Smartie's commander reworks: Soviets

Invis some offtopic after the discussion swift towards 120mm.

Imo mark target should be changed from the damage increase it is now to the mark target the usf have that reduces armour and increases target size. It makes more sense in that it helps RNG instead of just reducing TTK.

Edit: it also lends itself better to using things like t34s with their lower pen. The ptrs would also benifit, as would the su76, and even the isu!

I think that's a good call. It makes it less oppressive when comboed with ISU152 and useful in more situations.

I just made some tests: Can anyone explain why the T-34/85 can take 5 instead of 4 pak shots? This is a huge advantage. I can live with it but than the fuel cost need to be higher. 135 fuel for a medium that can take 1 pak hit more is hard to justify.

I just made some tests: Can anyone explain why the T-34/85 can take 5 instead of 4 pak shots? This is a huge advantage. I can live with it but than the fuel cost need to be higher. 135 fuel for a medium that can take 1 pak hit more is hard to justify.

Its armour is 160 to the T-34/76's 150. Everyone and their dog in axis will penetrate it frontally.

Its armour is 160 to the T-34/76's 150. Everyone and their dog in axis will penetrate it frontally.

Yeah but why can a medium tank can take 5 hits when the more expensive P4J only takes 4 hits? That does not make any sense.

I just made some tests: Can anyone explain why the T-34/85 can take 5 instead of 4 pak shots? This is a huge advantage. I can live with it but than the fuel cost need to be higher. 135 fuel for a medium that can take 1 pak hit more is hard to justify.

Because it has more HP that other medium 800 instead of 640.

Yeah but why can a medium tank can take 5 hits when the more expensive P4J only takes 4 hits? That does not make any sense.

The Auf J has 234 armour and typically faces at far range:

• AT guns with 190 pen or less
  
• PTRS (A meme vs this unit)
  
• PIATs (A meme vs this unit with 110 pen)
  
• Zookas (Also a meme vs this unit, except maybe for Rangerssssss)
  
• Med tanks (80-120 pen typically). There are higher ones (Eg: Ez 8's 155) but they're doctrinal and not often used.
  
• TDs with 210 pen or more but are a huge threat to them due to speed and model size
  

That's a lot of bounces from most of that list, esp from contemporary med tanks. Yes the infantry AT has high deflection damage but an auf J will roll right over you (figuratively) long before your deflection dmg kills it. TDs and AT guns are still penetrating reliably but even then it's not a guarantee in the case of the latter.

Has the auf J cost me games? Absolutely, when its armour fails to a t-34/76 but I've lost count of the no. of times Comets and TDs/AT guns bounce repeatedly.

Because it has more HP that other medium 800 instead of 640.

You know he wasn't literally asking "What game mechanic lets the T35/85 survive 5 shots from a PAK". It was clearly a rhetorical question.

I just made some tests: Can anyone explain why the T-34/85 can take 5 instead of 4 pak shots? This is a huge advantage. I can live with it but than the fuel cost need to be higher. 135 fuel for a medium that can take 1 pak hit more is hard to justify.

Because it's 45 fuel more than a standard t34 and 10/5 armour and some pen would not justify that price difference.

Because it's 45 fuel more than a standard t34 and 10/5 armour and some pen would not justify that price difference.

That's not an argument imo. The T-34/85 is way to cheap for his performance. And by the way the price differential between the Cromwell and the Comet is a lot higher.
Fact is:
T34/85 is CHEAPER although the unit has MORE HP than the P4J. Thats not justified.
Bring down the HP to the same level as the P4J and the price is justified. As long as it have more HP it needs to be more expensive.

That's not an argument imo. The T-34/85 is way to cheap for his performance. And by the way the price differential between the Cromwell and the Comet is a lot higher.
Fact is:
T34/85 is CHEAPER although the unit has MORE HP than the P4J. Thats not justified.
Bring down the HP to the same level as the P4J and the price is justified. As long as it have more HP it needs to be more expensive.

T-34/85 is probably the most cost efficient medium tank.

The fact that is had its HMG buffed with the T-34/76 by accident made things worse.

That's not an argument imo. The T-34/85 is way to cheap for his performance. And by the way the price differential between the Cromwell and the Comet is a lot higher.
Fact is:
T34/85 is CHEAPER although the unit has MORE HP than the P4J. Thats not justified.
Bring down the HP to the same level as the P4J and the price is justified. As long as it have more HP it needs to be more expensive.

Axis and Allied tanks operate under different rules due to penetration and armor values with Axis tanks having better armor and Allied tanks having better guns to provide a unique balance to the vehicle game.

When you're looking at a P4J. rough estimate of penetration values probably land around 75% with various differences based on distances and what's shooting, etc. So in your average engagement the P4J can eat 4 shots, bounce one, and die to the 5th giving it effectively 5 shots of health with the scaling rng based on previous factors notwithstanding. This justifies it's increased cost.

The T-34/85 is meant to be an allied version of the P4J mechanically but it obviously can't function as an armored powerhouse due to penetration differences between factions. So it's mechanical function to give it an addition shot like the bounce chance of a P4J is to provide it with 5 shots of health.

This also functions as a way to provide differing balance decisions to vehicles since the T-34/85 having more health means when it's damaged it returns to the field slower since it takes longer to repair. it's weak armor means it's susceptible to weaker sources of damage unlike the less health but stronger armored P4 and as a benefit, it's more consistent of a unit which as a P4J might shake off multiple shots and bully an opposing tank, or just eat 4 shots and die. The T-34/85 will take damage with little to no chance of ever shrugging off a shot. The price of this unit when compared to units of it's equal is fairly balanced by design.

T-34/85 is probably the most cost efficient medium tank.

The fact that is had its HMG buffed with the T-34/76 by accident made things worse.

It's good that we talk about such inconsistency in this thread. That's exactly the kind of minor change that the commander patch have to tackle. Fuel cost needs to be increased or the HP needs to be lowered.
That being said the T-34/85 is a hell of unit and should be in more 2bd or 3rd tier doctrines.

Axis and Allied tanks operate under different rules due to penetration and armor values with Axis tanks having better armor and Allied tanks having better guns to provide a unique balance to the vehicle game.

When you're looking at a P4J. rough estimate of penetration values probably land around 75% with various differences based on distances and what's shooting, etc. So in your average engagement the P4J can eat 4 shots, bounce one, and die to the 5th giving it effectively 5 shots of health with the scaling rng based on previous factors notwithstanding. This justifies it's increased cost.

The T-34/85 is meant to be an allied version of the P4J mechanically but it obviously can't function as an armored powerhouse due to penetration differences between factions. So it's mechanical function to give it an addition shot like the bounce chance of a P4J is to provide it with 5 shots of health.

This also functions as a way to provide differing balance decisions to vehicles since the T-34/85 having more health means when it's damaged it returns to the field slower since it takes longer to repair. it's weak armor means it's susceptible to weaker sources of damage unlike the less health but stronger armored P4 and as a benefit, it's more consistent of a unit which as a P4J might shake off multiple shots and bully an opposing tank, or just eat 4 shots and die. The T-34/85 will take damage with little to no chance of ever shrugging off a shot. The price of this unit when compared to units of it's equal is fairly balanced by design.

Thx for the detailed answer. I still think the 85 needs to be more expensive (at least 140 fuel) but I enjoy the discussion and you made some really good points.

Thx for the detailed answer. I still think the 85 needs to be more expensive (at least 140 fuel) but I enjoy the discussion and you made some really good points.

Also I didn't mention this at first, but it being a doctrinal unit means that you have an opportunity cost of selecting a doctrine with this in it, so it's average power level should be slightly higher than that of the norm to give players justification in building and using them. I suppose that is what the 5 fuel difference and consistency increase is between this and the P4J.

It's good that we talk about such inconsistency in this thread. That's exactly the kind of minor change that the commander patch have to tackle. Fuel cost needs to be increased or the HP needs to be lowered.
That being said the T-34/85 is a hell of unit and should be in more 2bd or 3rd tier doctrines.

The t34 85 is fine as is. Its doctrinal and can take an extra shot but gets penned by all forms of at with its 160 armour vs 234 on the p4j.
Unlike the p4j wich bounces with some consistancy all but the heaviest at sources. Giving it about the same maybe a bit more suvivabilty then a t34-85.

And as whe are speaking of inconsistancy why does the p4j start with such high armour out of the gate? If the t34 85 isent allowed more health then normal meds then shurly the p4j or even panthers comets and japgzr 4 shoudnt have such high armour as well.

And as whe are speaking of inconsistancy why does the p4j start with such high armour out of the gate? .

If you look at my post I did not say that the bigger HP of the 85 is a problem. The price is the problem. The JP4 is not cheaper than the SU-85 when I last checked the fuel cost btw.

But hey, agree to disagree. All arguments discussed now. Maybe some of you want to post some commander rework ideas for Soviets. The faction has the most overlap of all factions in their commander pool.

The t34 85 is fine as is. Its doctrinal and can take an extra shot but gets penned by all forms of at with its 160 armour vs 234 on the p4j.
Unlike the p4j wich bounces with some consistancy all but the heaviest at sources. Giving it about the same maybe a bit more suvivabilty then a t34-85.

And as whe are speaking of inconsistancy why does the p4j start with such high armour out of the gate? If the t34 85 isent allowed more health then normal meds then shurly the p4j or even panthers comets and japgzr 4 shoudnt have such high armour as well.

T-34/85 is simply more cost efficient than PzIV J.