Login

russian armor

Soviet's tech tree needs to be look at

11 Oct 2015, 05:06 AM
#1
avatar of tigerhunter

Posts: 20

playing soviet union used to be very exciting because it was double edge sword to tech up. At that time u can get a early Armour but it was hard to get t3 and t4 coincidentally. It make su player play more aggressive as they knew they don't have late game advantage against Germans without doctrinal tanks. However It makes problem people started to skip tech up for doctrinal tanks especially t34/85 and commanders whch don't have tanks were not used. So relic change t34/85 into tech tree and combine t3,t4 tech. For the consequence, Soviet's tech tree is now very stable like ost. Actually it is enjoyable for sometimes because i can use t76 and t70 which wasn't used much before. however it brings another problem. When soviet players are winning against ost, they can make t34/85 too quickly. sometimes stug-e is coming out same time with t34/85 and soviet bring katusha easily after that. They don't give chance to ost to win with heavy Armour. When ost is winning, I have p4 against t70. it is easily hunted down by p4 and soviet goes two zis or su-76 which makse me rush to tier4 panther.

where is the p4's rival t34? It should be going out at right time versus ost's tier 3 but it is not so soviet is going to be passive at that time which make game too slow.

So I suggest to change soviet tech tree like before but little bit different. Split T3 and T4 tech again. Tech up cost should be expensive like before but T3 and T4's gas requirement must be different as T4 gives su much more better option.

I think T3 should get these Armour.

-m5 half track.
-t70
-t76
-t34

I think T4 should get these Armour.

-t70
-su85
-katusha

Upper tech tree t70 becomes core unit like 222 which can be used in both t3,t4. And to compensate tech cost t70 should have less cost (i suggest 50 gas).

Then how about the problematic t34/85 tanks?

There are two ways for it. one is that treating t34/85 as heay tank counter option so their numbers of produce should be limited to 2 for call in, another option is putting in t34/85 in tech tree but gives them cp limitation like before prohibitting early t34/85.

+ I think T3 and T4 tech up cost would be very controversial.
11 Oct 2015, 05:37 AM
#2
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Strongly disagree, the community lobbied Relic for years to change Soviet Teching to the way it is now. Not many people considered it "exciting" to be locked out of 50% of your core units, and limited on counters if you picked the 'wrong' one.

What you describe just means one player is losing. If someone has a T-70 vs Panzer IV, they were already losing. Nobody complains if USF gets a Sherman vs a Panzer II, this situation isn't any different.

And the T-34 does come at about the same time as the Panzer IV, players just don't build them because nobody likes the T-34.
11 Oct 2015, 06:05 AM
#3
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

I preferred the old tech as well.

As it is now, Soviets can't spend much time in t3 because they're pressured to go t4. There's not much reason to get an Su76 over a T70 either anymore. Slightly better vs vehicles but not much, and the T70 has godlike infantry sniping potential. I suppose you could try and counter tanks with AT guns and Su76/mines, but one mistake and you're done. Considering the Su76 cost almost the same as Stug... it's pretty underperforming.

I liked the versatility the old tech had.

The problem was the call in units should have required a t3/t4 structure to be built before being able to be called in. If it wasn't for the commanders all having a billion tank call ins it would have been fine.

It's also way too easy to pair up T34/76 with Su85 now. Having both on the field around the same time is really strong.
11 Oct 2015, 06:10 AM
#4
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

Strongly disagree, the community lobbied Relic for years to change Soviet Teching to the way it is now. Not many people considered it "exciting" to be locked out of 50% of your core units, and limited on counters if you picked the 'wrong' one.


there was nothing stopping people from building both t3 and t4, except for cost.


right now the soviet feels like the more boring faction out of the 5. It's still strong but everything just feel bland.
11 Oct 2015, 06:18 AM
#5
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279

This is a terrible idea. Relic is trying to move away from relying on call-ins, and although we are not there yet, making t3 and t4 available in one game was great. As said before, being locked out of half your units every game was not fun. Even t1 + t2 got changed so they are both affordable, so I'm afraid your opinion might be in the minority. Being locked out might be fun for you, but that is very subjective. I for one, love having tools to deal with any situation the enemy throws at me.

Also t-34/85s were never a problem. They're the only halfway decent generalist medium tank Soviets have. Why are they a problem again? Why fix what's not broken?
11 Oct 2015, 06:22 AM
#6
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279

I preferred the old tech as well.

As it is now, Soviets can't spend much time in t3 because they're pressured to go t4. There's not much reason to get an Su76 over a T70 either anymore. Slightly better vs vehicles but not much, and the T70 has godlike infantry sniping potential. I suppose you could try and counter tanks with AT guns and Su76/mines, but one mistake and you're done. Considering the Su76 cost almost the same as Stug... it's pretty underperforming.

I liked the versatility the old tech had.

The problem was the call in units should have required a t3/t4 structure to be built before being able to be called in. If it wasn't for the commanders all having a billion tank call ins it would have been fine.

It's also way too easy to pair up T34/76 with Su85 now. Having both on the field around the same time is really strong.


Re: this post, I can't quite put my finger on it, but I disagree with everything you say. Why are you comparing su-76 and t-70? They are completely different units and I see people getting both in one game. You say t4 gets rushed too often? On the contrary, I feel like the meta is to go t3 and then rely on a kv-8 or is-2 for late game.

And did you say a '76 and an '85 is a strong combo? It's the weakest medium tank with one of the most underperforming TDs. Having two together won't magically make them super strong. Literally every tank / TD combo is stronger. P4 / StuG. P4 / JP4. Sherman / Jackson or M10. Cromwell or Churchill and Firefly. Compared to literally any other faction, a '76 and an '85 is the weakest by far.
11 Oct 2015, 06:30 AM
#7
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

there was nothing stopping people from building both t3 and t4, except for cost


The cost was extremely prohibitive and in an even match you would not be able to get both buildings up. The old design limited you to just 8 of your 14 core units.
11 Oct 2015, 07:11 AM
#8
avatar of The_rEd_bEar

Posts: 760

No, the Soviet tech tree is fine. It's finally a versatile faction that allows you to use all of your core units.
Hat
11 Oct 2015, 08:29 AM
#9
avatar of Hat

Posts: 166

Then how about the problematic t34/85 tanks?


To have an actual heavy tank (IS2) and access to a decent medium tank (t34/85) I have to spend 4 buck on a commander. Feels pretty bad.
11 Oct 2015, 08:31 AM
#10
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Its fine as it is.

If anything in the tech needs any changes, its the penal accuracy on mid and long range.
11 Oct 2015, 13:52 PM
#11
avatar of zyssyxn

Posts: 2

The problem of T34-85 is, as a top tier medium tank, T34-85 has no top tier medium tank performances, it is more like a basic tank to instead T34-76, so it will OP when Soviet is winning, and underperformance when OST is winning.

This problem will not be solved, only if Relic set T34-85 armor and penetration as a top tier medium tank.
11 Oct 2015, 14:43 PM
#12
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Oct 2015, 06:22 AMHorasu


Re: this post, I can't quite put my finger on it, but I disagree with everything you say. Why are you comparing su-76 and t-70? They are completely different units and I see people getting both in one game. You say t4 gets rushed too often? On the contrary, I feel like the meta is to go t3 and then rely on a kv-8 or is-2 for late game.

And did you say a '76 and an '85 is a strong combo? It's the weakest medium tank with one of the most underperforming TDs. Having two together won't magically make them super strong. Literally every tank / TD combo is stronger. P4 / StuG. P4 / JP4. Sherman / Jackson or M10. Cromwell or Churchill and Firefly. Compared to literally any other faction, a '76 and an '85 is the weakest by far.


Su76 and T70 were both a light vehicle option, depending on tech choices. You'd choose one or the other with tech. Now that both come from the same building, there's no reason to get a su76 ever.

I'm sure the meta is still doctrinal call ins, I'm speaking from a core faction perspective. You can't take advantage of t3 units for very long because nothing in t3 is conparable to say Ostheer t3. 240/85 or whatever it is just to build light vehicles and a halftrack while everyone else has stuff like Puma's, stuarts, AEC's and stugs? Yeah okay. You have to skip t1/t2 for fast t3 if you really want to take advantage.
As for 534/su85 the reason I say it's a potent combo is because t34's are disposable. The su85 can sit way back picking off his tanks and as long as you trade everytime (with or without ram) you come out ahead. Other factions don't have 300/80 medium tanks.
11 Oct 2015, 14:45 PM
#13
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



The cost was extremely prohibitive and in an even match you would not be able to get both buildings up. The old design limited you to just 8 of your 14 core units.


That'a the whole point. You had to make teching decisions based on the situation. Now Soviets may as well have a fucking linear tech tree like Ostheer.
11 Oct 2015, 16:12 PM
#14
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279



Su76 and T70 were both a light vehicle option, depending on tech choices. You'd choose one or the other with tech. Now that both come from the same building, there's no reason to get a su76 ever.


I'm not entirely sure you know what you're talking about. You're basically saying something like, "Now that Combat Engineers and Conscripts are in the same building, there is no reason to make Conscripts." It makes no sense! You need Engineers for flamers, building wire, mines, sweeping, repairing, and building. You need Conscripts for fighting and being versatile core infantry.

Likewise, T-70 is a light tank that specializes in anti-infantry. You get it if you want some major harass and to try to bleed the enemy or wipe his squads, as well as transition into a late game map hack. You get the su-76 if you want a light TD to fend off your enemy's tanks and have additional barrage options for his infantry. You're not going to be running around with an SU-76 to try to wipe squads. You're not going to sit a t-70 in the back to snipe medium tanks.

Situations like Soviets needing a light harassment vehicle AND protecting it with a light tank destroyer can come up and it does very often in this game. I just can't wrap my head around why you would think that, just because you have a t-70, there is no reason to increase your AT capabilities, or if you have an SU-76, you won't need a harassment / recon vehicle.
11 Oct 2015, 17:24 PM
#15
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Oct 2015, 16:12 PMHorasu


I'm not entirely sure you know what you're talking about. You're basically saying something like, "Now that Combat Engineers and Conscripts are in the same building, there is no reason to make Conscripts." It makes no sense! You need Engineers for flamers, building wire, mines, sweeping, repairing, and building. You need Conscripts for fighting and being versatile core infantry.

Likewise, T-70 is a light tank that specializes in anti-infantry. You get it if you want some major harass and to try to bleed the enemy or wipe his squads, as well as transition into a late game map hack. You get the su-76 if you want a light TD to fend off your enemy's tanks and have additional barrage options for his infantry. You're not going to be running around with an SU-76 to try to wipe squads. You're not going to sit a t-70 in the back to snipe medium tanks.

Situations like Soviets needing a light harassment vehicle AND protecting it with a light tank destroyer can come up and it does very often in this game. I just can't wrap my head around why you would think that, just because you have a t-70, there is no reason to increase your AT capabilities, or if you have an SU-76, you won't need a harassment / recon vehicle.


The SU76 was used because it was the only option if you went t4. It's simply not good anymore because of how much the barrage has been nerfed. The T70 is such a better unit to the point qhere it completely overshadows the su76.

The SU76 is a paperweight outside of its barrage ability. Its normal attack isn't much better than the T70 vs vehicles. Any vehicle a Su76 can kill a T70 can too, without being gimped vs infantry and having more independence (Recon, self repair) It stands up marginally better to medium tanks but dies in 2 hits anyway and doesn't have the range to kite so who gives a shit.


What I'm saying is that the SU76 is an underperforming unit but it had situational use before to ward off halftracks/scout cars if you went t4. Now you can just use a T70 for that without economically locking yourself out of T4 units.


11 Oct 2015, 17:27 PM
#16
avatar of sneakking

Posts: 655

Permanently Banned
Everything that the Soviets have in T3 is extremely annoying to fight against with no real counterplay other than pure positioning.
11 Oct 2015, 17:28 PM
#17
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

Everything that the Soviets have in T3 is extremely annoying to fight against with no real counterplay other than pure positioning.


Scout car cost effectively counters the T70/Su76/halftrack.


Puma hard counters.
11 Oct 2015, 17:29 PM
#18
avatar of TheSleep3r

Posts: 670


The SU76 is a paperweight outside of its barrage ability. Its normal attack isn't much better than the T70 vs vehicles.


I think you need to play again.
Hat
11 Oct 2015, 17:34 PM
#19
avatar of Hat

Posts: 166



I think you need to play again.


Don't see why the SU76 is getting hate. With 3 of them and enough distance you can dominate panthers quite effectively.
11 Oct 2015, 17:36 PM
#20
avatar of Horasu

Posts: 279



The SU76 was used because it was the only option if you went t4. It's simply not good anymore because of how much the barrage has been nerfed. The T70 is such a better unit to the point qhere it completely overshadows the su76.

The SU76 is a paperweight outside of its barrage ability. Its normal attack isn't much better than the T70 vs vehicles. Any vehicle a Su76 can kill a T70 can too, without being gimped vs infantry and having more independence (Recon, self repair) It stands up marginally better to medium tanks but dies in 2 hits anyway and doesn't have the range to kite so who gives a shit.


What I'm saying is that the SU76 is an underperforming unit but it had situational use before to ward off halftracks/scout cars if you went t4. Now you can just use a T70 for that without economically locking yourself out of T4 units.




Okay I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure you're trolling me at this point.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

757 users are online: 757 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