Login

russian armor

T34-76/85 needs a fuel cost increase

31 Jul 2014, 06:29 AM
#25
avatar of Xylon666Darkstar

Posts: 11

Nah, T34/76 is fine.

Reduce costs of Panther V though imo. Tech costs, unit costs, something.
31 Jul 2014, 07:21 AM
#26
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246

General answer for this topic is No.
31 Jul 2014, 08:13 AM
#27
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Mark Vehicle could perhaps use a small duration nerf.

I wouldnt otherwise touch t34 or 85s till Panther gets sorted somehow, which might swing the meta enough to necessitate some wider armor changes, depending on how they go about Panther and the Ost T4 situation.
31 Jul 2014, 08:17 AM
#28
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130



"T34/76 is a joke against other armor" lolz are you loco bro? To you sir as you so nicely put it yourself, "Come back once you know how units actually work"........

As for the OP, hmmmm ya T85s are extremely strong in a good players hands, but can be easily countered with 2 paks and a medium tank, just learn to use units in concert with one another man.


You do realise that your counter cost 3 times more mp right?

The problem with both the t-34-85 and the e8 is that they over perform as AT tanks. if you look at the penetration rates both the e-8 and the t-34-85 nearly rivals that of the ami and soviet dedicated tank destroyers. So its easily capable of replacing either the jackson or the su85. Thats why you see the fucking spam: they are nearly as good as dedicated AI or AT tanks. The label jack of all trades cannot be applied to them. in sufficient numbers they become the master of all trades.

Increasing the fuel for these tanks will change nothing. i suggest we keep the fuel the same but decrease the penetration of both call ins to 120.
31 Jul 2014, 08:57 AM
#29
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2014, 08:17 AMJaigen


You do realise that your counter cost 3 times more mp right?

The problem with both the t-34-85 and the e8 is that they over perform as AT tanks. if you look at the penetration rates both the e-8 and the t-34-85 nearly rivals that of the ami and soviet dedicated tank destroyers. So its easily capable of replacing either the jackson or the su85. Thats why you see the fucking spam: they are nearly as good as dedicated AI or AT tanks. The label jack of all trades cannot be applied to them. in sufficient numbers they become the master of all trades.

Increasing the fuel for these tanks will change nothing. i suggest we keep the fuel the same but decrease the penetration of both call ins to 120.

And why relic got to do that? Dom't see tje point. 120 pen is nothing wrong to fight Ostwind and Pz4, but T34|85 come lategame and supposed to fight heavy tanks. I know the unit itself is good, but there are many viable counters to it.
31 Jul 2014, 09:05 AM
#30
avatar of ofield

Posts: 420

It's all about RNG. The only difference between the T34 and Panzer IV is that the T34 is better against infantry


Just based on stats, the PIV is the better AI tank, 0.5 less scatter, slightly better AoE Profile and a pintle MG.

The only reason t34 seems so great vs inf are the smaller german squads.
31 Jul 2014, 10:42 AM
#31
avatar of Steiner500

Posts: 183

T34/76 vs Pz4:
T34 has always had very solid anti-inf power, way better than Pz4;
now since it got a huge anti-tank buff, and they can penetrate Pz4 armor from any angle from the max range. So basically, T34/76 dominates Pz4 in both AI and AT role, while Pz4 cannot be used as a breakthrough (soviet t3 rush) tank anymore. Pz4 has a fuel cost of 125 while T34/76 is 100. In that case, for every 5 t34, there will only be 4 pz4. but their power is more or less the same.

From experiment, now T34/76 can penetrate Panther FRONT armor within mid-range. Panther has got thick armor as a Tiger, but they penetrate it from the front so easily. T34/76 has the speed of a panther to get close enough, or even flank it.

So conclusion is, since the Anti-tank buff of T34/76, they even scale up to Ostheer T4, this should cost more than 100 fuel. Now it is overperforming and kind of spammable.

On the other hand, T34/85 is more or less the same story.
For 10 more fuel than a Pz4, it has even better anti-inf power from its AOE.
And for tank battle, Pz4 won't stand up to its massive health pool

the super mobility and penetration of this thing makes it a tank destroyer. It is similar to panther from stats, it can penetrate tiger with ease, but only cost 135 fuel, teching not required, no building time, extremely spammable.

The T34 after the buff is overperforming for their costs.

Ur objectivity isn't high enough to write this. Please play Soviet and look for the Weak side of this Army.
31 Jul 2014, 11:09 AM
#32
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130


And why relic got to do that? Dom't see tje point. 120 pen is nothing wrong to fight Ostwind and Pz4, but T34|85 come lategame and supposed to fight heavy tanks. I know the unit itself is good, but there are many viable counters to it.


Why should it counter heavy tanks? you got tank destroyers for that. and if it counters heavy tanks and be IA shouldnt it be 175 like the panther?
31 Jul 2014, 13:19 PM
#33
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2014, 11:09 AMJaigen


Why should it counter heavy tanks? you got tank destroyers for that. and if it counters heavy tanks and be IA shouldnt it be 175 like the panther?

Why? Because of
1)CP and late income time = battlefield with Heavy tanks.
2)High fuel cost (not per unit , I agree that it is cheap as per unit).
Vaz
31 Jul 2014, 13:44 PM
#34
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

We are being trolled right? On the plus side, I finally got myself a nice sig, thanks siuking666!
31 Jul 2014, 14:05 PM
#35
avatar of jackill2611

Posts: 246

The point is, I repeat, that T34-76/85 don't need a fuel cost increase
31 Jul 2014, 14:12 PM
#36
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130


Why? Because of
1)CP and late income time = battlefield with Heavy tanks.
2)High fuel cost (not per unit , I agree that it is cheap as per unit).


Heavy tanks is not an argument you got TD's for that but they are not used because the 85 and e8 take their roles. this game is also becoming boring as fuck because of it. nearly 99% of all the soviets and ami take the e8 and 85 commanders and you use a build specifically to counter this. Other doctrine that could ad so much debt and strategy to this game are currently not viable.

31 Jul 2014, 14:26 PM
#37
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2014, 14:12 PMJaigen


Heavy tanks is not an argument you got TD's for that but they are not used because the 85 and e8 take their roles. this game is also becoming boring as fuck because of it. nearly 99% of all the soviets and ami take the e8 and 85 commanders and you use a build specifically to counter this. Other doctrine that could ad so much debt and strategy to this game are currently not viable.



No, they don't, not even close.

Thing is, its always better to have numerous medium tanks then a single heavy. The firepower of multiple tanks alone is good enough reason. Thats why T34/85 was always more popular then IS-2.

There is also the extremely dated axis players mindset that if their tank got more then 200 armor it should roflstomp everything below IS-2.

Heavy tanks are strong and potent, but they won't stop the tank force of greater fuel cost, especially if its bolstered by doctrinal abilities like mark target and this have nothing to do with T34/85 or EZ8 price, but the axis mindset that "superior kurtz steel should not need any AT support".
31 Jul 2014, 15:22 PM
#38
avatar of SUCKmyCLOCK

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2014, 08:17 AMJaigen


You do realise that your counter cost 3 times more mp right?

The problem with both the t-34-85 and the e8 is that they over perform as AT tanks. if you look at the penetration rates both the e-8 and the t-34-85 nearly rivals that of the ami and soviet dedicated tank destroyers. So its easily capable of replacing either the jackson or the su85. Thats why you see the fucking spam: they are nearly as good as dedicated AI or AT tanks. The label jack of all trades cannot be applied to them. in sufficient numbers they become the master of all trades.

Increasing the fuel for these tanks will change nothing. i suggest we keep the fuel the same but decrease the penetration of both call ins to 120.


First of all getting 2 paks in a game is a basic necessity, I dont know how you play or what games you play (1v1,2v2 ect)but having less than 2 paks in 2v2 upwards is just silly and asking for trouble. Not having paks and just waiting around for your own armor = a loss against even a half decent allied player.

Secondly T85s or E8 are not Tigers or IS2s they go down easily, (again if you have paks and a single tank anything from a stug upwards), if your enemy has a horde of them, well you have already made massive mistakes in the game and deserve to lose.

As OKW a raketen will take down both tanks so easily when backed up with volks and shrecks, I dont understand how this is an issue for you?

PS Ever hear of teller mines?

31 Jul 2014, 20:22 PM
#39
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2014, 14:26 PMKatitof


No, they don't, not even close.

Thing is, its always better to have numerous medium tanks then a single heavy. The firepower of multiple tanks alone is good enough reason. Thats why T34/85 was always more popular then IS-2.

There is also the extremely dated axis players mindset that if their tank got more then 200 armor it should roflstomp everything below IS-2.

Heavy tanks are strong and potent, but they won't stop the tank force of greater fuel cost, especially if its bolstered by doctrinal abilities like mark target and this have nothing to do with T34/85 or EZ8 price, but the axis mindset that "superior kurtz steel should not need any AT support".


Completely missing the point again. Tell me katitof do you see many jacksons or su85? no you dont because 85 and e8 have taken their jobs. which is a rather massive imbalance . generalist tanks need to be decent at their jobs not take the role of a dedicated TD or AI. if it was up to me i would jack these tanks up to 175 fuel given their worth.
Vaz
31 Jul 2014, 20:24 PM
#40
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

Tellar mines? I'm actually happy when I run over those as allies, considering how strong and underused they are.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

745 users are online: 745 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49104
Welcome our newest member, zhcnwps
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM