Landships II

Given the threat posed by British heavy and medium tanks (and later the French Renault FT) I'm surprised at the seeming paucity of specialised anti tank weapons adopted by the Central Powers. Yes they may have underestimated the threat as a result of the Battle of Arras but they certainly were aware from 1st Cambrai onwards. I've read eyewitness accounts (in the Boiler Plate War) of sand bags filled with grenades being hurled against tanks as a sort of crude mattress charge and in the same battle anti tank traps consisting of water filled pits, concealed with earth covered chicken wire and canvas, were encountered. I've seen  the anti tank rifle issued in the latter part of 1918 in small numbers (with a recoil that could sometimes break a collar bone), looked at an illustration of a very agricultural looking gun in one of Ian Hoggs books and as a young lad I met an ex tank driver whose tank was blown up by a nmine in 1918 buts thats it. Scouring the pages of both 'Tanks and Trenches' and  'The Boiler Plate War' (two excellent books full of eyewitness accounts and interviews with surviviors with almost no duplication between them) reveals nothing else. Did the Germans largely rely on using conventional field guns and armour piercing bullets (not originally developed for anti tank use)?

Did Britain, France  or America develop any specialised anti tank weapons?

One further anti tank conundrum - I've founf a reference on an Austro Hungarian army history web site to certain mountain artillery pieces also being suitable as antt tank guns. Having looked at Jones Rarey and Icks's description of all the British, French and American tank actions I cannot see any place that Austro Hungarian troops ever faced a tank attack (not even on the Western front). Was this allocation just a prudent precaution?