Suggestion for overhauling T-34/76 & PanzerIV next patch.

Hello ladies and gentlemen,

Since the awesome March Deployment patch I have been playing a lot of ranked matches, mostly as Ostheer. Curiously Soviets have completely abandoned T3, my Panzer IVs or Panthers no longer face T-34/76s.

So I started playing as soviets and found out why.

I’m happy with the current fuel cost for both soviets T3 – T4 buildings, as they delay the armour and make the game pacing more enjoyable. However seeing that soviets can only afford a single tier, there’s no incentive into going T3, due to T70s being tin cans and the T-34/76s seem to be designed as support tanks, their role being to ram a panzer so the ZiS-3 can easily shoot at crippled target. Most soviets have to go guards into SU-85 + call-in armour.

If we take into account the historical performance of the T-34/76 compared the Panzer IV, on one hand the T-34/76 was faster, had a better gun (only in 1941-2), better mobility (wide tracks) and had vastly superior sloped armour, yet was rarely equipped with radios. On the other hand, as the bulletin notes state, Panzer IVs had better radios (Better coordination), better optics (Thus better visibility & range) and properly trained or experienced crews.


Why don’t you test the following?

T-34/76s should have more health and armour than Panzer IVs, while keeping current speed and mobility (superior tank design). Yet it should miss more often and reload slower (inexperienced crews)

T-34/76s could keep the ram or not, and instead of having the secure point vet 1 ability they should earn “flank speed”, to flank panthers & tigers and hit them at the side armour (That’s what they did in real life). It would help a lot the Soviets on the Anti-tank departement, T-34/76 already performs well against infantry.

However, Panzer IVs should have a noticeably longer line of sight and range (Radios+optics), shoot much more accurately be it on the move or static while reloading faster with minimal scatter (Better crews).

Panzer IVs could get armour piercing rounds ability (similar to vCoH), losing the AoE against infantry for 100% guarantee penetrating hits without any increased damage, just so rounds never bounce off T-34/76s and T-34/85s. However this should not work on Heavy Kv1s & IS2s. Maybe a 50 munitions cost should be about right?

Seeing the multiplayer takes place in 1944-45, both tanks have equivalent guns so they should have the same damage output and penetration values.

I think with these changes the PIV would play differently instead of being simply considered a much better T-34 (Which bugs the authenticity freak I am); Surely ending the arguing about which tank is better overall. Because now it would be at what task they perform better than the enemy medium tank.

Result: T-34/76s are more durable than PIVs but the PIVs deal more consistent DPS to compensate.

You will have to see how this could impact the Stug III, I think that with these suggestions the Stug III wouldn’t be used as much considering the PIV would have a similar performance to a turreted Stug III. Changes to the Stug III would have to be made, but the balance team knows all the dots and I can’t connect them all, So I don’t know what to suggest for that unit.

Anyways I thought this was a decent idea to propose, some might disagree and others might agree but I just wanted to share it and see how Relic balance team thinks it could fit in the medium armour/heavy armour overhaul they are working on.

Cheers.

Hey,

So it seems most people agree on an armour and health increase for the T-34/76.

However should it be a slight increase? Meaning a T-34/76 = Panzer IV health and armour.

Or should it be a substantial health & armour increase resulting in a slightly sturdier T-34/76 compared to the Panzer IV?

[Originally posted by Death's Head View Post
I think you have to consider the impact of these changes on T-34 vs infantry encounters.

Also from a historical point of view, the Panzer IV with the L43 gun was overall a better tank than the T-34/76 mainly due to the significant effective range advantage. This is a game and not a simulator but I just wanted to point that out as you seem to think the T-34/76 was definitively superior to the Panzer IV, which it most certainly was not.]

Not going to debate on whether the Panzer IV or T-34/76 is the better tank as it would derail the thread off topic, also I said superior tank design, which he is, not overall better tank, maybe there's a thread on that already.

I did consider the impact of the changes against infantry, that is why I proposed to give the T-34/76s a soviet equivalent to blitzkrieg. So guys what do you think about “flank speed”?

Instead of buffing the T-34/76 damage output, which could be very problematic to infantry, it would allow the T-34/76 to deal more damage to panzers and light vehicles by outmaneuvering them and hitting the sides & rear.

Furthermore, flank speed could be activated to dodge panzerfausts, consequently increasing the T-34/76s survivability and keeping veterancy for the late game scalability.

If we increase the penetration of T-34/76s, spamming them and launching a frontal assault, kitting with them or keeping them at range could be too powerful and overwhelming against axis armour, T-34s/76 need to take some risks for the tank gameplay to remain balanced.

Should Flank speed replace secure point?

Should Flank speed replace ram?

Maybe having ram + flank speed can be too powerful?

The original idea was to make the T-34/76 a more aggressive tank by tailoring it into a shock troops mechanic, respectable health & armour amplified by a short speed burst to close in on a panzer IV and shoot him in the rear.

Lastly, if overhauling the Panzer IV is out of the question, then with these changes the T-34/76 should receive a cost increase, because it would be equal to a Panzer IV if not better.

Cheers.