T-34/76 feels plain pathetic

They would have to be careful to not ruin T3 altogether, otherwise people will always go for T4, get an Ostwind, then Panthers.

Agree, then Ostheer would be in the same situation the Soviets are in right now...

...except the Ostwind is actually a pretty good choice and can even win against T-34 if supported. The Stug does win against T-34 pretty handily (IIRC) but needs to be careful not to be flanked. So, leaving T-34 as is and just making the PzIV a more costly unit and considerably delaying the heavy T4 tanks for both races by upping their fuel costs seems like a pretty good idea!

Or did I miss something? Bonus: It creates more exciting gameplay.

We don't want to see the P4 to be too expensive making it unaffordable or a stupid choice.

As I see it the P4 is an all-rounder, good vs. infantry and good vs. tanks. It shouldn't be as good as the Ostwind vs. Inf and it shouldn't be as good as the Stug vs. Armor cause these two units are actually specialists. The problem, the PzIV is too good at both, so it's currently a no-brainer.

I thought with a T34 buff and perhaps a small increase to P4 fuel cost we would be sitting pretty.

That was my initial idea aswell.

I generally dislike the ram feature all together. Historically speaking it would make more sense to give the T34 an Overdrive ability since it was known for its flanking.

I also like this.

Hum, reric should consider give medium tanks 120 damage (right now it's same as heavy tank which is doing 160damge level)

Panzer IV damage reduced from 160 to 120, frontal armor reduced from 160-->150.(this tank is not well known for its armor)
but keep it's costs. It's the back bone of the Wehrmacht shouldn't be that expensive to build.

but, hell....... T-34 series needs up armored and penetration up to 100(T-34/76) 160 for T-34/85........ to make it a rival to PZIV... right now....I feel sorry for T-34 tanks.



BTW:I personally loves how PZ IV looks with the side skirts, maybe a munition upgrade for the skirts which makes PANZER IV more resilience to the PTRS & AT nade?

I really don't think the T-34 should be a rival to the PIV, unless they added an upgun upgrade of some kind. It would break the balance the game already holds in that department.

The T-34 arrives early, and that's great. I understand that, being the only turreted vehicle for the Soviets, and being such an iconic tank, players want it to be more useful in the anti-vehicle department. An upgun could fix that (maybe turn them into T-34/85's, and have the doctrinal power bring in veteran ones).

If the T-34 is buffed as is, then it must undoubtly be delayed, either through cost, or required upgrades. The Soviets can field vehicles much faster than any Ostheer player can, and buffing those vehicles with more staying power than necessary is going to break stuff up.

Why are none of the resident Sov fanbois considering the upgun option for T34s to 85 status maingun for 100 munis?

Front Armor T34: 47mm
Front Armor Panzer IV: 88m

If you want to compete against a PzIV with T34s you have to get atleast 2 (bait, ram, win), and better use combined arms (AT grenade, AT gun) to finish it off. Ostheer has the same touble with SU85s, only combined arms will do against it.

The thing why (anti) tank guns have a damage of 80 / 160, I guess, is simply because the health pool of vehicles is a multiple of 80 / 160.

StuG for example has 480 HP, means 6 penetrated hits from a T-34/76 or 3 penetrated hits from a SU85 will kill it.

I also think T34 is a little UP, true story, but one of the major aspect to this is because the SU85 is performing too well at all so the T34 doesnt seem to be a viable option.

Regards
ace

Front Armor T34: 47mm
Front Armor Panzer IV: 88m

If you want to compete against a PzIV with T34s you have to get atleast 2 (bait, ram, win), and better use combined arms (AT grenade, AT gun) to finish it off. Ostheer has the same touble with SU85s, only combined arms will do against it.

The thing why (anti) tank guns have a damage of 80 / 160, I guess, is simply because the health pool of vehicles is a multiple of 80 / 160.

Panther for example has 960 HP, means 6 penetrated hits from a T-34/76 or 3 penetrated hits from a SU85 will kill it.

I also think T34 is a little UP, true story, but one of the major aspect to this is because the SU85 is performing too well at all so the T34 doesnt seem to be a viable option.

Regards
ace

1.As you already stated, Panther has 960HP, but T-34/76 can only deal 80damage/shoot . 960/80=12(penetrated), SU-85 has 160damage/shoot, 960/160=6 shoots (penetrated)
6 penetrated shoot from a T-34/76 or 3 penetrated hits from SU-85 will kill a Panther in your dream., you've failed all your math courses since primary school aren't you?


2. T-34/76 has 45mm 60° slope upper hull armor, and T-34/85 has 110mm turret front armor.
as you are doing "GREAT" in your mathematics, 45mm/sin30°=90mm>80mm(PZIV) , of cuz you won't understand that.

3.using 2*T-34/76+AT nade vs. one PZIV, doing a little math here(I knew you had a hard time in math, 240/95*2+125/25 vs.320/115. that means you dump 605MP/215fuel to deal with a 320MP/115FUEL(soviet T3 and ostheer T3 are having a similar costs to get), and your conclusion is T-34 is a little UP?

I sincerely hope you are joking or trolling.......

1.As you already stated, Panther has 960HP, but T-34/76 can only deal 80damage/shoot . 960/80=12(penetrated), SU-85 has 160damage/shoot, 960/160=6 shoots (penetrated)
6 penetrated shoot from a T-34/76 or 3 penetrated hits from SU-85 will kill a Panther in your dream., you've failed all your math courses since primary school aren't you?


2. T-34/76 has 45mm 60° slope upper hull armor, and T-34/85 has 110mm turret front armor.
as you are doing "GREAT" in your mathematics, 45mm/sin30°=90mm>80mm(PZIV) , of cuz you won't understand that.

3.using 2*T-34/76+AT nade vs. one PZIV, doing a little math here(I knew you had a hard time in math, 240/95*2+125/25 vs.320/115. that means you dump 605MP/215fuel to deal with a 320MP/115FUEL(soviet T3 and ostheer T3 are having a similar costs to get), and your conclusion is T-34 is a little UP?

I sincerely hope you are joking or trolling.......

Win. T-34 variants are pretty good with vet, but very difficult to get there imo. By comparison to a pIV with vet 2-3 though, they are awful still ^^

@UGBEAR:
Dude, you got any serious problems?
Don't see any purpose to get so personal and emotional.
For me you gave away any claim to be taken serious in this discussion with that kind of comment.

You know, I did change the example to the StuG, since i found it a more matching example but simply did forget to change the name and hitpoints cause I was in a hurry (life, you know, girlfriend, yelling etc). Post has already been edited.

pq said in a cast they wanted to buff the T34s AI (lower scatter) and the Pz4s armor fighting capabilities for its price (higher damage/shoot). If you like it or not, that's where it is going.

What I do feel though is slightly UP is the armor and/or guns penetration.

T34s armor is 115, which means penetration chances for german tanks of:
StuG: 127%
PzIV: 96%
Ostwind: 30%
Panther: 148%

... while the T34s gun with 75 penetration only has a chance of:
vs StuG: 47%
vs PzIV: 47%
vs Ostwind: 71%
vs Panther: 28%

So maybe increasing the guns penetration to 90 (+20%) and the armor to 140 (+20%) and the tables would look this.

Recieved penetration:
StuG: 100%
PzIV: 79%
Ostwind: 25%
Panther: 121%

76mm Gun penetration:
vs StuG: 56%
vs PzIV: 56%
vs Ostwind: 86%
vs Panther: 33%

It actually isn't that slight at all, might be even to much of a buff, but it adresses my main concern about the T34: it's gun being near useless vs other tanks and its sheet metal armor.

I can never be on pair with a PzIV in terms of direct fighting. Don't forget (like that bias boy UGBEAR seems to do) that the T34 is an intended infantry killing machine. I guess it should have a supportive role in armor fighting (Ram and some damage), but that's about it.

Regards
ace

A 10-20% buff to armour penetration would be great, maybe the same for armour (as you say it might be too much), although I feel the AT capabilities are what need to be looked at. Ram needs to be removed and replaced with something that actually adds to the game, unless they make it so that you can micro out of it or something.

As far as the role of the pIV, don't you think that if it gets better AT capabilities, that even if they tone down its anti-infantry, it will still be more attractive than a Panther or a Stug? It seems very difficult to balance the Ostheer tanks because they are all fairly similar, at least at present.

PzIV already got buffed huge in terms of armor fighting with the vehicle patch at the end of the beta.

The damage was increased from 80 to 160 (which despite increased splash damage mainly helps vs tanks)

The reload vs increaed from 4.75 to 5.75 (nerf in terms of AI fighting)

So that's what Relic wants to PzIV to be. decent vs infantry, good vs Tanks.

Vice versa for the T34, decent vs tanks, good versus infantry.

But right know personally I don't think it is really "decent" vs tanks because of the resaons written above. But as I already said the T34 also stands in the shadow of the SU85 which absolutly overperforms and shredds any german tank with ease.

Regards
ace

But right know personally I don't think it is really "decent" vs tanks because of the resaons written above. But as I already said the T34 also stands in the shadow of the SU85 which absolutly overperforms and shredds any german tank with ease.

The real issue is that a tank that is "decent against tanks" is worthless. Noone invests 100+ fuel to counter infantry. The idea itself is retarded in the context of this game. I think that's bad game design, sorry to say.

@UGBEAR:
Dude, you got any serious problems?
Don't see any purpose to get so personal and emotional.
For me you gave away any claim to be taken serious in this discussion with that kind of comment.

You know, I did change the example to the StuG, since i found it a more matching example but simply did forget to change the name and hitpoints cause I was in a hurry (life, you know, girlfriend, yelling etc). Post has already been edited.

pq said in a cast they wanted to buff the T34s AI (lower scatter) and the Pz4s armor fighting capabilities for its price (higher damage/shoot). If you like it or not, that's where it is going.

What I do feel though is slightly UP is the armor and/or guns penetration.

T34s armor is 115, which means penetration chances for german tanks of:
StuG: 127%
PzIV: 96%
Ostwind: 30%
Panther: 148%

... while the T34s gun with 75 penetration only has a chance of:
vs StuG: 47%
vs PzIV: 47%
vs Ostwind: 71%
vs Panther: 28%

So maybe increasing the guns penetration to 90 (+20%) and the armor to 140 (+20%) and the tables would look this.

Recieved penetration:
StuG: 100%
PzIV: 79%
Ostwind: 25%
Panther: 121%

76mm Gun penetration:
vs StuG: 56%
vs PzIV: 56%
vs Ostwind: 86%
vs Panther: 33%

It actually isn't that slight at all, might be even to much of a buff, but it adresses my main concern about the T34: it's gun being near useless vs other tanks and its sheet metal armor.

I can never be on pair with a PzIV in terms of direct fighting. Don't forget (like that bias boy UGBEAR seems to do) that the T34 is an intended infantry killing machine. I guess it should have a supportive role in armor fighting (Ram and some damage), but that's about it.

Regards
ace

Great figures there. I'm not sure about increasing its armor value though. One of the whole points to a T34 is that its cheap and relatively vulnerable. Increasing its armor values means it'll roll all over infantry AV that bit more easily. Not to mention potential knock on effects for when it rams.

I'm all for increasing the Pen a bit and seeing what happens.

That's your opinion. Fact is you got to work with what you got.

Fielding a T34, which comes relativly early, counters all german light vehicles with ease and means also a big threat for infantry. So you force your enemy to spent resources to get a proper counter (I would go for a StuG or PzIV if I have the resources).

Sitting there thinking "I just pump out more T34s to win" is the wrong approach in my eyes. You KNOW the enemy will react to the T34 so take as much advantage of its presence as possible and start preparing yourself for the counter by getting AT guns or SU85 for example.

At least that's my thinking process to this.
There are no "Eierlegende-Woll-Milch-Säue" as we germans say (cept for the SU85 maybe )

Regards
ace

That's your opinion. Fact is you got to work with what you got.

True, and I decide to not work with the T-34, because there is no compelling reason to use it, not at this price.

Fielding a T34, which comes relativly early, counters all german light vehicles with ease

It actually comes a little later than the PzIV.

Time to field, assuming 5 territory points + 1 upgraded + 1 fuel point held:

PzIV: 9.3m
T-34: 9.4m

I shit you not. Equally funny is that the T-70 comes at the 8min mark, so it has a whopping 1 1/2 minutes to drive around and deal damage before it gets owned by the PzIV.

Bottom line is, Soviet T3 does not come early.

Here's the sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApUR3Nu-vMvddHduS0VwZGo4bVh5OUloY01CQ2wtc0E&usp=sharing

Did you include Sovs 30 free fuel at start? I dont see it on the chart.

Did you include Sovs 30 free fuel at start? I dont see it on the chart.

You're right, I have omitted that. But it will only affect the absolute numbers not the relative distance in time.

I am also collecting statistical data, to get a better time dependant function of fuel rate, because right now in the spreadsheet it's flat from the start of the game (which isn't very realistic, but since it affects both races the same way it would just increase the times across the board, again leaving the realtive numbers intact).

Edit: Soviet starting fule is 50, german is 20.

You tend to omit quite a lot.

Infact just about all your posts carry a very apparent bias, to the point of "conveniently" omitting i portant counter considerations, quite seemingly deliberately.

Presumably because you seem to be of the opinion that it is not "your business" or repsonsibility to include counter-indicators, but rsther some random Ost-fanbois.

Its getting pretty old and disruptive tbh.

The 30 free fuel crucially alters timing, because it means those buildings are constructed eaelier than your accumalative fuel incomes indicate.

Are you trying to tell me you dont understand that? Or are you merely "conveniently" ignoring it.

You tend to omit quite a lot.

Infact just about all your posts carry a very apparent bias, to the point of "conveniently" omitting i portant counter considerations, quite seemingly deliberately.

Presumably because you seem to be of the opinion that it is not "your business" or repsonsibility to include counter-indicators, but rsther some random Ost-fanbois.

Its getting pretty old and disruptive tbh.

Cry not, I have added the starting resources in the sheet and unsuprisingly enough, they did not alter the times in a significant way. More importantly, I also added the base fuel generation rate of the HQ (which is +4), that changed the times around somewhat, but unsurprinsingly (again!) since it's the same for both races, the relative numbers did not change.

Also, before you call out people on being "disruptive" and biased, you should get your facts straight. Soviet starting fuel is 50, not 30.

Where is the starting fuel included?

Where is the starting fuel included?

It's a flat substraction to the required fuel.