State of the T34-85
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
The unit is good vs infantry for sure but is it really what you want when you invest into it? I felt like I would build 1 o 2 when I started playing with them but finally came up with the idea T34-76 is better investment for that purpose.
If there is a Pz4, T34-85 is better to deal with but with all the snares around I usually not chase in fear to lose the unit (which happened in my first games), a T34-76 at least you know you're not going to chase and keep it safe.
If there is a Panther, your T34-85 is like a T34-76 at the end. Su-85 is the way to go in both cases to support your vs the panther so why bother building a T34-85 for 40 more fuel.
The unit has maybe more room on 1vs1, don't know.
What's your opinion.
Posts: 1563
Posts: 39
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
As with many units it just suffers from heavy tanks being 10x better than any medium tank. Why bother with T34/85 when you can get a 375 armour IS2? Same as P4, why bother when you can get a Tiger instead?
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
I don’t use, I prefer specialized units SU-85 + Katyusha. T-34-85 universal mediocrity in the game. For the price similar to Pz-4, his anti-infantry ability is clearly worse, the anti-tank’s ability is also not great. Stupid 1st vet. And the more so the T-34-85 is absolutely poor against the background of the M4C - which has a similar price, similar characteristics to the main gun, but has an AA machine gun, the better 1st vet, smoke, and a change of shells.
I find T34/85 way better than the M4C Sherman.
T34/85 has more HP, more penetration, more AOE on main gun, way better machine-guns (AI damage is way more important than AA damage). The M4C extra pen round is mediocre because it increases the reload significantly and still bounces a lot on OKW P4s, Panthers etc. The only good thing about the M4C is the reload speed.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
-Overextending
-not supporting with infantry
-attacking more pricey compositions then you have head on
-spamming it and nothing else, therefore making it easier for opponent to counter, especially with stugs
That's all that can be said here without a replay.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
If you're failing with 34/85 you are doing one of these things:
-Overextending
-not supporting with infantry
-attacking more pricey compositions then you have head on
-spamming it and nothing else, therefore making it easier for opponent to counter, especially with stugs
That's all that can be said here without a replay.
Well I did overextend in my first games using them, like I think anybody discovering your unit limits. Then I found myself keeping them away from the frontline because they couldn't really do much than soaking a bit of damage.
They are like said good overall tank and maybe it is not what I need with my own gameplay. I just wanted to know different opinions.
I find it better to get two specialized units: Katy + SU-85 after a T-70 or a fast T34-75 than 2 T34-85 which are spending too much time in repair in my hands.
Posts: 4474
t 85 has even better AI but not by much and gets 800 hp + much better penetration
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
It's safer to micro a single heavy tank than 2 800HP medium tanks which have more potential of doing dmg.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Unit in basically perfect state overshadowed by current heavy meta.
It's safer to micro a single heavy tank than 2 800HP medium tanks which have more potential of doing dmg.
Except Luvnest used it in the tournament to devastating effect. People just don't know how to use it effectively, it's not overshadowed, especially with Armoured Assault being a thing.
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Posts: 1484
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Except Luvnest used it in the tournament to devastating effect. People just don't know how to use it effectively, it's not overshadowed, especially with Armoured Assault being a thing.
Read OP, it's 2v2. He already mentioned the difference with 1v1.
Volume of unit and army composition differs from 1v1. It's more likely to face a higher burst fire from AT units making it more likely to lose medium (or advance premium medium) which are unlikely to bounce any shot.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
I think its just the meta of heavy tanks and there are far more efficient tanks like Su-85 and Kat/T-70s combo. Aside from Lunvest, I rarely see T-34/85 in 2 v 2s.
I feel like that, but I'm not even using heavy tanks.
Posts: 857 | Subs: 2
Another important disadvantage T-34-85. There is no commander with the T-34-85 and Shock Troops.
I would replace ppsh upgrade in "Advance warfare" with shocks. It would be a strong but still reasonable combo considering that the rest of the doctrine is not so strong.
Posts: 422 | Subs: 2
Posts: 1527
Permanently BannedLivestreams
21 | |||||
22 | |||||
12 | |||||
6 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.35258.859+1
- 4.599234.719+7
- 5.936410.695+2
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
13 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, iasexam
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM