Login

russian armor

100mm BS-3 AT Gun

12 Mar 2015, 17:29 PM
#41
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Because there aren't any units that exist that could make a viable Japanese army, for this game. Play soviets versus USF but you can make nothing but conscripts, 45mm AT guns, and T70's and tell me how much fun you have.


It does not matter, it's a game and everything depends on the balance.
Especially was the presentation of guns and tanks which are competitive with other countries
12 Mar 2015, 17:32 PM
#42
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



It does not matter, it's a game and everything depends on the balance.
Especially was the presentation of guns and tanks which are competitive with other countries


The problem is Japan never focused on developing their army, they had good support weapons like mortars and MG's, because they focused on massed infantry warfare, not tank battles or long drawn out sieges. They had good fighter craft and naval ships because that's what they needed.

For the factions in europe, you can give them rarer units to balance things out because said rare units did in fact exist. Short of literally making up units that didn't exist you couldn't put a Japanese army in coh2.
12 Mar 2015, 17:39 PM
#43
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561



The problem is Japan never focused on developing their army, they had good support weapons like mortars and MG's, because they focused on massed infantry warfare, not tank battles or long drawn out sieges. They had good fighter craft and naval ships because that's what they needed.

For the factions in europe, you can give them rarer units to balance things out because said rare units did in fact exist. Short of literally making up units that didn't exist you couldn't put a Japanese army in coh2.
The most common AT gun the soviets used was the crummy m42. Yet their nondoctrinal one is a field gun. They could do the same thing for the Japanese as well. Japan had quite a few seldom used things that would help make them balanced.
12 Mar 2015, 17:41 PM
#44
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



The problem is Japan never focused on developing their army, they had good support weapons like mortars and MG's, because they focused on massed infantry warfare, not tank battles or long drawn out sieges. They had good fighter craft and naval ships because that's what they needed.

For the factions in europe, you can give them rarer units to balance things out because said rare units did in fact exist. Short of literally making up units that didn't exist you couldn't put a Japanese army in coh2.


Again, talking about history.
I know the history. And I do not mind the fact that Japan had a bad ground troops.
We're talking about the game. And the fact that Japan had absolutely everything that would be a new, exciting faction.
You are the commander - show how to fight, show tactics.
12 Mar 2015, 17:41 PM
#45
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

The most common AT gun the soviets used was the crummy m42. Yet their nondoctrinal one is a field gun. They could do the same thing for the Japanese as well. Japan had quite a few seldom used things that would help make them balanced.



The M-42 wasn't really "crummy". It had 51mm meters of penetration at 1000m, enough for a PIV. For example zis-3 had 67mm at 1000m.


And zis-3 was definately more common than the m-42 in 1943-1945.

12 Mar 2015, 17:50 PM
#46
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

The most common AT gun the soviets used was the crummy m42. Yet their nondoctrinal one is a field gun. They could do the same thing for the Japanese as well. Japan had quite a few seldom used things that would help make them balanced.


Yes but the ZiS was still made in massive numbers. The M42 was more common because they simply made more of them, and as Burt's mentioned it was more than enough in most scenarios, several could make a mess of any medium tank, and the M42 went out of production in 43.



Again, talking about history.
I know the history. And I do not mind the fact that Japan had a bad ground troops.
We're talking about the game. And the fact that Japan had absolutely everything that would be a new, exciting faction.
You are the commander - show how to fight, show tactics.


The problem is they don't have enough units to fill out a list, you can't just make up units that don't exist to put in an army.

Why don't we just add the Polish army into the game? They had better tanks and weapons than the Japanese did. How about the Vichy french? Or the Bulgarians? Or the Romanians?

There is a difference between making realism a tertiary concern, and literally throwing everything out the window by making up units that did not in fact exist.
12 Mar 2015, 17:51 PM
#47
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

The most common AT gun the soviets used was the crummy m42. Yet their nondoctrinal one is a field gun. They could do the same thing for the Japanese as well. Japan had quite a few seldom used things that would help make them balanced.


Type-90 gun
Total production: 786
with characteristics similar to the ZIS-3
I think that this gun is well suited to the role of the main gun.
Could good to deal with the T-34 and M4

I repeat again: the USSR against Japan is possible. and I will pay only for this DLC
Western Front upset me. He bored me faster than 1.5 year (plus a closed beta test) original game
12 Mar 2015, 17:53 PM
#48
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Type-90 gun
Total production: 786
with characteristics similar to the ZIS-3
I think that this gun is well suited to the role of the main gun.
Could good to deal with the T-34 and M4

I repeat again: the USSR against Japan is possible. and I will pay only for this DLC


What exactly, are you going to do when all you have is a worse ZiS when facing off against IS2's and ISU's?
12 Mar 2015, 17:59 PM
#49
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



What exactly, are you going to do when all you have is a worse ZiS when facing off against IS2's and ISU's?


75-mm anti-aircraft gun Type 88


100-mm anti-aircraft gun Type 14


120-mm gun Type 10
12 Mar 2015, 18:02 PM
#50
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



75-mm anti-aircraft gun Type 88


100-mm anti-aircraft gun Type 14


120-mm gun Type 10


Right because Axis has the 88 anti aircraft gun, and your little emplacement gun isn't going to get brutally owned by indirect fire.

Sorry, but a faction entirely based around static anti aircraft doesn't seem all that fun to me.
Neo
12 Mar 2015, 18:08 PM
#51
avatar of Neo

Posts: 471



IIRC the KV2 is one of the rarest tanks of the war, only 300 were ever made. So it's inclusion makes about as much sense as any of the other rarer tanks like the Sturmpanzer or Ostwind.


Indeed its inclusion makes much less sense because KV1 and KV2 were early war Soviet tanks that were mainly destroyed/abandoned in the first year of the war, whereas the German rare weapons like Ostwind, Elephant, Sturmtiger etc. fit very well with the "ZOMG ZUPERWAFFEN" narrative Relic loves so much.
12 Mar 2015, 18:17 PM
#52
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2015, 17:41 PMBurts



The M-42 wasn't really "crummy". It had 51mm meters of penetration at 1000m, enough for a PIV. For example zis-3 had 67mm at 1000m.


And zis-3 was definately more common than the m-42 in 1943-1945.


I meant in game. My point being that Japan can use a field gun as well, which they had a few of. There are plenty of options to get creative with.
12 Mar 2015, 18:21 PM
#53
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053


your little emplacement gun isn't going to get brutally owned by indirect fire.


Its not like there are static forward HQ's called OKW trucks, and its not like there was ever a mechanic like vCoH Brit Emplacements...

But of course people will start whining when static objects are introduced and get destroyed in one tank shell, because design definitely cannot otherwise be special and overcome issues.

The fact that OKW can be designed the way it is means anything else could be designed just as wacky. And "work".
12 Mar 2015, 18:39 PM
#54
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Right because Axis has the 88 anti aircraft gun, and your little emplacement gun isn't going to get brutally owned by indirect fire.

Sorry, but a faction entirely based around static anti aircraft doesn't seem all that fun to me.


self-propelled gun "Ho-Ni" with 75 mm cannon
self-propelled gun "Na-To"

Type 3 "Chi-Nu"
Type 4 "Chi-To"
Type 5 "Chi-Ri"

Artillery / Aviation
AT rifle grenade
mines
Type 97 anti-tank rifle
RPG type 4

plus a lot of interesting things such as:
Type 1 "Ho-ki" armored personnel carrier
12 Mar 2015, 18:49 PM
#55
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2015, 18:08 PMNeo


Indeed its inclusion makes much less sense because KV1 and KV2 were early war Soviet tanks that were mainly destroyed/abandoned in the first year of the war, whereas the German rare weapons like Ostwind, Elephant, Sturmtiger etc. fit very well with the "ZOMG ZUPERWAFFEN" narrative Relic loves so much.


The KV1 was extremely good at the start of the war, the Germans didn't develop an effective counter to it till 1942, and the KV2 when it did see action was fairly effective.

The KV1 series of tanks was used in the Battle of Kursk, but it was discontinued because it had the same gun as the T34 series but it was slower which didn't fit the Soviets tactics.

I don't see what your complaint about rare German weapons is, everyone wants Soviets and USF to get some of the cooler rarer tanks, but OKW was given what it has because Relic wanted a faction that didn't use medium tanks.


Its not like there are static forward HQ's called OKW trucks, and its not like there was ever a mechanic like vCoH Brit Emplacements...

But of course people will start whining when static objects are introduced and get destroyed in one tank shell, because design definitely cannot otherwise be special and overcome issues.


But trucks do get brutally owned by indirect fire? It's the best counter to OKW. But with OKW your trucks are somewhat durable, a emplacement with a exposed crew, not so much. Not to mention OKW and Ostheer have other counters to armor outside of the Pak43...
12 Mar 2015, 18:58 PM
#56
avatar of ☭ Калашникова ☭

Posts: 322

OKW was given what it has because Relic wanted a faction that didn't use medium tanks.


Did i miss something?
Last time i checked Panther was a medium tank, Along with the Jagdpanzer IV.
12 Mar 2015, 19:10 PM
#57
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



Did i miss something?
Last time i checked Panther was a medium tank, Along with the Jagdpanzer IV.


This is Relic's logic, not mine. The StuG III Ausf G was removed (And it's lines given to the Sturmtiger for ~reasons~) and the Panzer IV Ausf J made doctrinal because Relic felt that "traditional medium tanks go against OKW's design philosophy".

And the Panther wasn't classified as a medium tank till after the war, during the war the Allies classified it as a heavy tank because of it's tonnage, the Germans classified it as a medium because of it's speed and lower caliber main gun.

OKW is also strictly based off of units that were used in the Battle of the Bulge, which begs the question of why OKW doesn't have a buttload of non-doc artillery.
12 Mar 2015, 19:22 PM
#58
avatar of ☭ Калашникова ☭

Posts: 322

Just because the allies classified it as a heavy doesn't make a heavy.
It showed a lot of characteristics of being a medium.
(Faster speed, smaller gun, smaller size)
While its closest counterpart (IS-2) was similar in weight class, It had
a much larger gun, was larger in volume and slower then the panther
Thus being closer to a heavy tank in characteristics.
12 Mar 2015, 19:31 PM
#59
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

tank buster doctrine


1. Lend lease bazookas - combat engineers can equip 2 bazookas for 120 munitions
2. Anti tank stun mines - same as in the tank hunter doctrine
3. mark vehicle
4. BS-3 anti tank gun
5. IL-2 sturmovik rocket strafe (its in game already)
12 Mar 2015, 19:32 PM
#60
avatar of ☭ Калашникова ☭

Posts: 322

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Mar 2015, 19:31 PMBurts
tank buster doctrine


1. Lend lease bazookas - combat engineers can equip 2 bazookas for 120 munitions
2. Anti tank stun mines - same as in the tank hunter doctrine
3. mark vehicle
4. BS-3 anti tank gun
5. IL-2 sturmovik rocket strafe (its in game already)


Or they could just fix tank hunter doctrine.
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

273 users are online: 273 guests
7 posts in the last 24h
18 posts in the last week
45 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50212
Welcome our newest member, Calcutte
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM