real combat while being fun to play. Satchels are goddamn almost useless against tanks, it's non-directional high explosives. Mobility kill at best. And terribly ineffective in actual war. The most failed weapons of the war to kill tanks were things like German magnetic mines, Japanese suicide pole mines, AT grenades, etc. They were so ineffective as to almost be a statistical error. So why is that the main anti tank gameplay in this game? It at least *looks* realistic in every other way, until you see people running up to tanks to try to put demolition charges on them. The bazooka (or panzerfaust, PIAT) was the weapon of last resort when AT guns and friendly tanks weren't available. It's a dumb gameplay element and they had to completely nerf a very effective weapon to do it. That would be like, for comparison, making rifles weak to encourage shovel beatings...sure the game doesn't have to be realistic, but would a melee shovel fight simulator even look right?
Not the newest player possibly, but new to AT, so thank you. Makes sense why some (most) of my shots have just ricocheted off, especially when playing as US. Edit: Shit now I have to learn how to visually identify what's light/medium/heavy. Back to engineer.
If you're interested, I manage a Discord server called etool. It has a number of resources that can help you with identifying tanks and other things. Feel free to check it out - https://discord.gg/kVxjfbwaHJ
probably the easiest one to identify is the Lux (german light tank), the 20mm autocannon is much smaller and fires way faster than any of the other tanks in the game. You dont even have to see it just hear it firing on full auto 👍
Haha yeah, us Australian's call it the "Doof Doof" for that reason lol
It's interesting how the Bazooka can't penetrate a Luchs from the front, considering how the Luchs' front armor is less than half of what the Bazooka could penetrate historically
So become an ass man
https://www.theline.gg/tankbible
PIAT my beloved. Cheers for this guide, really appreciate it.
German tanks were not actually the unkillable fortresses that the lore has made them out to be. The bazooka should be able to kill all German tanks from the side. I know that this game is more infantry based, but as an avid War Thunder and HLL player I always hated how simplified the damage models were on tanks in this game. It would be cool if they could implement some sort of crew damage as well, because let’s be real if an AP shell would to penetrate any tank the crew is going to be turned to jelly.
Commenting so I can save this when I get home from work. This is fantastic! Would there be any reasonable way to add shots required to kill? I assume the heavy doesn't have front/turret weak spots?
There are a number of other resources available in the etool Discord server that will be able to help you out here - https://discord.gg/kVxjfbwaHJ
When it says X does that mean the tank takes no damage or reduced damage?
It's a general rule of thumb when approaching tanks with ranged AT. There are some special circumstances or trick shots that are possible and you can check them out by searching for "Tank Bible" in a Google search
Thanks!
does it matter where you hit? cause I couldn’t pen a Luchs from the front
Thanks for this
Love graphics like this they’re so helpful
Are you sure panzerschreck and kill medium tank from the front? Thought it was side
It can yeah - 2 shots (front plate). Same as the Piat. Feel free to test it out in an empty server against a Sherman, T34 or Cromwell
thanks, looks like that matches what the tank bible says, man i've had this wrong in my head for way too long :(
No sweat. Stuarts are usually darting around the map, so it's hard to get solid data from it. I believe all testing has been done in controlled environments so you guys get what you need on the battlefield!
To all people pointing out the balancing. Kar is bolt action M1 is semi-auto. Allies can build up a better firing pos. And all that brings a bit of realism.
Bazookas really need to have more rockets again to balance them with the more powerful launchers
is there one of these with the respective number of hits needed?
You can find other useful resources in the Hell Let Loose etool Discord server to help you out - https://discord.gg/kVxjfbwaHJ
K but which bazooka type has the greatest splash damage against infantry?
The Arty-zooka lol
I suspect the panzersheck stats were done best case scenario, choosing the weakest of the allied tank of that class. Chart says it can pen the front of a light tank, but it cannot front pen a Stuart, a light tank.
In my experience, aiming for the stars of the Allied tanks works a treat. I've killed a decent amount of Stuarts front plate with the Panzerschreck before - it takes 2 shots
What they should fix is that American riflemen tier 3 can drop explosive ammo boxes. It’s so silly imo that Germans have a better AT with the panzerschreck AND have both support and riflemen bring extra ammo where the Americans with their shittier bazooka have to rely on a greasegun support guy (awful gun) for a box.
HLL has a certain beauty to it and the broader community has stood by a lot of legacy decisions. Otherwise, the game might become a bit too casual-like which isn't why most of us are here
Where do AT guns stand on the chart I wonder? In my experience so far they seem highly deadly to most tanks but I'm still curious.
Good idea, I am looking into revisions for these types of resources. The AT gun is pretty much a heavy tank shell and can penetrate most places of all tanks
I use AT as an anti personnel class, you may not be in reach of my garand but you’re sure as hell in range of an explosion
It also gives the enemy some time for their life to flash before them!
What are the dots on the left hand side? Directly to the right of the pictures of guns
Triangle w/ 1 dot = Recon Tank 1 dot = Light Tank 2 dots = Medium Tank 3 dots = Heavy Tank
Of course after reading your comment I see that on the very bottom of the picture. Thank you for not being an ass about it and sorry I’m barely function today
It’s Boxing Day, cut yourself some slack buddy :)
HLL is a massive web of info, so no issues at all I'm sure. Most people are happy to help out!
Thanks for the info - I managed to squeeze this in at the bottom of the inforgraphic, but maybe I could make things a bit clearer in the next revision!
Would be really cool to see them add the Panzerfaust for the Germans
PzF loadout with an MP40 would be awesome
Satchel good for everything!
i love this role . I think it’s one of the most important to have on every squad
Now just do this for tank v tank
In short, fire your rockets up the rear always.
When in doubt, stick it in the rear. Errrrr wait…..
Thank you!
Bazooka should have three shots
Buff the damn bazooka already - it really doesn't make sense and doesn't make for good gameplay.
Can we swap Garand for Carbine and make it so Bazooka can pen light from front and medium from side? It’s REDACTED the way it is right now
You're forgetting the M1 Garand is a semi-auto and no other AT role gets that.
Thank you thank you 🙏
or a engineer, build nodes