A historical comparison in the Game

Jump back to quoted post20 Sep 2014, 01:49 AMKamfrenchie

And i must insist you are making completely untrue statements. Without ever backing them up.

It was the Axisplayers who were always furious that their more expensive tanks could get disabled by a cheaper one ramming them. Hence why at first, they had ram only work in a straight line and not follow the target if it turned around.

Meanwhile, soviets did point out that ram didn't trigger reliably, and that T34 in tank fights was at an extreme disadvantage, being basicly almost useless vs tigers and needing a lot of help to beat a lone p4.

but everyone considered ram to be a ludicrous and stupid ability, because it basicly sacrified a tank for some nice crits, but made t34 immonilized and without weapons.
Soviet T3 being so bad against armor could hardly stand back then, and still doesn't stand that well today, when soviets are forced to chose between t3 and 4.

Jump back to quoted post20 Sep 2014, 15:35 PMflyingtiger

Panzer IV was an obsolete tank in 1942 but the German still had to lengthen its life as a main battle tank due to the lack of new tanks produced. They tried to add so many things into this old design so of course it has to cost more and not as cost effective as the T-34.

Jump back to quoted post20 Sep 2014, 17:29 PMAirborne

Ram means now only you lose a t-34, giving with luck the enemy eniging damdge.

Jump back to quoted post20 Sep 2014, 18:27 PMJaigen

the p4 was considered slightly superior to 85 . this was an assessment that the soviet commanders made during testing according the red army handbook. in fact one of the key reasons the germans lost was they focussed to much on quality over quantity. doesnt change the fact however that the t-34 where very bad tanks.

Jump back to quoted post20 Sep 2014, 20:58 PMKronosaur0s

Pre patch was, holy yezus, Tiger/Elefant? no problem, let me ram it and it will become useless, yeeha! Now its useless