What’s up guys, Rogue-9 here! The video series analysing the vehicles in BF1 continues, I have heard your requests and surprisingly it’s not the FT-17 Light Tank next, although it came a close second in the voting. No, today I get to discuss the three variants of the Putilov-Garford Assault Truck instead. So let’s get to it! Plagued by a bug on launch that made the vehicle basically unusable for a significant part of the PC community; this little truck has not received a lot of love. Its thin armour and awkward handling make it a challenge to use effectively and for many players, these additional barriers to entry just make the vehicle not worth picking when you have so many other great options to choose from. An arguable advantage that the Assault Truck has over its closest competitor, the Armoured Artillery Truck, is that can seat up to 3 players, 2 controlling side mounted HMGs with one driver that can either sit in the front seat for easy control of the vehicle or in the back, where he is able to control the HMG and 76mm canon.

Sitting in the driver’s seat switches on the truck’s headlamps which have different levels of blinding effect, depending on the type of truck you are driving. The Armoured Assault Truck has 5 headlights that create a significant glare for the enemy attacking from the front, the Armoured Anti-Tank Truck only has two lamps with a significantly lower effect and the even though the Armoured Reconnaissance Truck also has 5 lamps, the blinding effect is not as strong as that of the assault variant. What do I think of these lamps? All in all, I would say that most of the time, you are better off driving from the rear position if possible. The blinding effect doesn’t do much to stop enemies from shooting at you, it doesn’t spot enemies like that lamp of the St.

Chamond does and most importantly, it will make you stand out on the battlefield and will signal to your enemies, that you are currently unable to use your main weapons. No significant advantages with a number of disadvantages mean that this feature gets the thumbs down from me. In terms of speed and manoeuvrability, the Putilov-Garford is quite good. It is better than all of the tanks in the game (no surprise there) and while it’s acceleration is the same as that of the Armoured Artillery Truck, it’s top speed is a little lower, so we’ll give it a “good but not great” rating here. And finally, before we move on to the armament and gadgets available to each variant of the truck, there is one last issue to mention and that is its capability of breaking through solid obstacles. Most vehicles in the game, including motorbikes, can easily breakthrough walls, gates, sandbags and other soft-ish obstacles but not the Putilov-Garford. At least, it can’t do it while driving forward… If you want to break through an obstacle with this vehicle, you and only do so while driving backwards and only of you hit at a bit on an angle, instead of straight on… To me, this is just bizarre and it honestly feels like a bug rather than intended behaviour.

Whatever the case, it definitely makes getting around the map unnecessarily difficult and just gives players another reason not to pick this vehicle. So things are not looking great right off the bat for this truck but maybe its weapons, gadgets and abilities can make up for these shortcomings? (he says hopefully…) Let’s take a look! I’ve already named the three variants: Assault, Anti-Tank and Recon. And while each one of these comes with a rear mounted main gun and HMG for the driver, they they all fire unique types of 76mm shells. Let’s examine their capabilities against enemy vehicles first and here, the stats of the assault variant’s HE shells will be familiar to you if you have seen my videos on the A7V and St. Chamond tanks. So as before, that means 6 shots to kill against heavy vehicles, 3 against light armour, 4 against the FT-17’s turret and 5 shots if you hit the plate at the back.

Unsurprisingly, the anti-tank variant’s capability against enemy vehicles is somewhat better. The shells are different compared to all other tank weapons that we have explored so far, in that they have a damage drop off that starts at 50m and bottoms out at 200. Does that mean that you should always get as close as possible to your targets? I would definitely say no, since thedifference in shots to kill vs a full health vehicle is only one extra shot max. Against heavy armour you will almost always need 4 shots but it could be 5 at absolutely max range.

Against light armour, it’s 2 shots up to 125m and 3 shots beyond that, the FT-17 turret can take 3 hits at any range and the back plate will be 3-4 shots. All of this, of course, assuming that you are landing at a decent angle and not bouncing any shots. And last (and in this case also least), we have the shrapnel shell of the recon truck. This variant will require up to 7 shots on full health heavy armour and 5 shots against light armour, although it does have the same advantage as the delayed fuse shells of the St.Chamond, of always causing the same damage, independent of the angle or part of armour you are shooting at. Against infantry, the HE shells of the assault variant behave exactly as with other tanks, direct hits will kill anyone, including sentries, while close misses will cause enough splash damage to usually take out infantry in a single hit. The damage stats you are seeing at the top of the screen are for infantry without perks, with Flak, with Juggernaut and with Flak + Juggernaut. Again similar to the AT shells of other tanks, the AT truck is devastating when landing direct hits, but splash damage is pretty poor, with a small area of effect and low damage numbers, meaning that you will need at least two or more close misses for a kill.

The shrapnel shells of the recon variant are completely unique when it comes to their effectiveness against infantry. The game’s code lists a direct hit damage of 100 points but there is no way that you will ever land a direct hit on enemy infantry, since the shells are fitted with state of the art early 20th century proximity fuses that will detonate the shells, once they come close to enemy infantry. On the one hand, this means that you will never be able to land a direct hit and will always need at least two shots to take out an opponent. In fact, if you aim directly at the enemy, you will tend to do around 60 damage but if you aim off to one side or over the top, you can do up to 70 damage, so being less precise is actually a benefit with this type of ammo.

But the benefit of this is not only, that you can get away with less well aimed shots but also that you can aim over the top of infantry sheltering in a trench of behind cover and you can still do full damage to them. Add to that the benefit of a large area of effect and you will be able to harass enemies that would normally be safe from you. All of this comes at one significant cost though and that is that these shells will do zero blast damage to buildings and other structures, meaning that you will need to put your shots straight in through a window or door if you want to get at your targets The HMGs available to the driver aswell as the 2 side gunners are excactly as those we’ve seen on other vehicles. 3 Shots to kill the head and 4 to 6 to the body depending on the distance to your enemy.

So what do I think of the main guns of the three Assault Truck variants? Well, the HE is exactly what we’ve seen on other tanks, decent against vehicles as well as infantry. The AP rounds are pretty powerful but at the end of the day, it’s still at least 4 shots to kill against heavy armour which is the same as the AT guns on other tanks, such as the Heavy Assault Tank and Tankhunter Landship. So to me, this tiny bit of extra power is not enough to offset how awkward the AT Truck is to drive and how weak its armour is. The recon truck’s ammo is interesting and can be very effective but on most maps and in most game modes, the issues in dealing with enemy vehicles can be a significant problem.

And now, before I give my final verdict on Putilov-Garford, let’s quickly go over the gadgets and abilities and here there are actually some interesting features. For the assault variant, the driver can chuck out a smoke grenade or drop infantry supplies while the side gunners can throw out frag grenades. The AT variant has AT grenades and an emergency repair for the driver, with incendiary grenades for the gunners. And the recon variant has spotting flares and AT mines for the driver and impact grenades for the gunners. I think tossing infantry gadgets out of the top of the vehicle is a nice touch and while the smoke and flares can be quite useful, I think the ability to throw out AT grenades is not all that helpful.

If you are that close to an enemy vehicle then sure, it could be great in combination with the super powerful AP shells but if you really end up that close to the enemy with a relatively thin skinned vehicle, something has already gone horribly wrong. Also, giving the gunners the ability to toss out grenades is great, but in all my time of playing the assault trucks, I have never had teammates patient enough to man the guns consistently and if there is no one there to use the ability, it is basically worthless. Conclusion time and in theory, the assault variant is a well-balanced vehicle that can offer close ranged support to friendly infantry against enemy vehicles and foot soldiers. The AT variant has one of the most powerful anti-tank canons in the game and can still defend itself against infantry with its three machine guns.

And the recon truck is great for marking enemies and taking them out at all ranges. For me personally, the assault variant is probably the weakest option since its supply drop gadget only makes sense if you push up close in support of your infantry. But because of the truck’s awkward handling and weak armour, if you come up against an enemy vehicle or a group of enemy assault players at this range, there is a good chance that you will not make it out alive. The other two variants have more of a standoff support role which makes it easier to survive in them and therefore makes them more viable in my eyes. The AT truck can devastate enemy armour at long ranges while taking on infantry with the HMG but probably my favourite variant is the recon truck.

Even months after the addition of this vehicle to the game, many players do not seem to be aware of the fact that it fires proximity fused shrapnel shells and most of my kills with the main gun come from infantry taking cover around a corner thinking that they are safe. If only the shells had the ability to destroy buildings, like those of the Gas Assault Tank, they would be perfect. But I’ll still happily take this truck out for a spin on infantry heavy maps, as long as my team is managing to keep enemy vehicles at bay. But as always, those are just my opinions! Do let me know what you think of the assault truck in the comments section. What do you think of it in general and which variant (if any) is you favourite? Also, go ahead and vote for which vehicle you want me to cover next! By the way, i’ve started live streaming and since i don’t have a fixed schedule yet if you want to ever catch me live, you can click the bell icon below to be notified of my streams or follow me on twitter for notifications there.

And with that, thank you so much for watching, I hope you enjoyed the video and I will see you in the next episode! [OUTTAKES] But not the Putilow-Garfield… No wait….to discuss the three variants of the Putilov-Garford Assault Tank instead, of the Putilov-Garford eh… of the Putilov-Garford is… Fuck me! *chuckles* of the Putilov-Garford Assault Tunk….

As found on Youtube



SHARE