flank vehicles

I said flanking is optional? The Panther and the Jackson have the mobility to flank too, the Panther even has an ability for it, but that doesn't mean it's always a good idea to do that or that it's their primary role.

They originally had Flanking Speed at vet 2, which does not really point towards the unit primarily being a flanking unit, but as a way to let it scale against heavier targets that it could no longer effectively engage frontally.



It has an x/-20/-20 penetration profile that is completely natural for tanks.
Totally not comparable to the Puma's profile that doubles from 80 far to 160 close. Not that the Puma is primarily a flanker either.
The T-34/76 has a regular x/-20/-20 penetration profile too, with worse close range pen than any other tank. I don't see how that has anything to do with the M10/Achilles.

The SU-76 simply has higher penetration because it's a casemate with low mobility.



Yes it has the mobility to flank if it needs to, that doesn't mean that that's its primary role. This description does not suggest that or it would've said something along the lines "best used to flank enemy vehicles". Not that Relic descriptions are anything to go by anyway, most of them are faulty.


The M10/Achilles is a very good medium counter because it's cheap and it can outrange them. It can flank heavies too if need be, but that's not its primary or only role.

And that is why it's a good addition to the UKF stock roster, because they didn't have a cheap medium TD to fill the gap between a Centaur/Cromwell and the much more expensive and more geared to towards anti-heavy Firefly or the even more expensive Comet.

I moved the post here since it off topic in the other thread.

Relic had clearly given the role of flanker to certain vehicles. That does not mean the are meant only to flank or that they only role is to flank since unit can fill more than one role.

Flanker units will do so and so vs enemy unit in frontal fight and will do far better if the attack from the side.

They usually combine mobility and high penetration at close range. Example of this is m10 and T-34/76.

Penetration:
T-34/76 80->120 a x150% increase in penetration
(for comparison PzIV 110->125 x113% increase

M10 140->180 a x129% increase in penetration (and gets AP round on top of that.)
(for comparison 170->200 x118%)

I'm not sure what the point of this thread/post is. ALL units do better when flanking.

Saying the T34/76 has "high penetration at close range" is a bit misleading. It isn't anything beyond what most other tanks receive and doesn't have the raw stat to back up the "high penetration" claim.

Playing the name game and what units receive what names is simply the definition of semantics and pointless in most cases.

I moved the post here since it off topic in the other thread.

Relic had clearly given the role of flanker to certain vehicles. That does not mean the are meant only to flank or that they only role is to flank since unit can fill more than one role.

Flanker units will do so and so vs enemy unit in frontal fight and will do far better if the attack from the side.

They usually combine mobility and high penetration at close range. Example of this is m10 and T-34/76.

Penetration:
T-34/76 80->120 a x150% increase in penetration
(for comparison PzIV 110->125 x113% increase

M10 140->180 a x129% increase in penetration (and gets AP round on top of that.)
(for comparison 170->200 x118%)

Surely vipper, youre not trying to make the argument a t-34 is better than a p4 and youre surely not trying to make the case the m10 is overpowered right? Like, because if youre not, this thread is completely useless and if you ARE, then this thread is smoothbrain.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread/post is. ALL units do better when flanking.

Saying the T34/76 has "high penetration at close range" is a bit misleading. It isn't anything beyond what most other tanks receive and doesn't have the raw stat to back up the "high penetration" claim.

No it is not the stat I provided clearly show that T-34/76 has different weapon profile than other tanks when it comes penetration.
Thus is DPS improves al lot more with range than the average tank and that is clear.

Playing the name game and what units receive what names is simply the definition of semantics and pointless in most cases.

I am not playing any name game, I have simply pointed out that Relic intended for certain vehicles to be flankers. That is a fact.

If others use name as way to play semantics games that has little to do with me.

Surely vipper, youre not trying to make the argument a t-34 is better than a p4 and youre surely not trying to make the case the m10 is overpowered right? Like, because if youre not, this thread is completely useless and if you ARE, then this thread is smoothbrain.

Surely you are able to read and I have made neither claim so there is not reason to put words in my mouth.

I have simply pointed out a fact that Relic has create the role of "flanker" and given to units like the T-34/76.

Surely you are able to read and I have made neither claim so there is not reason to put words in my mouth.

I have simply pointed out a fact that Relic has create the role of "flanker" and given to units like the T-34/76.

Oh ok, so useless thread no one asked for, including the guy you quoted to start this thread, got it.

Penetration:
T-34/76 80->120 a x150% increase in penetration
(for comparison PzIV 110->125 x113% increase

Why would you calculate it like this? Relic clearly didn't use a percental increase formula for establishing penetration values, but a simple -/+10 to -/+20 per distance for most units. Otherwise we would have different sets of penetration values (like 80/96/115 with a 1.2 increase, etc).

The T-34/76 just happens to have a high percental increase because it has the lowest base value that gets disproportionally multiplied by the standard +20/+20 pen increase compared to other vehicles, but there is nothing to conclude from this and it makes no sense to compare vehicles like this.


How does high near penetration prove the vehicle has a flanking role anyway? If a vehicle is supposed to flank, it should be able to get to the rear armor of enemies relatively easily, and then they do not need high penetration. 110 would be enough for quaranteed pens against the rear armor of nearly every unit. There is no logical correlation that high near penetration values indicate a flanking purpose. Penetration decrease over distance is just a natural phenomenon.

Puma confirmed ultimate flanking unit in game by having 100% pen increase at close range.
We can further nerf range to standard 40, because it doesn't need any more as a flanking vehicle.

Why would you calculate it like this? Relic clearly didn't use a percental increase formula for establishing penetration values, but a simple -/+10 to -/+20 per distance for most units.

That is an assumption in your part.

Even so PzIV get +15 and T-34 +40. There is clearly a difference.

Otherwise we would have different sets of penetration values (like 80/96/115 with a 1.2 increase, etc).

I did not claim there was a formula I simply point that T-34 weapon profile penetration has different curve than other medium tanks the same way M10 has different curve than other TDs.

The T-34/76 just happens to have a high percental increase because it has the lowest base value that gets disproportionally multiplied by the standard +20/+20 pen increase compared to other vehicles, but there is nothing to conclude from this and it makes no sense to compare vehicles like this.

Yes there is. Relic create a role which is "flanker vehicles" and part of that role included better DPS at close distance.

How does high near penetration prove the vehicle has a flanking role anyway?

It does not on its own.

If a vehicle is supposed to flank, it should be able to get to the rear armor of enemies relatively easily, and then they do not need high penetration. 110 would be enough for quaranteed pens against the rear armor of nearly every unit. There is no logical correlation that high near penetration values indicate a flanking purpose. Penetration decrease over distance is just a natural phenomenon.

Tank had much higher rear armor values that 110 at the time.

Oh ok, so useless thread no one asked for, including the guy you quoted to start this thread, got it.

Since in your opinion it useless feel free to stay away from it, and the guy I quoted just posted it in it.

Even so PzIV get +15 and T-34 +40. There is clearly a difference

The Tiger II gets +40 penetration from far to close range too. Is that a flanking tank too then?

That is an assumption in your part.

How is this an assumption? You can check the values yourself. The vast majority of vehicles get a steady +/-10, +/-15 or +/-20 penetration per subsequent distance. There clearly is no formula for these values, they are simple fixed increases. The Panzer IV is the exception here (+5 and +10), not the T-34/76.

The Tiger II gets +40 penetration from far to close range too. Is that a flanking tank too then?

There nothing magical about the number 40 that makes a unit a "flanking" unit.

You should also be aware by now that absolute values mean little. That is why weapon profile curves are used.

The T-34/76 get a x150% penetration increase while the Tiger gets x120% and thus the T-34/76 has more reason to close in to its target.

This is an intentional decision. It even explained in Patch notes about the PzIV buff:

"Panzer IV
The Panzer IV is having its ranged penetration increased to better combat medium tanks at a distance where it has the advantage of stronger frontal armour and faster rate of fire.

Penetration from 120/110/100 to 125/115/110"

The PzIV has it penetration increased by 10 far but only half that to mid and close so that it benefits less from closing. The player is encouraged to keep the distance when using the PzIV.

How is this an assumption? You can check the values yourself. The vast majority of vehicles get a steady +/-10, +/-15 or +/-20 penetration per subsequent distance.

You are looking for pattern that is simply not there, specially since the penetration values have changed with paches:

Panzer IV: +5+10
Cromwell: +15+15
Sherman: +20+20
T-34/76: +20+20

There clearly is no formula for these values, they are simple fixed increases. The Panzer IV is the exception here (+5 and +10), not the T-34/76.

There is no formula but there is design. There tanks that want to close the distance and there tanks that want to keep their distance.

Since it seem you do not want to take my word for here it from Relic in black and white from the patch notes:

"The role of the T34 is that of a flanker meant to exploit enemy weak points with hit and run tactics. "

There used to be a formula but it has been altered by tweaks.
P4 used to be 100/110/120 iirc, the t34 has been as listed for ages
The formula used to be simply consistency.
A close value and a far value with a middle value... In the middle as a result, an even split.
"flanker" units don't really exist because the risk of flanking is rarely worth the reward, certainly it enough to warrant a class of its own. This is why the t34 is regarded as hot garbage when it comes to AT.
No, if you want a "flanker" unit it needs to have low pen and high damage so that it's actually advantaged to be up in the enemy's guts, not disadvantaged-because the enemy is getting a pen increase as well after all, so it's not only making the flanker easier to snare, but more reliable to do finish off at the same time.
The role that's being called "flanker" exists and is really just called "shitty"

Flankers would exist, if revers speed dont be the same, as forward speed.

There used to be a formula but it has been altered by tweaks.
P4 used to be 100/110/120 iirc, the t34 has been as listed for ages
The formula used to be simply consistency.
A close value and a far value with a middle value... In the middle as a result, an even split.
"flanker" units don't really exist because the risk of flanking is rarely worth the reward, certainly it enough to warrant a class of its own. This is why the t34 is regarded as hot garbage when it comes to AT.
No, if you want a "flanker" unit it needs to have low pen and high damage so that it's actually advantaged to be up in the enemy's guts, not disadvantaged-because the enemy is getting a pen increase as well after all, so it's not only making the flanker easier to snare, but more reliable to do finish off at the same time.
The role that's being called "flanker" exists and is really just called "shitty"

Relic decided to create the role of "flanker" that is a simply fact and T-34/76 was designed with that role.

If Relic implement that role correctly is another story.

The current state of the T-34/76 is even yet another story since Relic has stop making designing the Patches a long time ago. I will not go into T-34/76 current performance since it irrelevant this topic.

The fact remain that vehicles better of maintaining distance and vehicles that are better of closing the distance.

Flankers would exist, if revers speed dont be the same, as forward speed.

If you can't flank a Ele/JT/IS you are probably doing something wrong that has nothing to do with reverse speed of these vehicles.

Having that said having different forward and reverse speed would be an improvement for vehicles but unfortunately as far as I know the current engine can not handle it.

There are way to make unit better at flanking thou.

Relic decided to create the role of "flanker" that is a simply fact and T-34/76 was designed with that role.

If Relic implement that role correctly is another story.

The current state of the T-34/76 is even yet another story since Relic has stop making designing the Patches a long time ago. I will not go into T-34/76 current performance since it irrelevant this topic.

The fact remain that vehicles better of maintaining distance and vehicles that are better of closing the distance.

Nice theory, but its incorrect.

T34 originally was designed as cheap "pack hunter", where you sacrifice one for ram to kill whatever target.
Without ram, there was a time where 4 T34s couldn't kill P4.

Current T34 is just another med tank with stats and price proportionally lower to regular bunch.

Flanking tank without acceleration. The only one the T-34 can flank is the Tiger if the German player gets drunk and drool over the keyboard.

Nice theory, but its incorrect.

Nice theory, but its incorrect.

T34 originally was designed as cheap "pack hunter", where you sacrifice one for ram to kill whatever target.
Without ram, there was a time where 4 T34s couldn't kill P4.

Current T34 is just another med tank with stats and price proportionally lower to regular bunch.

Here what Relic has to say from the patch notes:
"The role of the T34 is that of a flanker meant to exploit enemy weak points with hit and run tactics. "


Now pls stop fabricating thing that are false and presenting them as Relic's design.