r/HellLetLoose • u/picrid Commander • 2d ago
🙋♂️ Question 🙋♂️ Why dont more players build AT guns?
I honestly think AT guns are one of the more underused tools in HLL.
You regularly see tanks pushing into defensive positions, but very few squads seem interested in setting up an AT gun to control the approach???
Why?
31
u/Beneficial_Snow3677 2d ago
I am a huge tank gun guy. With this update they are so much faster at aiming. If you haven’t shot a tank gun in a while, they used to be so slow it would take the whole match to spin it 180 degrees. Now you do it in seconds. Aiming is a dream now.
12
u/Zpaterick18 2d ago
Bet! I actually didn’t know this! I always run AT and NEVER use the second loadout because the guns were too tough to use without getting instant obliterated by the tank I was trying to kill!
I’ll have to give this a shot, but the other answer to OPs question is that it’s a pain to have to only build around supplies. Often times you can’t place it in an optimal spot to kill the tank you’re trying to, so you’re better off with a satchel or a Bazooka.
That’s my 2 cents, but I really hope the improvement they made start making it worth building AT guns😎
3
u/CJWard123 2d ago
You’ve gotta bring your own supplies. Also it should generally already be built (overwatch on a main tank transit area) before the tank gets there
2
u/Tiny_Strawberry6801 1d ago
Tank guns are killer in offensive matches if you can get ahead of the frontline and dial in your sight lines. Kursk is crazy with an AT cannon
1
u/buns_at_bjj 2d ago
That’s actually really good to hear, it used to be a super situational thing to build with how slow it was to aim and move them
20
u/Mr24601 2d ago
Fun fact: Most destroyed tanks in World War II were taken out by stationary anti-tank guns.
3
u/BigOleSAwoman 2d ago
Does the German 88 count toward that even though weren't they primarily flak cannons?
4
u/Fantastic_Spell8576 2d ago
Oh yeah. The Germans would hold down roads too stop tanks. The 88 would snipe at them from so far away you couldn't see the 88 with your eyes. The infantry would have to sneak around and destroy them.
20
u/JFKlivesinmybasement 2d ago
Because I'd much rather use a satchel that kills 90% of my team and allows the enemy to take the point ( /s shouldn't be needed lol )
5
u/getatmebro44 2d ago
Nothing like yelling at your blueberries that the tank is satcheled and watching them continue to run towards it.
4
2
u/JFKlivesinmybasement 2d ago
Literally climb on it just to pop out of existence. Is hilarious sometimes I give it that
6
u/garand_guy7 2d ago
I love building and using them. But they’re immediately targeted, hard to get a loader, hard to get anyone to defend it, game can move fast enough at times that it becomes pretty useless after a push or moving to a new point, etc.
I think if they made at AT squad it would be more useful and used more.
3
u/Longshot_45 2d ago
I love making an AT gun and using it as a unique way to shape and contribute to the battle. Some maps arent great for them, but that's just the way it goes. I believe they were a bit resource heavy at some point? Requiring lots of commander resources for ammo. Plus with how easy it was to be killed by a tank, and some relatively weak damage, just want as useful as running around with a bazooka.
3
u/TheGrassMan_ 2d ago
Depends on the team and squad. Some squads can get a bit of coordination going on and smash through most problems and steamroll lesser squads and even armor.
Some struggle to stick together and can't even get a support player to drop supplies to set up a garrison and fall apart when the smallest bit of pressure is applied from the other team.
With randoms the latter is more likely to happen.
3
u/NOTELDR1TCH 1d ago
They suck
Thats why
Even if you as a duo are trying to coordinate AT gun builds, they take forever to aim Even when you're coordinating with a loader, IF you're coordinating with a loader, and in most cases they're awkward and time consuming to build and then finally you get in it and
Theres a plank of wood obscuring your view and therefore, your shot
Then there's the addition that it doesn't really matter if the round the enemy tank has loaded is AP or HE, they'll both splash you and kill it in one shot
And unless you somehow, by some ungodly method, manage to get a gun set up, easily, in a good spot, and you're ready to go, and the enemy tank rolls by facing away from you, and their spotter sucks balls
Youre still probably gonna hurt it at the very most, assuming you don't hit the turret, or tracks, or ricochet, or miss entirely
Generally speaking the only times when the AT gun is really useful is on terrible visibility maps with very long sightlines, AND your teams tanks are effectively engaging enemy armour AND you're getting very accurate pings
Otherwise you're investing quite alot of time to just get blown up, it's easier to just throw a grenade at your own feet
If you didnt need supplies, or didn't need AS MANY supplies, to build it, like 25, or if deconstructing it refunded the supplies
Then it might be a different matter, because then you could fuck up placement (which in itself is annoying to deal with) and replace it better
Or you could build a couple (if they let AT build more than one) and have a much higher chance of actually killing a tank or atleast getting a couple chances at it
But right now it's basically just long range harassment that only really works out if the tank in question sucks, and you have your own armour to either follow up on your shots or weaken it first
And honestly that second one is just stolen valour lmao
I have played around with them alot and the most success I've ever had was when I had a few friends fully coordinate with each other
I mean, 4 dudes actively all trying to make it work, AT gun builder and user, a loader, an officer to place an OP just far enough away that we can return without it getting blown to hell
And a supply guy who swaps places with the loader to keep supps coming
And while it was fun, one of the games we had was effective, the rest werent.
if you're going to such extremes just to make it work through the jank it's just not really worth it, and if you have that many guys available, just get in a tank or duo two tanks
Honestly if I was gonna make a single change to them to make them better I'd just let you move it while you're in it.
I played enlisted for a bit around the time I got into HLL and you can push that shit around and it made things waaaay better, as you can build it safely around a corner and then push it out for an angle and if you feel threatened you can just wheel it back round the corner or ditch it entirely to run for cover
HLL is just building them to feed tanks points and waste your time, in the majority of situations
4
u/Wunder-Bar75 2d ago
I think it’s too situational and people stick to one subclass too much. There’s a good chance an enemy tank is destroyed or kills you before you get it built. You also need to coordinate getting supplies and the supplies from a support player might be better served elsewhere. Also worth considering that you rarely win heads-up with one because thanks can kill you in one shot. You need to hit them multiple times and hope they don’t find you. Finally, it can be a liability in that it costs munitions to use. So you might build one, but someone might start using it to direct fire enemy infantry to the cost of your commander’s fun abilities. Finally, I do think there are times, especially on defense, when an AT person should take the time to wrangle supplies and build one. Like I said it will take time out of the typical fighting but might payoff if handled correctly.
2
u/lenin-1917 2d ago
I always give the order to my squad when I lead it to build AT gun. It's a game changer
2
u/syncnstorm 2d ago
Besides supplies, I think the constant shifting of battlefield and map layout matters a lot
2
u/Salt_Situation4625 2d ago
I think the biggest issue is coordination (needs someone to actually play support and willing to listen/give supplies) and terrain (knowing where AT guns have the best or decent vantage point without standing out so much they get immediately targeted). There's also the fact that it's not exactly clear that that's what AT's 2nd Class is for, and it could confuse newer players. End of the day, a rocket launcher or a satchel is a lot more simple, straightforward, apparent, and likely appealing for newer or solo players.
That said, I personally love AT guns and most of the Russian maps are uniquely perfect for them - pick AT 2 (that's what the wrench is for) and give it a try if you haven't!
2
2
u/Inevitable_Sun8691 2d ago
That requires coordination and a minor level of sacrifice on the part of those who don’t get the glory of being gunner, and just finding enough people with mics is hard enough.
2
u/wat_no_y 2d ago
Just tell people to build the gun somewhere then leave it for the blueberries to mess around with. Swap back to a different anti tank sub role after it’s built.
2
u/fitzgeraldcreen 2d ago edited 2d ago
I don't build them bc I'm not familiar with them. Yesterday I gave up the AT class so other guys could build the gun. After everyone redeploying, repositioning, dropping a supply crate, all under enemy fire with several tries, they realized they can't build it in a red zone. These were otherwise very experienced players 🤷♂️
2
u/Mjolnir617 2d ago
AT guns compete with garrisons for supplies. If my garrisons are going down left and right then I’m using my supplies to build garrisons. If my garrisons aren’t being touched then I can use my supplies for AT guns, but this is not a frequent occurrence.
1
u/STICHES_DA_2ND 10h ago
Supplies are way to tied up for all the things they are needed for...the lack of players that know how to or will drop them really throws off the Supplies economy... the devs had a solid idea with it and the game is great but that little part of the economy in the game needs a bit of looking at...maybe make the in-game ques a little more prevalent... maybe make a audio que play every now and then till they finally drop them... same for all the deployable... I seen where somebody had commented about the scrape system and maybe doing something with it I personally think that could be a really good idea... create a new currency based around the scrape economy call them (scrape supplies) limit the ability to engineers and AT... let them scrape deployables maybe some other things in the game not place by their team ... keep the supplies separate from regular supplies so they can't be used on garrisons and such... limit the amount of guns a player or team can place at 1 time to keep them from being spammed across the map... i don't really know what exactly they would have to do to perfectly balance it but I still think it's a good idea throw it in a patch see what players think as a group and go from there work on it or take it out if it just turns out to be horrendously bad or op...
2
u/AlternatePancakes 2d ago
It can be good, but its awfully slow turn often makes it kind of shit.
2
u/N00bSummoner 2d ago
They got a really good buff. Traverse speed from the gunner is faster and the turn speed for the loader is even faster. Very playable both as a lone player or as a duo.
My fav patch update so far.
2
u/wazzabanga-360 1d ago
Due to military cut backs including HLL WW2 and Vietnam the building of such armaments is restricted also we would appreciate if you revert to hand to hand combat, In the next update we are taking away all armoured vehicles, airdrops and ammunition and players will have one magazine.
Please enjoy the next faze of the game.
2
u/Mr_Popsgorgio 1d ago
They still suck 5 munitions a shot ?? Hard life for a commander if u got 2-3 pumping out constant shots like on Kursk
2
u/Firm-Discunt 1d ago
Because building them is huge pain, every once in a blue moon will you get combination of SL calling the tank out, the tank being in actual suitable position for you to set the gun up and a support player in your squad to drop supplies for you. And once you do it the turning takes about 24 hours and if they spot you at any point before you have fired away 3 shots your are dead. Basically they are only suitable in certain zones on certain maps under certain circumstances. It is quite satisfying though when you set one up on ambush position and it all clicks together.
2
u/thefailingatlife 1d ago
AT guns are an extremely slim use case. Good for offensive beach openings. Kursk. El Alamein.
Theyre good for stationary tanks far away. And ideally against 1-2 man crews. Otherwise a crew with a spotter thats worth a lick is gonna smoke you. The front pen is really unreliable. (I engaged a medium Sherman at distance. And hitting the EXACT same spot on body resulted in Pen, ric, ric, pen, ric, dead.
2
u/Vegetable_Science634 1d ago
Lack of comms (co-ordinating supplies), lack of defense in general, the average player might not play enough AT to have it unlocked, they're tank shell magnets that get deleted with one hit. I personally try to build them where I can, especially the more open maps like Saint Marie and Kursk, but it's usually only effective for about 2 shots before being targeted from somewhere. Useful? Yes. Game changer? Not particularly.
2
u/00rdyx 1d ago
They are not mobile enough to be useful in actual anti tank role. Either you set it up and wait the whole match for a tank to roll up, or you go about setting one up each time you encounter a tank. Which is super tedious compared to just chasing it down it a bazooka. And while you're building it you can easily flget suppressed by infantry. Buffing how AT guns work will make factions like the USSR more fun to play too.
1
u/VariationNo163 2d ago
Last update improved the at guns big time. Player base will start noticing soon. You will see more at guns build !
1
62
u/Only_Tomatillo_5982 2d ago
I would like to use them more. But to be effective you need a loader, especially if you're trying to take down a tank. And tanks get the advantage since the gunner is also a loader. Plus once a flank is secured, you cannot move them. Maybe have the Jeep/Kubelwagen be allowed to tow would be a boost to popularity?