Login

russian armor

T34/76 should get a slight buff

6 Apr 2015, 15:45 PM
#81
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

The problem with buffing anti infantry is then it over shadows the T-70 even more. What is the point of the T-70 if the T-34 is just as good against infantry. 30 less fuel isn't enough.

I think penetration would be to nice to give it a bit more late game scaling but without breaking the balance vs Paks or P4's. Alternatively I really like the idea of nerfing the armour on all the heavies.


the t70 and the su76 need to be swapped, they're both cheaper versions of something better in their tier and the soviets already have enough shit units.
6 Apr 2015, 15:55 PM
#82
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

With all this Shrek blobs and even more heavy armors/OKW Panther on the field, the T-34 is lack luster. T-34 is only viable in Industry for now, call ins will never be replaced. This is in regards to 2 v 2+.
6 Apr 2015, 16:52 PM
#83
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

The problem with buffing anti infantry is then it over shadows the T-70 even more. What is the point of the T-70 if the T-34 is just as good against infantry. 30 less fuel isn't enough.

I think penetration would be to nice to give it a bit more late game scaling but without breaking the balance vs Paks or P4's. Alternatively I really like the idea of nerfing the armour on all the heavies.


This. Buffing the AI capabilities of T37/76 makes T70 useless. And it makes T3 even more I would still suggest penetration buff at vet3.
6 Apr 2015, 16:55 PM
#84
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

A ROF buff would help the T34 in all area's, it's really silly that the KV1 is basically just a extremely good T34 that arguably outclasses the 85 in performance despite costing almost the same.
6 Apr 2015, 17:26 PM
#85
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

A ROF buff would help the T34 in all area's, it's really silly that the KV1 is basically just a extremely good T34 that arguably outclasses the 85 in performance despite costing almost the same.


GL chasing or flanking with a KV1.
6 Apr 2015, 17:28 PM
#86
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



GL chasing or flanking with a KV1.


The KV1 is quite fast for a heavy tank with the amount of armor it has. It's only 1.2 slower than the 85.
6 Apr 2015, 17:53 PM
#87
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



The KV1 is quite fast for a heavy tank with the amount of armor it has. It's only 1.2 slower than the 85.


And that's a LOT! Add acceleration, rotation and size into account also. I think you constantly overestimate the small numbers.
6 Apr 2015, 17:55 PM
#88
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



And that's a LOT! Add acceleration, rotation and size into account also. I think you constantly overestimate the small numbers.


Iv found in my experience the much much better armor allows the KV1 to flank fairly well, but the 85 is still great. Falls down to personal preference IMO.

14 Apr 2015, 12:33 PM
#89
avatar of Blackart

Posts: 344

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Apr 2015, 16:52 PMRMMLz


This. Buffing the AI capabilities of T37/76 makes T70 useless. And it makes T3 even more I would still suggest penetration buff at vet3.


Then why not moving T-70 to T4 and SU-76 to T3?

Why I should spend 70 fuel for an anti-inf tank when I can make T-34 for 100 fuel which is decent in anti-inf and can fight vs tanks or why I should spend 70 fuel for SU-76 when I can have SU-85 or Katy for the barrage?

T-70 would be nice to support SU-85 and defend it against shrecks and SU-76 could support T-34 from range against Pz IV.
14 Apr 2015, 13:08 PM
#90
avatar of Blackart

Posts: 344


That's okay, but it's cost would need to be raised. The PIV is 25 fuel more expensive because it's a better tank.


With the buildings cost fuel price is similar.

Soviets:

T1 160/50

T3 240/120

T-34 310/100
____________
710/270 for 1x T-34

1020/370 for 2x T-34

Ost:

T1: 80/10

BP1: 200/45

BP2: 200/55

T3: 165/25

Pz IV: 350/125
__________
995/260 for 1x Pz IV

1345/385 for 2x Pz IV

Soviet would need also molotov upgrade or/and AT nade for 125/25 while Germans get faust and rifle nade for free.
14 Apr 2015, 13:49 PM
#91
avatar of US3K
Patrion 15

Posts: 104

I feel like this unit has been rebalanced too far from its original concept - quick, cheap tank that was best and easily used in groups. The old ram that guaranteed gun knockout kept it viable late game.

Right now its a mid game tank which, whilst not being too bad, isnt great at anything, and cant break a late game stalemate where the enemy have heavies.

Edit: I think that like with a lot of the soviet units the problem lies not with its stats but with how it suits its role and how the faction is designed. It's an OK tank, but without a heavy alternative its just not the sort of unit you want in the late game
14 Apr 2015, 14:32 PM
#92
avatar of y3ivan

Posts: 157

All base tier 3 vehicles needs to be rebalance lmao, in both penetration and armor values to scale to 2/3 of a heavy tank (tigerI). Theres hardly any advantage of having 2 t34/76 over 1 tiger.

i find it odd that panzershrek has more penetration (180) and DPS than a 75mm cannon (120)

a good start would be buffing all main cannons (75mm) of tier 3 units to be (180) and armor (200)
14 Apr 2015, 15:29 PM
#93
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Apr 2015, 13:49 PMUS3K
I feel like this unit has been rebalanced too far from its original concept - quick, cheap tank that was best and easily used in groups. The old ram that guaranteed gun knockout kept it viable late game.

Right now its a mid game tank which, whilst not being too bad, isnt great at anything, and cant break a late game stalemate where the enemy have heavies.

Edit: I think that like with a lot of the soviet units the problem lies not with its stats but with how it suits its role and how the faction is designed. It's an OK tank, but without a heavy alternative its just not the sort of unit you want in the late game



I think similar. They removed ram and tweaked some stats but didn't give anything for it. 2 of these can fight against Tiger but they need some good luck to do so, provided they won't get screwed by path finding. You also need to screen it with infantry, which is ok but my biggest problem is that this tank is too fragile to risk chasing.

Also I think 100 fuel is tad too much. 95 or 90 would be more reasonable.


That said however I got this feeling that with the introduction of British army, we'll have some major balance tweak as it was the case with Western Fronts. Ram was removed because of that as it would be too simple to knock down the only OKW vehicle with it and completely neglect any tank play.
14 Apr 2015, 17:14 PM
#94
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2



Then why not moving T-70 to T4 and SU-76 to T3?

Why I should spend 70 fuel for an anti-inf tank when I can make T-34 for 100 fuel which is decent in anti-inf and can fight vs tanks or why I should spend 70 fuel for SU-76 when I can have SU-85 or Katy for the barrage?


Cause if you don't need the AT from the 76, the T70 fairs WAY better as your first unit. As micro goes higher, the T70 does way more damage.
14 Apr 2015, 19:57 PM
#95
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1


I think similar. They removed ram and tweaked some stats but didn't give anything for it. 2 of these can fight against Tiger but they need some good luck to do so, provided they won't get screwed by path finding. You also need to screen it with infantry, which is ok but my biggest problem is that this tank is too fragile to risk chasing.

Also I think 100 fuel is tad too much. 95 or 90 would be more reasonable.


That said however I got this feeling that with the introduction of British army, we'll have some major balance tweak as it was the case with Western Fronts. Ram was removed because of that as it would be too simple to knock down the only OKW vehicle with it and completely neglect any tank play.


Some interesting thoughts here. I agree that the T34/76 was largely rebalanced based on community feedback, and entirely disrupts the way in which T3 was designed. The T34 either needs something to make it scale better, or my preference is to see Soviets reworked as a faction.

Opinion: I would like to see multiple T34's vs 1 German tank again, instead of basically a 1v1 situation we have now.
14 Apr 2015, 20:02 PM
#96
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217



Some interesting thoughts here. I agree that the T34/76 was largely rebalanced based on community feedback, and entirely disrupts the way in which T3 was designed. The T34 either needs something to make it scale better, or my preference is to see Soviets reworked as a faction.

Opinion: I would like to see multiple T34's vs 1 German tank again, instead of basically a 1v1 situation we have now.
Agreed. I don´t want the T-34 to become a mirrored Panzer IV. Make it cheaper. It used to be 85 fuel. Maybe lower the cost to around 90 fuel now that it has been buffed several patches ago. Russians should be all about quantity, not quality.
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

877 users are online: 877 guests
0 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM