Mastering Anti-Tank in Hell Let Loose! 

Ping with middle mouse button to measure distance

Hey tactical can you tell me what your mouse sens is for all your games I just watch your squad vid and was alittle confused by what you said thanks

It's way OP currently for a milsim. There's no way infantry were taking out tanks like this in ww2.

I played as a crewman I blevie u are a nice shooter

I mark first and than I try to use the three steps marker in front of the bazooka or panzerschreck to get the distance right. First of 100m second for 200...can''t really tell if it's working but my first shot is closer to the target then by guessing.

lol yeah and like there's any other way to do sth?

They could literally add rangefinders for every weapon. 50m, 100m, 200m

because lazy devs wanted to shove more maps and dlc down our throats

I liked the video btw I’m just starting to play as AT more and more and you have good tips it’s just annoying when you notice it to hear “as humanly possible”, good video.

Can I borrow a Mr.MEE6 Rick? I need it for somethin

I died

The german arsenal is already underpowered compared to the U.S with garands too

Panzerschreck has higher penetration and velocity so it can punch through the heavies quicker and more reliably

@@hi_bingus9456 mg42

You said dodge twice

Dodge, duck, dip, dive ..... and run ! 😂

@@racon8272 **throws wrench at you**

The 5700XT is notorious for having odd performance issues in games. Imo, Nvidia cards like mine are less prone to it. However, the game itself is unoptimised which is by no means your hardwares fault. - I've heard you can get great performance by clearing your shader cache for the game in the files.

Because shrecks ammo is so slow for a standard armor piercing AT ammo, has a so low explosive capacity for a hesh ammo, so small for a heat ammo. So, it can't penatrate thick armor. If it's penetration capacity is insane then why every anti tank gun has not a schrek

@@IntergalacticVoid No it could penetrate the frontal hull of both turret and hull on the Sherman. It had an effective armor thickness of 50mm (90mm angled) and the panzerschreck could penetrate well over that. The HEAT-like Shaped charge rocket warhead was considerably larger than the Bazooka, and like the bazooka, the slow projectile maintained penetration power regardless of distance. It creates a 'lance' of molten metal that shoots through the armor using a charge that goes off upon impact, not a squash head meant for spalling like the HESH. The reason 'every anti tank gun was not a schreck' is because the slow projectile makes hitting targets at a distance very difficult. The Schrek's effective range was 150m, and realistically quite a bit less. It also created a shitload of smoke around the operator giving away their position, hence the 'Stove Pipe' nickname, and making firing from enclosed spaces like bunkers and houses impossible to do safely. However, HEAT-shells based on the same premise (shaped charge warhead) was used plenty by both tanks and anti-tank guns as they don't lose penetrative power over distance, making velocity irrelevant in long distance engagements. The Germans were especially big fans!

@@MartinTraXAA Correct. I think people don't realize how disadvantaged allies were in terms of their armor for tanks. The Sherman was a death trap to put it lightly. In through the front out through the back, all crew dead. Where for example a Tiger , allies had shot 26 bazooka rounds at a Tiger tank from the front, and didn't do a single thing to it. The difference in armor thickness, was the major difference. U.S Tanks were more agile, like the Jackson, however they weren't armored enough for a head on tank battle, they needed to keep their distance. Shermans shouldn't be standing toe-to-toe with Panthers or Tigers.

@@IntergalacticVoid Shermans were literally nicknamed "Death on wheels", not because they killed many, but because of how easy it was to penetrate their armor and destroy them and kill all crew members from a frontal shot. American tanks were quite bad in tank combat, jackson's were the tank destroyer "class" for the Americans that were only effective at a distance. Shermans, not so much. Another nickname for the sherman: Ronson (cigarette lighter) -" “it lights up the first time, every time.”"

@@svenkonig453 This game isn't realistic anyway. I'm just saying that panzerschreck doesn't have an insane penetration. Sherman's armor is also thin.

Yes

It looks like what it is before you place it

@@hansthecheeseman i think you need supplies to build

Explosive ammunition boxes dropped by your team.

You need supplies near it and somebody with a hammer

@David Pauk you missed the point...Plenty of WWII battles were just shoot at a general direction were you hear shots coming from. Also, many German frontline units defending Normandy were entrenched all around farmland, barns abandoned houses, and even canals. Sporadic fighting also led to some major battles, so yes Battlefield should had learned from this.

Nope. It would have failed as a mainstream game. The masses don't want a realistic shooter. They want a quasi-realistic shooter that gives you way more leniency than this one.

AT is for hunters, not Teamplay.