Login

russian armor

T-34 rework

PAGES (9)down
29 Nov 2020, 10:03 AM
#41
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 09:59 AMSerrith


The common theme though is that the T-34 has 120/100/80 penetration which is admittedly poor compared to 110-150fuel tanks. Because of the poor penetration, that means the T-34 isn't "cost effective" or in other words, its not worth 90 fuel. I disagree with this sentiment.

Only it far penetration is low because it designed as "flanker" vehicle similar to Puma.

And it has the great mobility so it can attack side/rear armor. The unit is quite good in open maps.
29 Nov 2020, 10:04 AM
#42
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:03 AMVipper

Only it far penetration is low because it designed as "flanker" vehicle similar to Puma.

And it has the great mobility so it can attack side/rear armor. The unit is quite good in open maps.


I'd hesitate to say "good", but its price is well justified.
29 Nov 2020, 10:13 AM
#43
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:03 AMVipper

Only it far penetration is low because it designed as "flanker" vehicle similar to Puma.

And it has the great mobility so it can attack side/rear armor. The unit is quite good in open maps.


And what flanking are you talking about here if the T-34 has no acceleration. Pz.4, Panther, Cromwell, Comet (with hammer tactics) are real flanking tanks. They have acceleration.
29 Nov 2020, 10:18 AM
#44
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:04 AMSerrith


I'd hesitate to say "good", but its price is well justified.


jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:03 AMVipper

Only it far penetration is low because it designed as "flanker" vehicle similar to Puma.

And it has the great mobility so it can attack side/rear armor. The unit is quite good in open maps.


if the T-34 is "good" or "justified" then what does that make the outright superior in every way P4? overpowered? broken?
29 Nov 2020, 10:31 AM
#45
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:18 AMgbem




if the T-34 is "good" or "justified" then what does that make the outright superior in every way P4? overpowered? broken?


The stats it has for 90 fuel lineup with other vehicles. If it were 100 or 110 fuel id expect a penetration or rate of fire increase or both. But at 20 fuel less then a cromwell you really think it should have more penetration than it does?

You want to give it 120/110/100 pen and +10 armor, ok, bump its price up by 10-15 fuel.
29 Nov 2020, 10:35 AM
#46
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:31 AMSerrith


The stats it has for 90 fuel lineup with other vehicles. If it were 100 or 110 fuel id expect a penetration or rate of fire increase or both. But at 20 fuel less then a cromwell you really think it should have more penetration than it does?

You want to give it 120/110/100, ok, bump its price up by 15 fuel.


then increase its rate of fire and improve its scatter + armor to 160? great id take it for 100 fuel...


btw the Cromwell is considered underpowered soo its a pretty terrible point of comparison... if anything both the T-34 and the crom need a buff... instead its wiser to compare the T-34 and the crom to the P4... in both cases they are outclassed heavily by the P4...
29 Nov 2020, 10:58 AM
#47
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



And what flanking are you talking about here if the T-34 has no acceleration. Pz.4, Panther, Cromwell, Comet (with hammer tactics) are real flanking tanks. They have acceleration.

"Flanker" in the sense that it need to bring the fight close and preferably outflank enemy vehicles.

The is nothing wrong with mobility of the T-34/76 especially once vetted. It has to be used in similar way to Puma and M-10
29 Nov 2020, 11:02 AM
#48
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:58 AMVipper
The is nothing wrong with mobility of the T-34/76 especially once vetted. It has to be used in similar way to Puma and M-10

I'm fairly certain T-34 can't be used as a self spotting unit kiting meds from 50 range.
29 Nov 2020, 11:13 AM
#49
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

I think the T34/76 is fine as it is. You use it as an anti-infantry and oppertunistic AT tank while leaving the actual AT to your SU85 and Zis Guns. I'm sure that with the ram change they will still be fine.

The only real problem will be with JT/Elephant being more OP than they are. But these can be adressed in the commander patch.
29 Nov 2020, 11:23 AM
#50
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 11:02 AMKatitof

I'm fairly certain T-34 can't be used as a self spotting unit kiting meds from 50 range.

Now check what it probability of puma damaging a medium at max range.

Puma, m10, T-34/76 are all units that have low far penetration and better close.

And since the new patch Puma can not self spot.
29 Nov 2020, 11:38 AM
#51
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

I think the T34/76 is fine as it is. You use it as an anti-infantry and oppertunistic AT tank while leaving the actual AT to your SU85 and Zis Guns. I'm sure that with the ram change they will still be fine.

The only real problem will be with JT/Elephant being more OP than they are. But these can be adressed in the commander patch.


i mean the T-34 is usable... its just outperformed outclassed and inefficient when contrasted to a proper medium like the panzer 4 and thus lies much closer to the "bad" end of the spectrum than it lies in the "good" end... and a nerf is most certainly not warranted without a compensatory buff...
29 Nov 2020, 11:45 AM
#52
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

Seems to me some people don't see the role of the T-34 correctly. It is not supposed to go against tanks. It shreds ifnatry and can still somewhat fight medium tanks. If you want to go head on versus German tanks go for the T-34/85.
29 Nov 2020, 11:47 AM
#53
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 11:45 AMButcher
Seems to me some people don't see the role of the T-34 correctly. It is not supposed to go against tanks. It shreds ifnatry and can still somewhat fight medium tanks. If you want to go head on versus German tanks go for the T-34/85.



a P4 will shred infantry better than a T-34 will with its superior scatter and ROF + pintle MG while still being useful against armor unlike the T-34... as I've said before the T-34 is simply outclassed by the P4...

and the worst part is it takes more time to actually get your first T-34 than it takes to get your first P4...
29 Nov 2020, 12:33 PM
#54
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 10:35 AMgbem


then increase its rate of fire and improve its scatter + armor to 160? great id take it for 100 fuel...


btw the Cromwell is considered underpowered soo its a pretty terrible point of comparison... if anything both the T-34 and the crom need a buff... instead its wiser to compare the T-34 and the crom to the P4... in both cases they are outclassed heavily by the P4...



Including the sidetech, an AEC will ring you up for 75 fuel while a puma is only 70. Yet the puma is superior across the board stat wise with exception of armor. Does that mean the AEC isn't cost effective? Does that mean the AEC should have its cost reduced or its stats buffed? I would hope you'd say no.

The T-34 is statwise inferior across the board to the panzer 4 but thats separate from whether or not the tank is worth 90 fuel. It's combined anti tank and anti infantry are not worth less then 90 fuel. They used to be 80, but it was found they were too cost effective.
29 Nov 2020, 13:08 PM
#57
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 12:33 PMSerrith



Including the sidetech, an AEC will ring you up for 75 fuel while a puma is only 70. Yet the puma is superior across the board stat wise with exception of armor. Does that mean the AEC isn't cost effective? Does that mean the AEC should have its cost reduced or its stats buffed? I would hope you'd say no.

The T-34 is statwise inferior across the board to the panzer 4 but thats separate from whether or not the tank is worth 90 fuel. It's combined anti tank and anti infantry are not worth less then 90 fuel. They used to be 80, but it was found they were too cost effective.


The t34 is cost effective indeed. it wont be if you take away ram with nothing to show for it.

Its price is not only about its ai or at. Ram is also part of that price. you cant just take that away without compensating it somewhere else. putting requirements on a suicide abilitie is the same as taking it away. it will see next to no use.

even if you get it to vet 2 or vet 3 it still gets destroyed with ease even in mere seconds if unlucky. its to flimsy and lacking in at to be viable in the late game on its own.

Its only viable use is to mass them and use 1 out the 3 you have to ram the target and have the other 2 or a off map finish the target. the off map is just supiroir because the other 2 t34's also wont survive mostly and might not be able to finish the target before they get destroyed or forced off.
29 Nov 2020, 13:08 PM
#58
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Put a flamethrower on T-34 or replace it with KV-8 if its not supposed to fight armor.
29 Nov 2020, 13:13 PM
#60
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1979

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Nov 2020, 12:33 PMSerrith

Including the sidetech, an AEC will ring you up for 75 fuel while a puma is only 70. Yet the puma is superior across the board stat wise with exception of armor. Does that mean the AEC isn't cost effective? Does that mean the AEC should have its cost reduced or its stats buffed? I would hope you'd say no.

1. the puma is doctrinal for ostheer and okw is complete and utter trash soo despite the puma`s performance it really doesn't indicate much...

2. the puma isn't a straight upgrade to the AEC... the AEC has better anti-infantry and light vehicles due to its more reliable MG higher accuracy and as you've said before more armor... the puma in comparison is better against medium armor due to its higher speed and longer range... there are actual situations where id rather have the AEC than the puma and vice versa...

the T-34-76 on the other hand is outright outclassed in both anti infantry and anti armor in both a 1v1 and a critical mass setting by the panzer 4... there is no reason to build a T-34-76 if you have a panzer 4 in your lineup
PAGES (9)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 2
Canada 3
unknown 2

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

407 users are online: 407 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49195
Welcome our newest member, fitena
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM