Relic: Rebuff the 34/76

The nerf was pointless/futile/senseless!
So take it back
Thank you, Relic
And Thank you for the Good Game and Community Support

That is a BUG fix, not a nerf.

About 2 months ago, the reload time of T34/76's main gun was 6.2-6.8s, and no one complainted about this. Then they buffed the reload time of KV1 which uses the same main gun model with T34/76. So the reload time of T34/76's main gun bugged, it was set to 5.2-5.8s too. And last patch, they just renewed the reload time of T34/76's main gun to the right level it should be.

Compare the t34 to the sherman and 10 fuel and 30 mp cannot justify the performance difference. Nerf one or buff the other changes must be made

Completely different approach: swap the T-34/76 with the T-34/85

I miss T34s vs P4s battles from back in da day. Nowadayz everyone is just waiting for callins. Imo all non-callins should be viable solutions in order to encourage players to use other docs that might not include heavy tank callins.

Wow, its still Company of Call-ins? Who woulda guessed.

T-34s just can't pull their weight late game, especially as Soviets are required to pick one of each particular building. A reload buff won't change that.

Soviets need a complete faction redesign to be of any use as a combined arms fighting force. Enough said.Their reliance on cheese and call-ins is the only thing that just barely keeps them in the game.

I had a guy in a 2v2 recently railing against my use of advanced warfare where I was able to smash up his infantry through PPSh cons and T-34-85s. He told me to use combined arms and skill instead of just spam. He was spamming shreked volks into obers followed by a KT. Anything else I might have done would have been wrecked, whether by the Obers, or the shreked volks, or the KT.

Non-doctrinal units such as the SU-85 and T-34/76 simply wouldn't have been able to do anything, they'd have been meet for his shreks, nothing more.

SU-85 is a joke. Unless you go ISU-152 you are pretty much screwed against mediocre OKW players in team games. Conscript PPShs are waste of ammo, it is far better to stockpile it and spam Sturmovik runs.

SU-85 is a joke. Unless you go ISU-152 you are pretty much screwed against mediocre OKW players in team games. Conscript PPShs are waste of ammo, it is far better to stockpile it and spam Sturmovik runs.

I beg to differ on the Conscript PPSh argument... but the SU-85 point is true enough.

The problem remains the lack of variety in dedicated AT and the mechanics of tank combat in CoH2.

If every tank had deflection damage and a chance, on deflection, to deal a minor crit? There would be a reason to have a T-34/76.

It could leave a PzIV hurting, rather than the current plonk fest.

There would be some reason to have cheap tanks alongside your super heavy call in tanks- their deflection damage would add up over time, and the minor crits (traverse damage, crew injuries, optics damage, whatever) would offer them some utility in helping to keep heavy tanks sensible. I don't care that you're in a tiger, 76mm steel slugs slamming into your turret and hull do fuck up the modules and hamper the crew.

As it stands, as soon as a tiger hits the field the early tanks are rendered 100% useless. Even the Stuart is of dubious usefulness.


If all tanks had more realistic reloads, but all of them had reasonable AoE, and all shells had a chance of doing something? Tank combat would actually be interesting. As it stands, it suffers heavily from being made too arcade style- much more so than even the rather jovial infantry combat.

Tech progression makes vehicles that should become support utterly obsolete.

Only hampered further by early AT options being designed to fight everything from the first medium tank to the last heavy. If there were AT options that were came alongside mediums and then later ones in general area of T4, mediums could maybe fight some AT guns with a chance of not just getting torn to shreds. Alas, no such luck. And AT guns, too, would benefit from doing more than just HP, but hitting harder when they pen, but having more chances to hit minor areas or deflect.

Just my opinion, though. I'm sure some people like starcraft lite with armour mechanics that have given birth to current call in meta.

I beg to differ on the Conscript PPSh argument... but the SU-85 point is true enough.

I have used PPShs in the last couple of games and I didn't see any reasonable benefits. Defensively in green cover, I wasn't even able to slightly damage assaulting sturm pios on few occasions. Offensively at close range it seemed to me that PPSh accuracy is virtually non-existing on the move. How do you use them?

I have used PPShs in the last couple of games and I didn't see any reasonable benefits. Defensively in green cover, I wasn't even able to slightly damage assaulting sturm pios on few occasions. Offensively at close range it seemed to me that PPSh accuracy is virtually non-existing on the move. How do you use them?

Well I don't know how you cant find any use for them but my Soviet record is won almost alone by those ppshs.

I have used PPShs in the last couple of games and I didn't see any reasonable benefits. Defensively in green cover, I wasn't even able to slightly damage assaulting sturm pios on few occasions. Offensively at close range it seemed to me that PPSh accuracy is virtually non-existing on the move. How do you use them?

I tend to avoid using them defensively (PPSh range is terrible), however that won't mean I charge out to meet and advancing enemy of course.
I use them in groups of 2-3, generally I'll have 4,5, even 6 squads on the field. To ease micro, I'll work with 2 or 3 in a group, aggressively using cover and focus fire to advance and lay the hurt down on one enemy squad at a time, generally the strongest one as at close range PPShs will melt anything infantry shaped. You need to take good care of them. A successful engagement won't be without casualties, but feel confident that you still use a squad effectively with 5 or even 4 guys. The number of PPShs in a squad mean that losses are negligable until you get to 3. Given con durability its about then that I begin preparing to withdraw them.

(I'm considering writing a guide on Conscript PPSh tactics)

If I'm assaulting a defended position, I work as thus. I'll hope to have 4+ conscript squads plus support depending on the situation, a mortar or MG is appreciated, though if armour is expected, then an AT gun is required, if you have the munis then its barrage ability comes in handy as well.
I'll advance 2-3 conscript squads first, backing them with artillery, mortars etc. Using all available cover and from different angles and approaches, they will seek to rush the enemy positions, if one is suppressed by an MG, then the different angles enable me to rush the MG and kill it or retreat it. Molotovs are great for this. The durability of conscript squads enables me to take sustained suppression or fire and keep the assault going. If there are vehicles in the area, AT nading them for your AT assets is imperative.
The assault group should be made up of your less experienced troops, who'll gain vet faster and won't matter as much if your enemy pulls a trick on you. However, your assault group, once it has taken the objective, will likely be unable to hold it, particularly if the enemy is just reacting. They'll also be likely down to 4-3 men, though often, given skill and luck, you can achieve an assault so that you lose only 1-2 guys in all the squads combined. At this time you send in your reinforcement group, as well as advancing supporting weapons. You garrison all available cover, prepare approaches and if possible have your cons behind line of sight blockers. Mines are also preferable, but are unlikely to be put down in time, use at own discretion. When the enemy advances, your PPSh cons will ambush them, focusing fire on one or two squads, generally ones that need to die early, these will include obers and Pgrens, or any unit that represents a threat to your support.

Don't be afraid to go "screw it" and retreat everything, unit preservation (as ever) is key. If the attack fails, attack from a different angle.
If the Assault Group fails, don't hesitate to send in your reinforcement group via different approaches again to attack, the enemy may well be so badly battered that the new attack overwhelms them.
If you see a dropped weapon, particularly a panzershrek, do not hesitate to pick it up. Nothing apart from shreked shocktroops is more fearsome then shreked PPSh cons.


Three core rules for Conscript PPSh units.

1. Line of sight blockers
2. Different approaches
3. Focus fire.

Three don'ts of Conscript PPSh units.

1. Don't blob (especially during the approach)
2. Don't remain at a distance.
3. Don't overload your micro.

The Assault Group/Reinforcement group thing may seem like a bad idea, with your units being sent in piecemeal to be destroyed, (which is a good point) but I prefer it to microing 4-5-6-7 units in a mega blob. 3 units allows me to manage each unit effectively, enables me to focus fire and baby sit units into the best position and the best molotov targets. Anything more overloads me, although I am by no means a great player.
Micro overload is death to a Conscript PPSh player. Your units die easily under sustained fire. You have to baby sit them to get the most out of them.

I'll try to remember this thread so that I can put this together into a more cohesive form and publish it properly on the site.

These tactics are heavily based on genuine tactics used by Assault units in Stalingrad and the names (assault group, Reserve and reinforcement group) reflect this. It's a bit pretentious, but it works nicely, I am playing a historical game after all.

If every tank had deflection damage and a chance, on deflection, to deal a minor crit? There would be a reason to have a T-34/76.

It could leave a PzIV hurting, rather than the current plonk fest.

There would be some reason to have cheap tanks alongside your super heavy call in tanks- their deflection damage would add up over time, and the minor crits (traverse damage, crew injuries, optics damage, whatever) would offer them some utility in helping to keep heavy tanks sensible. I don't care that you're in a tiger, 76mm steel slugs slamming into your turret and hull do fuck up the modules and hamper the crew.

They tried that in CoH2 Beta, and nobody liked it. It was neat at first, but then you realise RNG will decide every tank fight for you. Wanna pull out? Too bad, driver injured. One more shot to kill? Too bad, gunner injured. Gonna send in a second tank to take out that lumbering wreck before it escapes? Oh they just got crew shocked, and he got away!

They tried that in CoH2 Beta, and nobody liked it. It was neat at first, but then you realise RNG will decide every tank fight for you. Wanna pull out? Too bad, driver injured. One more shot to kill? Too bad, gunner injured. Gonna send in a second tank to take out that lumbering wreck before it escapes? Oh they just got crew shocked, and he got away!

That's why it was a terrible idea that the crits they had were all so bloody severe, coupled with the very high rate of fire of vehicle weapons.

Introducing light engine/track damage, optics and turret traverses, canon breeches and barrels, and crew injuries (rather than deaths. Looking at you, top gunner) that affect the vehicle in a relatively minor way would be the first step. One shot from a T34 won't do much, and a slower rate of fire means it'll still obviously lose. A dozen from three while you fight will quickly start to stack up and make the tank a much easier target.

It requires more work into vehicle mechanics that relic ever tried to bother with. What they did was just throw in 'on yeah you can just blow off engines and guns with one in every 10 shots now'

Compare the t34 to the sherman and 10 fuel and 30 mp cannot justify the performance difference. Nerf one or buff the other changes must be made

I believe that the Sherman has to be a bit better than its price indicates because of the US lack of heavy armour. Therefore it is a bit misleading to compare the T34/76 to the Sherman.

I might be wrong, though. At least that's how I interpreted the US mission statement.

T34 doesn't need a buff, it needs a price decrease with an armor nerf.

Now: 12 popcap, 310 mp, 100 fuel.
Armor: 150
F34 gun penetration : 120 short, 100 medium, 80 long.


My suggestion: 9 pop cap, 280 mp, 90 fuel.

Armor: 120
F34 76mm gun penetration : 140 short, 110 medium, 80 long.

Panzer IV now: 12 popcap, 340 mp, 120 fuel.

Armor: 180
Kwk40 75mm gun penetration: 120 short, 110 medium, 100 long.

Panzer IV suggestion: 12 popca, 340 mp, 120 fuel.

Armor: 160
Kwk40 gun penetration: 150 short, 130 medium, 110 long.

That way the Cheaper T34s have a high chance of penetrating in short range while the more Panzer IV has a good chance of penetrating at all ranges. This way players get to develop different tactics to beat each other instead of just bashing each others head till rng decides to victor.

Also late game T34s could easily have the numerical advantage against big tanks and use the small med tanks surround and trap one big tank tactic that I've seen used successfully with T3485s and Shermans. This time with increase point blank range penetration for point blank range tactics.

T34 doesn't need a buff, it needs a price decrease with an armor nerf.

Now: 12 popcap, 310 mp, 100 fuel.
Armor: 150
F34 gun penetration : 120 short, 100 medium, 80 long.


My suggestion: 9 pop cap, 280 mp, 90 fuel.

Armor: 120
F34 76mm gun penetration : 140 short, 110 medium, 80 long.

Panzer IV now: 12 popcap, 340 mp, 120 fuel.

Armor: 180
Kwk40 75mm gun penetration: 120 short, 110 medium, 100 long.

Panzer IV suggestion: 12 popca, 340 mp, 120 fuel.

Armor: 160
Kwk40 gun penetration: 150 short, 130 medium, 110 long.

That way the Cheaper T34s have a high chance of penetrating in short range while the more Panzer IV has a good chance of penetrating at all ranges. This way players get to develop different tactics to beat each other instead of just bashing each others head till rng decides to victor.

Also late game T34s could easily have the numerical advantage against big tanks and use the small med tanks surround and trap one big tank tactic that I've seen used successfully with T3485s and Shermans. This time with increase point blank range penetration for point blank range tactics.

And why exactly would people build t34/76's because of this? Short range tactics mean your tank probably wont make it back alive. If Soviets had a non doctrinal ability to spend munitions to replace dead t34/76's, then perhaps the tank can be used for fodder this way. Otherwise, i see a tank version of the conscript.

Too bad this bugfix really screwed up the T34/76. It was actually fine before the "fix" but now there is no point in building T3.


Might as well wait for call-ins.

And why exactly would people build t34/76's because of this? Short range tactics mean your tank probably wont make it back alive. If Soviets had a non doctrinal ability to spend munitions to replace dead t34/76's, then perhaps the tank can be used for fodder this way. Otherwise, i see a tank version of the conscript.

Oh jeez, a much cheaper tank has a chance of defeating a more expensive tank and you are worried about not getting away? Would it be better if a T34 just rush into a lone Panzer IV and take it out, is that what you guys want?

This is where combined arms take place, where players have to be more tactical with their units. If the Panzer IV attacks it will be knocked out by a combined force of T34s and Anti tank guns. Hence the cheaper cost of the T34 will make it so players can afford to make other things. If the T34 attacks and actually got close to the Panzer IV the Panzer IV need it's own supporting units to damage the T34 so the Panzer IV has the winning chance. Both sides needing the combined arms to win and at the same time maintain some sort of asymmetry to the different kind of advantage. If you think the Panzer IV has too much of an advantage give some of your own suggestions.