Login

russian armor

t34 76 now useless

PAGES (12)down
4 Mar 2016, 04:56 AM
#181
avatar of Gumboot

Posts: 199

If the 222 can get a 50% health boost can they not give these guys a little boost? A 10-15% health boost will not make them all of a sudden OP and will give them just that little bit more staying power to harass or disengage.

4 Mar 2016, 05:17 AM
#182
avatar of TAKTCOM

Posts: 275 | Subs: 1

T34-76 is kinda OK for the price. Use it for support your SU85 , guard flank or mass them to 3-4 . You will be downed by micro with them, but it will be rewarded. Works perfectly on wide maps , with repair stations .

LOL, so many things "do this or lose" and even "do this no enough good and lose" :lol:
4 Mar 2016, 06:02 AM
#183
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

anyone remember when the t34 76 had faster firing rate from a bug? they were actually useful for about a month before it got fixed.

it's a shame that both the sherman and t34 are kind of useless. The british cromwell prove you don't need to be an expensive tank to be a good tank.
4 Mar 2016, 06:32 AM
#184
avatar of miragefla
Developer Relic Badge

Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13

anyone remember when the t34 76 had faster firing rate from a bug? they were actually useful for about a month before it got fixed.

it's a shame that both the sherman and t34 are kind of useless. The british cromwell prove you don't need to be an expensive tank to be a good tank.


What's wrong with the Sherman aside from its higher than usual target size? It's got good speed, good fire on the move capabilities, good penetration, and HE shells to top it all off. Only issue I see with it is the actual offensive veterancy arriving at vet 3 which is where it gets the reduced reload speed.
4 Mar 2016, 07:56 AM
#185
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063



What's wrong with the Sherman aside from its higher than usual target size? It's got good speed, good fire on the move capabilities, good penetration, and HE shells to top it all off. Only issue I see with it is the actual offensive veterancy arriving at vet 3 which is where it gets the reduced reload speed.

Nothing bad about it but usually USF only build Sherman when they got the upperhand and the Sherman serves as the nail in the coffin. In contrast, Jackson is always needed for the inevitable Tiger/Panther/KT.
4 Mar 2016, 08:26 AM
#186
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



What's wrong with the Sherman aside from its higher than usual target size? It's got good speed, good fire on the move capabilities, good penetration, and HE shells to top it all off. Only issue I see with it is the actual offensive veterancy arriving at vet 3 which is where it gets the reduced reload speed.


.1 faster than panzer 4 = "good speed"?

http://stat.coh2.hu/squad.php?filename=panzer_iv_squad_mp

http://stat.coh2.hu/squad.php?filename=m4a3_sherman_squad_mp

the sherman is only marginally faster than the panzer4. A .1 speed and .1 acceleration advantage is tiny.

the sherman did get that penetration buff after UKF release, but it doesn't stop sherman from having awful survivability.

What make the cromwell actually good is not its cannon, but its superior speed and small target size. People like to say that allied tanks are more nimble and faster, but the cromwell was the first allied tank to actually deliver on that promise.
4 Mar 2016, 10:28 AM
#187
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297

Double T34-76 call in? Were i saw an inferior double tank call in before, oh yeah, the old Elite armor doctrine, considered sometimes an useless skill. You guys just want T34-85 non doctrinal so you can go other heavy tank doctrine without share the lack of infantry call in from Armored assault
4 Mar 2016, 10:39 AM
#188
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Double T34-76 call in? Were i saw an inferior double tank call in before, oh yeah, the old Elite armor doctrine, considered sometimes an useless skill. You guys just want T34-85 non doctrinal so you can go other heavy tank doctrine without share the lack of infantry call in from Armored assault

Might have been because of prohibitive cost and super late arrival, not to mention sub par doctrine with limited options.

Now, about that mobile defense osttruppen call-in, which is being used all the time...
4 Mar 2016, 11:14 AM
#189
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297


Might have been because of prohibitive cost and super late arrival, not to mention sub par doctrine with limited options.

Now, about that mobile defense osttruppen call-in, which is being used all the time...


Still, the few games i played it looked more that people choosed it for the puma to fill the role of light early reliable AT, not for the osttruppen. But with my limited experience on 1 vs1 i cant really say if its picked for the osttruppen
4 Mar 2016, 11:26 AM
#190
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Puma is main reason to go for it, but osttruppen aren't a bad choice either, they are cheap and reliable infantry(you can count on osttruppen! no, really, you can!).

P4s were unpopular because of timing and cost, had they been call-in with current OKW economy, you'd see them really often.
4 Mar 2016, 11:40 AM
#191
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297

Still, OKW doesnt has anything appart of pz4 to fill that medium role, but if T34-85 becomes undoctrinal why would you choose to get other tanks that are exactly the same but just with worse stats, cheaper, but as far as i saw people preffers to go for the expensive and effective than numerous and cheap ones, specialy when it refers to armor
4 Mar 2016, 12:03 PM
#192
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Still, OKW doesnt has anything appart of pz4 to fill that medium role, but if T34-85 becomes undoctrinal why would you choose to get other tanks that are exactly the same but just with worse stats, cheaper, but as far as i saw people preffers to go for the expensive and effective than numerous and cheap ones, specialy when it refers to armor


Why people go for puma instead of rushing panther?
Why people go Stuart instead of waiting for sherman?
Why people go P4/Panther instead of stalling for KT?
Why people use osttruppen instead of building more grens?
Why people go conscript ppsh/PTRS instead of guards/shocks?
Why people go StuG-E instead of Ostwind?
Why people go SU-76 instead of SU-85?

Timing, cost, cost effectiveness. All of it can impact the unit and its validity.
Unit doesn't have to be improvement over what you have there as stock units, but it needs to be cost efficient enough.

People avoid 34/76 because its NOT cost efficient.
Yes, its cheapest med in game, but it doesn't make it cost efficient, just like M-42 is not cost efficient in relation to ZiS-3.

Relic made a tank, so its effective and efficient exclusively in numbers and in early enough game stage.
Then they increased its menpower cost and pop cap, so getting it in numbers is not efficient.

The tank is bad for the cost, even if the cost is relatively low in comparison to other tanks of its tier.
Its not even being bad vs other tanks. Its about being bad for the cost it have itself. You can reliably win vs T34/76 using puma.
4 Mar 2016, 12:05 PM
#193
avatar of Drink

Posts: 27

There is a simple solution - improve T3476 anti-infantry capabilities: buff both machineguns(yes, it has two machineguns!)
And probably lower manpower cost a bit.

Also toning down rear armor of all heavies can really help both USF Sherman and SU T3476.

Indirect buff to a whole sovjet T4 can be done with buffing SU85's penetration, but thats sort of offtopic :)
4 Mar 2016, 13:41 PM
#194
avatar of Pablonano

Posts: 297



Why people go for puma instead of rushing panther?
Why people go Stuart instead of waiting for sherman?
Why people go P4/Panther instead of stalling for KT?
Why people use osttruppen instead of building more grens?
Why people go conscript ppsh/PTRS instead of guards/shocks?
Why people go StuG-E instead of Ostwind?
Why people go SU-76 instead of SU-85?

Timing, cost, cost effectiveness. All of it can impact the unit and its validity.
Unit doesn't have to be improvement over what you have there as stock units, but it needs to be cost efficient enough.

People avoid 34/76 because its NOT cost efficient.
Yes, its cheapest med in game, but it doesn't make it cost efficient, just like M-42 is not cost efficient in relation to ZiS-3.

Relic made a tank, so its effective and efficient exclusively in numbers and in early enough game stage.
Then they increased its menpower cost and pop cap, so getting it in numbers is not efficient.

The tank is bad for the cost, even if the cost is relatively low in comparison to other tanks of its tier.
Its not even being bad vs other tanks. Its about being bad for the cost it have itself. You can reliably win vs T34/76 using puma.
i know. But... I feel like T34-76 cant come earlier, nor be cheaper. It may need a total rework instead of juat exchange to nondoctrinal to give it any sense than "just a conscript among the guards". Because right now soviets are the only factions that have units that have units with jobs overlapping, both infantry and armor. Actually, i think that they should take another look to the faction again.
4 Mar 2016, 14:41 PM
#195
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

i know. But... I feel like T34-76 cant come earlier, nor be cheaper. It may need a total rework instead of juat exchange to nondoctrinal to give it any sense than "just a conscript among the guards". Because right now soviets are the only factions that have units that have units with jobs overlapping, both infantry and armor. Actually, i think that they should take another look to the faction again.


Soviets are also the only faction that is prohibited from having reliable mainline infantry and reliable medium tank. Relic insists that cons aren't meant to scale, but there is no alternative as spamming elite inf is not efficient and will bleed you, penals aren't viable at all, 34/76 everyone knows.

Sobviets are the only faction packed with "this is the same unit, its more expensive, but it actually works now" type of units(not all of them being call-ins improvements over stock units-looking at you M-42, being the shittiest AT weapon in game and arriving LATER then friggin ZiS-3).

Relic insists that soviets are supposed to outnumber opponents, but doesn't provide balance or bleed resistant economy to support that goal, maxims, ZiS guns, T3 lights and katy-this is pretty much all you can use without feeling inferior despite paying just as much resources-it doesn't matter that T34 costs less fuel, when you're still limited by tremendous menpower bleed and high mp cost of units that actually can apply some attrition..
4 Mar 2016, 14:54 PM
#196
avatar of Raindrop

Posts: 105

Maybe they should bring back Soviet industry which they removed during beta. But not as global but a HQ ability that costs 100 menpower and 20 fuel. And only affects T34/76.
4 Mar 2016, 14:56 PM
#197
avatar of VenstreDjevel

Posts: 55

Now that they made the t3485 come from mechanized they should just swap the 85 and 76. Drop the cp cost and soviets have a stop gap like the puma between buildings for when you just need something right now rather than later.
4 Mar 2016, 14:57 PM
#198
avatar of Siphon X.
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1138 | Subs: 2

What about making the T34-76 an optional side-grade at T3, while also leaving it in T4?

The cost could be fairly low (like, 20 MP/30 FU), so you can start producing T34-76 earlier and don't need to build T4 only for T34s (which is what everybody does now, right?). No discount for T4 though, if you decide to build that later on as well.
4 Mar 2016, 15:14 PM
#199
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Maybe they should bring back Soviet industry which they removed during beta. But not as global but a HQ ability that costs 100 menpower and 20 fuel. And only affects T34/76.

That would do literally nothing.
4 Mar 2016, 21:08 PM
#200
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

i know. But... I feel like T34-76 cant come earlier, nor be cheaper. It may need a total rework instead of juat
exchange to nondoctrinal to give it any sense than "just a conscript among the guards". Because right now soviets are the only factions that have units that have units with jobs overlapping, both infantry and armor. Actually, i think that they should take another look to the faction again.

the advantage of doctrinal- not needing to get t4
atm you need t4 for the 85 ANYWAYS but t4 is what killed the 76. needing full tech for a cheap but relatively ineffective (on its own) tank is just a fail.
unless you ick a doctrine with an 85 the best tank you have is LITERALLY the worst one in game, to support an end game TD that has the same pen as your AT gun, or that much cheaper TD the tier before that also can barrage...

T4 is a shit show, but no noc 85s and a rebalanced su85 could bring it in
the t3476 is supposed to be a spam tank that you throw away because its garbage? make it easy to produce and throw away! (doctrinal call in)

means you can support your su76 with a t34 if you chose (swarm tactics) OR you can tech to a T4 worthy of being a final tier and build units that can fight (like all the other factions can)

i mean the brits have a FANTASTIC medium tank that is also cheap AND they can get the comet... meanwhile the soviets....
PAGES (12)down
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

761 users are online: 761 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM