My take on tank battles

My take on the new upcoming vehicle patch:

The gist of it is Soviets should have better end game tanks than the germans as they had better tanks in the war. This isn't western front where german Armour reigned supreme, the soviets had better tanks mid and late war one that would demolish a tiger or panther tanks such as the IS2 and ISU152.

• First off at guns need to be re worked – hold fire ability for starters, better vehicle targeting and faster lateral transverse speed – to be able to always track a moving vehicle instead of playing catch up. At guns have to become viable to destroy Heavy tanks such as the IS2 ( having between 2-3 should be more than enough to keep one at bay if used propely)
  
  
  
• One shot kill issue – this should be minimized, 1 shot squad wipes are not good for the game and isu and is2 do it on the regular, even on retreat.
  
  
• Tanks need to take about 1/2 the shots to die than they currently do - a king tiger could be annihilated by 2 at guns ( using AP rounds) in less time than it usually takes to kill a su 85 with a panther. The tank feel like big damage sponges and its terrible.
  
  
  
  
  Im sick of the absolutely basic way tank battles play out in coh 2. Its 2 lumps going head to head and the “better” tank always wins. What that means is each tank taking 15 shots and the one with more hp wins, manoeuvring, flanking, attacking from rear, hiding behind buildings or cover, reverse and forward acceleration and side and rear armour stats mean nothing.
  
  
  This needs to be changed – I want to see tanks that are technically worse get the upper hand if used wisely – this means hitboxes need to come back, proper rear and side armour stats need to come back, different forward and reverse speeds need to be implemented as well as different penetration at distance.
  
  Similar to the way how pios can now beat cons if used properly id like to see t34s take on pz4 and win considerably if you outplay your opponent.
  
  Its undeniable that ost has the infantry advantage – and I think soviets should have the end game heavy armour advantage ( doctrinal with the IS2, KV2, ISU152 ect) the tiger was not the best tank of the war – maybe on the western front but in the east russian armour ruled supreme by the later stages of the war)
  
  
  
• IS2: should be the best tank in the game – it should consistently beat the tiger in a 1 v 1 situation, should have better front armour, more damage, more health and slightly higher speed – its rear and side armour can be less than the tiger tho to give it some weaknesses.
  
  
• Isu 152 should be able to beat up enemy tanks and aenemy infantry – but you need to cycle between HE and armour piercing rounds with a significant but not over thetop delay – this will stop you just parking it and taking out the whole ostheer force.
  
  
• T34: should be a viable AI tank and not bad AT tank ( when used correctly) iat close range it should have high enough pen to soundly beat pz4 in a 1 v 1 if gets a superior position ( ie attack from the rear or sides)
  
  
• T34/85 should beat pz4 in a head to head but not the panther in a 1 v 1 unless It attacks from the rear or side.
  
  
• Pz4 should be a superior mid game tank to anything soviets can bring out at the time (t34 or su76) and will soundly beat su85 if attack from side or rear.
  
  
• Panther: This tank should still be a menace – its fast, well armoured and packs a serious AT punch – the machine guns should do less damage to inf though as it should not be a solid infantry killer, and its front armour should be very good – side and rear armour should be weak ready to be exploited buy at guns and well place tank hunters. Its job would be to out manoeuvre and destroy enemy armour and would be proably one of the best pound of pound tanks in the game ( price, front armour strength and AT capability) but with much more weakness on side and rear than it has now and would be more vulnerable to infantry if unsupported.
  
  SU85: still too many advantages in my book – needs to have weak side and rear armour be properly punished for over extending – should have great AT punch and solid front armour.
  
  
  
• 
  Su76: should accelerate forward and reverse faster and be more maeuverable as well as have good sight radius ( open topped) this will enable it to get into flanking ambush positions against enemy armour and rain down arty on infantry and get out of immediate danger due to speed. It should have same damage as su85 but lower penetration over med range but remain weak armour and
  low hp
  
  
  
• 
  AT nades and faust should be directional and do more damage accordingly to where they hit (side front rear) like in COH.
  
  
• Stug should be better against inf and against tanks ( to be a dependable AI and AT platform if used well) and a bit tougher from the front - the side and rear armor should be pretty low to allow it to be outflanked and destroyed with ease if unsupported. This would mean stug could form the base of any ost force if it needed to but would not be used to spearhead a assault. on a 1 v 1 head to head should just about lose to a su85 ( but would be worse due to less AT damage and less range) but be a great all rounder
  
• 
  Ostwind: Is good as is - I think it could do with some more sight range due to being open topped.
  
  
  
• KV8 - Flame and or health need to be nerfed. If its damage is going to remain the same it needs 40% health reduction it simply takes way too much to be destroyed. If not then increase the chance for engine critical by a big margin due to fuel tanks.
  
  
  
• t70 I think it should have the fire rate and reload time similar to the m8 scout car, it does good damage but i think its a bit off with the ROF and reload - this way would create a new and better way to use it.

The gist of it is Soviets should have better end game tanks than the germans as they had better tanks in the war. This isn't western front where german Armour reigned supreme, the soviets had better tanks mid and late war one that would demolish a tiger or panther tanks such as the IS2 and ISU152.

This is not really true as the tank losses statistics Show it:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/wwii/production.asp
go on "tank losses".
The soviets lost more then 83500 tanks while Germans only 25,584.

Its undeniable that ost has the infantry advantage – and I think soviets should have the end game heavy armour advantage ( doctrinal with the IS2, KV2, ISU152 ect) the tiger was not the best tank of the war – maybe on the western front but in the east russian armour ruled supreme by the later stages of the war)

The statistic of the tiger Shows it had maybe the best Kill/lost ratios of all tanks in WW2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_heavy_tank_battalion
"Combat Performance"
Tiger loss/kill Ratio 1 : 5.74 this was outstanding for a tank in WW2.Most allied tanks had negativ ratios.

IS-2 just Needs more health.He already has more damage, Penetration and armour then the tiger.
And the ISU-152 Needs a bit more armour and Penetration and he must be a bit cheaper..

My take on the new upcoming vehicle patch:

The gist of it is Soviets should have better end game tanks than the germans as they had better tanks in the war. This isn't western front where german Armour reigned supreme, the soviets had better tanks mid and late war one that would demolish a tiger or panther tanks such as the IS2 and ISU152.

Read a book. Even in 1945 the Soviets lost more tanks. IS-2 and ISU-152 were inferior to Panther tanks and not totally thought out. A big gun and armor isn´t everything. The IS-2 had accuracy issues as the gun had to be elevated back to the standard position after every shot to reload it. Thus accuracy was very poor. IS-2 and ISU-152 had awkward reload times, such as 2 shots and 1 shot per minute respectively. Germans had better accuracy, better crews, better reload times. Germans should have better tanks.

• One shot kill issue – this should be minimized, 1 shot squad wipes are not good for the game and isu and is2 do it on the regular, even on retreat.

That´s going to be fixed next patch.

• Tanks need to take about 1/2 the shots to die than they currently do - a king tiger could be annihilated by 2 at guns ( using AP rounds) in less time than it usually takes to kill a su 85 with a panther. The tank feel like big damage sponges and its terrible.

That should then apply to both sides, but I think that would be too fast. T-34s and Panzer IV would go down with two shots. That´s too fast for a game like CoH.

and rear armour stats mean nothing.

I agree that flanking should be more rewarded.

This needs to be changed – I want to see tanks that are technically worse get the upper hand if used wisely – this means hitboxes need to come back, proper rear and side armour stats need to come back, different forward and reverse speeds need to be implemented as well as different penetration at distance.

Agreed.

Its undeniable that ost has the infantry advantage – and I think soviets should have the end game heavy armour advantage ( doctrinal with the IS2, KV2, ISU152 ect) the tiger was not the best tank of the war – maybe on the western front but in the east russian armour ruled supreme by the later stages of the war

Disagreed. The Tiger achieved much higher kill ratios than any Russian tank. Just google tank aces. You will find German crews with upto 150+ confirmed kills. For the Russians you won´t. As I said above, a big gun and much armor on a tank like the IS-2 means nothing, if you have trouble hitting your target. Panther and IS-2 could take each other out, but keep in mind the Panther had a higher rate of fire, could keep the gun on target while reloading, had better optics, crew comfort and was usually in a defensive position. Panther should be better.

Read a book. Even in 1945 the Soviets lost more tanks. IS-2 and ISU-152 were inferior to Panther tanks and not totally thought out. A big gun and armor isn´t everything. The IS-2 had accuracy issues as the gun had to be elevated back to the standard position after every shot to reload it. Thus accuracy was very poor. IS-2 and ISU-152 had awkward reload times, such as 2 shots and 1 shot per minute respectively. Germans had better accuracy, better crews, better reload times. Germans should have better tanks.


Disagreed. The Tiger achieved much higher kill ratios than any Russian tank. Just google tank aces. You will find German crews with upto 150+ confirmed kills. For the Russians you won´t. As I said above, a big gun and much armor on a tank like the IS-2 means nothing, if you have trouble hitting your target. Panther and IS-2 could take each other out, but keep in mind the Panther had a higher rate of fire, could keep the gun on target while reloading, had better optics, crew comfort and was usually in a defensive position. Panther should be better.

There is also a nice doku about the tiger vs IS-2 duel during the battle of the Baltics.A few german tiger aces against masses of soviet tanks and it showed that the IS-2 could be destroyed by 1 shot of the Tiger if he aimed for the turret weak Points of the IS-2.Th german tanker here talked about it that Germans always aimed for the turret and not the front armour.The doku is based on Otto carius and others memories.It also Shows the weaknesses of the IS-2 with the reload times.Very interesting doku.Its based on true Events:

Hey guys while I know there was some amazing tiger ages it doesnt cover the fact that the tiger and panther has serious reliability issues, or that the isu152 or is2 could one shot them just as easily.

There is a lot of inof and love for german vehicles cos they look cool and whermacht has a great militaristic aura to it but realistically their tanks were no better if not straight up worse than late war soviet ones.

At the end of the day, tanks like the tiger and panther did not have the sort of dominance in the east then they did in the west and the game should reflect that.

As for 1/2 the damage taken, I guess I mean it should be closer to vcoh with vehicle health - i like how tanks are a bit tougher in coh2 but I think its too much, all vehicles need to get a health reduction cos say a pz4 vs KV tank takes like 1 minute of firing..


EDIT: ALso i mention that the panther would be "pound for pound" the best tank in the game - for its price/ damage and health and that tanks like the IS2 would just be better than the german heavies ( stats wise) but the tiger for exampels they could easily take it on if good tactics are used. So basically tank battles are not just stat based but strategy based too

Hey guys while I know there was some amazing tiger ages it doesnt cover the fact that the tiger and panther has serious reliability issues, or that the isu152 or is2 could one shot them just as easily.

There is a lot of inof and love for german vehicles cos they look cool and whermacht has a great militaristic aura to it but realistically their tanks were no better if not straight up worse than late war soviet ones.

At the end of the day, tanks like the tiger and panther did not have the sort of dominance in the east then they did in the west and the game should reflect that.

As for 1/2 the damage taken, I guess I mean it should be closer to vcoh with vehicle health - i like how tanks are a bit tougher in coh2 but I think its too much, all vehicles need to get a health reduction cos say a pz4 vs KV tank takes like 1 minute of firing..

At the end of the day, the soviets would always have more armor on the field, despite the losses. Referring to Russian armor, they were superior because they had the numbers. In terms of quality and performance, their German counterparts were always superior. If you mean by the end of the war, German armor was inferior to Russian armor, it was because the Germans had to produce tanks more cheaply and with a lack of parts. You can thank American bombers halting the production of many tank lines, and as Germany was losing land, their resources were getting low. A lot of German shells used Tungsten, which someone can elaborate for me, but i do know it is not common nor cheap, and the Germans at the end of the war were lacking materials like these to make their complex armor and grade A ammunition. Germans were more willing to abandon these tanks, and as the Russian captured them, they realized that the German's late war tanks were much weaker as their armor were made with cheaper alloys. An IS-2 did cost more to produce than a Tiger, but a Tiger was much better engineered. Needless to say the Russian's tank designs were innovative and cost-efficient,the Germans will always be known for designing the best vehicles. The Tiger's 88 cannon was practically the most efficient gun of the war. It had a great rate of fire, excellent accuracy, and was able to penetrate the front armor of most of the Soviet arsenal. Some even say the Tiger, and many other German tanks, were over-engineered. I certainly do not agree with these statements:
"but realistically their tanks were no better if not straight up worse than late war soviet ones.

At the end of the day, tanks like the tiger and panther did not have the sort of dominance in the east then they did in the west and the game should reflect that."

Straight up statistics show the superiority of German tanks based on their kill/death ratio. In CoH2,the panther currently is the bane of absolutely every Soviet tank, and its Blitzkrieg makes it escape every situation. I am in the boat that Soviet tanks need more AT in place for a little less, sometimes overkill, AI.

Didnt you read the K/D ratios of the Tiger or Elefant or are you blind?
They did not have dominance because for 1 german tank, there were like 13 russian tanks. That is imposible to win...

Did news of the new vehicle patch come up? Any information??

Didnt you read the K/D ratios of the Tiger or Elefant or are you blind?
They did not have dominance because for 1 german tank, there were like 13 russian tanks. That is imposible to win...

Statistics can be decieving.. germans destroyed hundreds of tanks in the first part of the war as the russians retreated and i doubt the figures are adjusted for this. I bet in later battles the kills very similar.

If tiger was so good why did they start making tiger 2 and king tiger after encountering russian tanks like the IS2?

Something may be highly engineered and still be worse than something more simple. the corvette ZR1 has basic engine and suspension but it will thrash ferarris 4 times its price around a race track..

Look I like german tanks.. the panther is just sweet looking but i can admit that the soviets had better tanks.

Look at modern tanks do they look more like german vehicles such as tiger or panzer or more like the russian t models and is2.. yeh i though so.

If tiger was so good why did they start making tiger 2 and king tiger after encountering russian tanks like the IS2?

Look I can say the same!!
If the T34 was so good why did the russians start making tanks like IS2 and SU100 after encountering german tanks like the Tiger or Elefant?

Statistics can be decieving.. germans destroyed hundreds of tanks in the first part of the war as the russians retreated and i doubt the figures are adjusted for this. I bet in later battles the kills very similar.

If tiger was so good why did they start making tiger 2 and king tiger after encountering russian tanks like the IS2?

Something may be highly engineered and still be worse than something more simple. the corvette ZR1 has basic engine and suspension but it will thrash ferarris 4 times its price around a race track..

Look I like german tanks.. the panther is just sweet looking but i can admit that the soviets had better tanks.

Look at modern tanks do they look more like german vehicles such as tiger or panzer or more like the russian t models and is2.. yeh i though so.

Soviets had there highest tank losses in 1943.
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/wwii/production.asp

tank losses:
year: German losses: Soviet losses:
1941.... 2,758........ 20,500
1942.... 2,648........ 15,000
1943.... 6,362........ 22,400
1944.... 6,434........ 16,900
1945.... 7,382........ 8,700

In 1944 when the IS-2 showed up the high tank losses for the soviets didn t Change.In 1945 the tank losses for Germans/soviets was only more similar because of lack of fuel for germans and because german tanks were extremely outnumbered then.

Germans start to make tiger 2 after they Encounter the IS-2?Dude the king tiger was build Long before the IS-2 hit the battlefield.The tiger II production has started in 1943 and the first IS-2 and king tigers entered the battlefield in 1944.The production of the tiger II has nothing to do with the upcome of the IS-2.

Statistics can be decieving.. germans destroyed hundreds of tanks in the first part of the war as the russians retreated and i doubt the figures are adjusted for this. I bet in later battles the kills very similar.

You bet wrong. StuGs alone - while not impressive on paper vs. the sheer armor and giant gun of an IS-2 were the vehicle with the most vehicle-kills in the entire war. And that with only 10k produced. And most of those kills were achieved past 1942 when the StuG was finally outfitted with the long gun.

Look at modern tanks do they look more like german vehicles such as tiger or panzer or more like the russian t models and is2.. yeh i though so.

Again, you are shooting into your own leg. Modern tanks are rather similar to the Panther or Pershing. The Panther was the first step to a main battle tank, which is standard in every army today. Behemoths following the concept of the IS-2 are outdated. You will find fast firing tanks, with a big ammunition loadout and a decent rate of fire today. The IS-2 and Tiger were breakthrough tanks - a concept not very common today.

Do we really need another thread asking for more realism in the game? This isn't a simulation, it's a game. The unit stats are only loosely based on reality.

I think Relic has consistently proven that balance > realism so these asks are completely pointless.

I agree Soviets need some help in regards to armor late in the game, but basing your arguments on actual or perceived stats from the war is a great way to ensure your thoughts are ignored.

I wonder how a T-34 squad would peform. Buy it, for the rough price of a Panzer IV, get 2 T-34/76 as part of one squad. That would encourage people to be more reckless with them, since losing one doesn't mean losing the veterancy and it can be cheaply replaced. It'd actually be fairly Soviet-like in that manner..

If tiger was so good why did they start making tiger 2 and king tiger after encountering russian tanks like the IS2?

Because Hitler had a fascination with really big tanks.

what you guys don't seem to undestand, is that while german tanks were better , they were also WAY more expensive than their soviet counterparts.

The soviet and german steel industries were more or less equal,with german being slightly ahead.

However, soviets choosed to make cheap,decent tanks. And germans chose to make extremelly expensive, over engineered tanks like the tiger.


And we all know the outcome of the war, and we can all say that the german strategy DIDINT WORK.

Because honestly, what is the better solution? To make 1 really expensive, high tech, tank like the panther that is somewhat better than its competitor, or make 5 cheap, however good enough tanks like the t-34/76 or /85 .

If you look for example, at fighter or bomber production you would see, that germany only very slightly made less planes than the USSR.

I wonder how a T-34 squad would peform. Buy it, for the rough price of a Panzer IV, get 2 T-34/76 as part of one squad. That would encourage people to be more reckless with them, since losing one doesn't mean losing the veterancy and it can be cheaply replaced. It'd actually be fairly Soviet-like in that manner..

A squad would be fun like the sovet sniper ones.
But then the ram Need to go away from the tanks or it would be OP.

A squad would be fun like the sovet sniper ones.
But then the ram Need to go away from the tanks or it would be OP.

Done. No one really wants to resort to ram. But how exactly would you reinforce the other tank? What if you retreat in your base and for 50 fuel and 200 manpower (will be adjusted, i made that up) and 30 seconds (again made up) a new t34 will arive on field and park into the squad. But it seems really abusable, so reinforcing the second t34 cant be affordable forever.

According to this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4R6TOFxlY

I think it's safe to say that we will see King Tigers, Hetzers, Jadtigers (which was basically confirmed) and the scary other German Heavies.

According to this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4R6TOFxlY

I think it's safe to say that we will see King Tigers, Hetzers, Jadtigers (which was basically confirmed) and the scary other German Heavies.

Finally. I hope their opposites, the many german light vehicles, will also make a debut somewhere (pz II as well as JagdTiger evidence seen)

Done. No one really wants to resort to ram. But how exactly would you reinforce the other tank? What if you retreat in your base and for 50 fuel and 200 manpower (will be adjusted, i made that up) and 30 seconds (again made up) a new t34 will arive on field and park into the squad. But it seems really abusable, so reinforcing the second t34 cant be affordable forever.

Well the manpower cost would need to be lower otherwise there wouldn't be much reason to try and keep one tank alive. What I'd be more concerned about is how to deal with engine damage and stuff, since it would mean both tanks don't move at the same speed anymore. It's a fun concept and I'd like to see it tried, but it probably wouldn't work too well and pathing would probably ruin it anyway.