Our ass got kicked.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Hmm, so... Me and Hawks apparently having some troubles Felt so helpless as Blitz doc, again. RA doc was surprisingly able to nuke our heads with non-stop arty spam as well as aggressive defense with 17pdr and other emplacements. And then comes the Firefly, and Staghound rush.

Me as Blitz doc with Hawks as Luft doc (together on Discord)
VS
Wurf as AB doc and Lehr as RA doc.

Most hilarious moments;
- Jump exactly at 22:40 where you can see the 57mm AT gun actually penetrating the frontal armor of my IVJ from distance.. and then shortly afterwards, even the 37mm AT gun penetrated my tank!!
- Now jump at 31:00 where you can see the Stuka patrol targeting the trench first and not the 17pdr emplacements, also.. 3 bombs were required just to kill 1 trench, and inf inside took no damage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMCBtJa1u5I

Video Thumbnail.

Enjoy... Or not.

[JimQwilleran]

- Jump exactly at 22:40 where you can see the 57mm AT gun actually penetrating the frontal armor of my IVJ from distance.. and then shortly afterwards, even the 37mm AT gun penetrated my tank!!

That's why there comes that recent idea to buff 57mm gun...

Moreover, I consider that axis should be buffed.

[Krieger Blitzer]

That's why there comes that recent idea to buff 57mm gun...

Pretty much...

[Warhawks97]

That's why there comes that recent idea to buff 57mm gun...

I had a game. Must have been in 2014. I had two tank IV´s and played vs terence, sukin and so on playing on la fiere. We actually won, there was nothing between us (or my tanks) and their base. The only AT they had was one 6 pdr from Terence. No AP and no ambush... nothing. That thing penetrated my H and J four times in a row killing both. Game changed. And at that time the 57 mm was even worse (like 20% or less chance to pen these tanks). But it happened four times in a row.

I probably still have the replay. If you want to have it. Just would need to figure which one it was and what version.

But because there is one scenario where things went fataly wrong (remember the youtube vid where the 76 sherman oneshoted the KT just like that, out of nothing?) doesnt mean that its total performence is great or something.


I could show you many scenarios where i just roled over these paks.

Last games i had also dozens of sdkfz 234 (mine and others) that survived 3 hits of 37 and 57 mm AT guns.

[Danikas]

57 mm at has a chance to pen tiger from camo, I had one game when it penned and took half hp from tiger.

[Warhawks97]

Just as 76 sherman can oneshot a KT just like that. But does it says anything about its performence in general?

There is a "chance" even though those can be as low as 1% or lower. And there is a reliable chance. And thats the chance required when you field a unit to counter a specific enemie unit.

I would never field a 76 sherman to counter a KT just because there is a chance (I barely do even against defeating tank IV´s)

And thats what is with the 57 mm. There is a chance, but none i would trust. You would probably also not field 57 mm when enemie has already got Tank IV´s. I would even say its the other way arround. When i see any Tank IV J/H the last thing i would start spending my res for is a 57 mm AT gun.

I am not jumping out of my second or third floor of the house just because there is a chance that i can land without breaking any bones.
Its about probability and reliability.

But thats also the problem. The 57 mm is just a low/medium counter to any enemie unit. You have a chance to beat all, but there is no unit where you would say: "I get a 57 mm to stop it". When you get a 50 mm you have a clear expectation what to stop reliable. Pretty much any armor and vehicles except churchills and Jumbos.

When you get a 57 mm you have no real idea what to actually stop at the end (what couldnt be stopped by 37 mm already or better by 76 mm).


The chance for a 50 mm to pen a Jumbo or churchill is 12,47% at point blank. 7,5% at max range and 12,47% with ambush and AP (Max range)
57 mm vs Tiger is point blank 10%, 7% max range, 11,375% with ambush an AP. (max range)

Would you build the weapon when you see such units coming just because there is this chance to penetrated and beat them? Nontheless i did kill Jumbos already just with 50 mm AT gun standard shells.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I would dare to say that the chance to penetrate Stug IV or Stug 3 with US 57mm AT guns and 6pdr are actually reliable enough, at least according to what I can see in the game. Keeping in mind that there is also the option to use the 57mm AT half-track, the long range allows to keep harassing those tanks from safe distance until you penetrate them, which is often not difficult to achieve at all.
And the speed of the half-track also makes it easy to escape anytime when necessary. And actually, I even kill 50mm Paks using this 57mm AT half-track... For some reason it has huge accuracy against Paks. Moreover; I would say that I have seen 50mm Paks bouncing off non-sandbagged Shermans for a couple of times. And with sandbags, it requires more hits to finally KILL the Sherman due to higher HP. Axis 50mm Pak isn't much better to be honest, specifically the PE one.. since it doesn't even have the rocket ability... And the accuracy is often too poor. I have seen it missing more than 6 shots in the row!

[Warhawks97]

The 57 mm is good enough vs stugs. No problems here actually.

The 6 pdr or 57 mm has less accuracy vs tank IV as vs stugs with is also funny.
The accuracy of the 50 mm vs shermans is the same as 57 has vs stugs.

The 50 mm pens Sandbagged e8 still 1% better as the 57 mm pens skirted stugs both using standard rounds, with AP the favour goes to 50 mm as well here. (And i consider the 57 mm as good enough vs Stugs, can you imagine that?)


The medium AT guns are best to counter enemie AT guns which goes for both sides. (maybe thats why i build 57 mm AT, to counter advancing 50 mm paks that try to hunt my shermans).


All i wish is that the 57 mm is as good vs skirted tank IV H/J as the 50 mm is against fully sandbagged e8. Whats so wrong here? Or that both are in quite equal terms. I see no reason why normal standard skirted tank IV H shall resist 57 mm so much better as a fully sandbagged e8 can resist 50 mm shells? This is the whole story.
The Tank IV´s dont need HVSS stuff, massve MP/fuel investment to get skirts (for H no extra cost at all) or invesmtents to become cheap in upkeep.
I mean why such huge invesments (HVSS, supply yard, sandbags etc) when it doesnt makes this tank more resistant to 50 mm AT guns as a Factory made Tank IV H already is against 57 mm?

Basically 39,5% for 50 mm vs fully boosted e8. 22,4% for the 57 mm vs factory made Tank IV H.
Cost wise (esspecially fuel) we could say they are equal with mass prod. Upkeep wise (even when reduced) the H costs less fuel.

And why that. I mean if any at gun really bothers you can right away get a maultier that does it job.



The halftrack is out of question.... except if you like to tickle Tank IV´s.

[Krieger Blitzer]

All i wish is that the 57 mm is as good vs skirted tank IV H/J as the 50 mm is against fully sandbagged e8. Whats so wrong here?

I think what's wrong is that the basic price of IVH is higher than any 76 Sherman, as you should also consider that IVH is used not only in Blitz doc but in TH doc too where they don't have mass production for PzIVs. Also.. it's not all about the penetration but the HP as well. It might be harder to penetrate IVH, but with sandbags and over-repair... Shermans can survive many more hits.

[Panzerblitz1]

The stolen 81mm mortar rekt pretty much all starting units by itself.

[Krieger Blitzer]

If only I had a Puma or something, this 101st AB squad would have not been able to steal mortar... Probably a mistake from my side.

[Panzer-Lehr-Division]

Yeah, was good game.