Russians get the greatest AT & ARTY gun out of T1?

Post a replay. If you dont even field them, then your argument falls flat on its ridiculous face.

Only thing that tells me anyhting so far is your fanboisim to an irrational level without any supporting evidence.

Poat a replay of your play.

Like everyone else, after the nerf I played a few games where I pitted my t34s against p4s got utterly raped, strafed and shreked, and like everyone else realized t34s were then a waste of resources and stopped making them. Switched to su 85 never had a problem since.

Please show ME a replay of t34s doing anything decent against p4s post patch? I have seen one video and he litterally rammed and lost all three of his t34s to cripple 3 p4s. Got lucky and was able to finish them off, but at what cost? Three t34s, thats enough to build a godamn Is2 almost. Just not worth it

You are hilarious.

"T34s only function is to Ram"

L2P.

2 T34s absolutely pwn a single PIV.

Post a replay of your play and show us how you fail with T34s.

Two T34s (without ram) with a bit of luck will narrowly beat an unsupported PIV. And two of them are currently 75 more fuel than 1 SU85, which is a far more efficient tank killer. T34 are good in overwhelming numbers, which isn't viable when one is just slightly cheaper than a Pz4.

mjsegaline: Only thing not worth it, is you, frankly.

T34 efficacy has no relevance on SU85 efficacy.

Saying T34s are shit at AT cos SU85s are better is a circular argument with no head or tail.

If the SU85 is so good at AT, then there is obviously, following from that, no need to buff the T34s AT, which is the crux of this guys argument, and where it falls on its face.

Buffing the T34s AT would result in the T34 being PIV viable (which it is, when supported) AND the SU85 being viable, effectively removing PIVs own viability.

Two T34s (without ram) with a bit of luck will narrowly beat an unsupported PIV. And two of them are currently 75 more fuel than 1 SU85, which is a far more efficient tank killer. T34 are good in overwhelming numbers, which isn't viable when one is just slightly cheaper than a Pz4.

Thank you for being a voice of reason to that fool. Much appreciated. I needed the support, hehe

What makes you think he is supporting you.

What makes you think he is supporting you.

Because he quoted you and then told you that the t34 is not cost effective... Man you have a real reading problem

I have seen two T-34s comfortably beat a P-IV head-on with no extraneous factors. Maybe they got a bit lucky with the penetrations but they're not *that* bad at AT.

I'm still seeing T-34s in games, though the SU-85 and T-70 are currently favoured. I still use them every now and then. I don't disagree some small AT buff might be useful on them but I hardly think they're that bad. An SU-85 will always be the better anti-PIV option, or general anti-armour option but if you've got other AT and limited AI, a T-34 is a good cheap tank that's less likely to die unexpectedly than a T-70.

That said, with the current SU-85 Blues Brothers reversing, I'm honestly finding shreks more use against the T-34 than the tank destroyer

The current metagame of choice seeming to be the Aimstrong Guards Motor conscripts, snipers, scout car, guards... an SU-85/Tier 4 fits in a lot more with that since it has a lot of AI and a mobile light vehicle counter already in the build but no early hard AT. Alternatively, maxim spam, which overly hard counters more or less all German infantry and can just sit in buildings, and thus also favours an SU-85. I think different Soviet build styles do favour the T3, though.

mjsegaline: what exactly is your suggestion for T34. Be specific.

mjsegaline: what exactly is your suggestion for T34. Be specific.

Well, I agree with you that it should not be a direct counter or even equal to the p4. But being that it is the heaviest tank in its tier, and once commiting to t3 it takes a while before ever getting out an su85, it needs to be able to hold its own against tanks. I think a slight increase in penetration and a major reduction in fuel cost. Leave the armor the same.

That sticks with the russian doctrine of weaker but cheaper and more in number

I said be specific. That means specific and concrete figures. Try again.

I said be specific. That means specific and concrete figures. Try again.

LoL, how much more specfic do you want? I told you exactly what should be changed and implemented?

I think at this point you have just started trolling. I think the convo is over

I think I just specifically said how specific I want them.

Did you not read?

" I said be specific. That means specific and concrete figures."

I think I just specifically said how specific I want them.

Did you not read?

" I said be specific. That means specific and concrete figures."

I am not a relic dev, I don't know the code of the game. I don't know the exact figures, I know how the game plays out. I know that a round from a t34 to the frontal armor of a p4 bounces off and the P4 laughs as if being tickled by a small fat child. I fail to see your point? I answered your question.

You sir, are a troll. Not a clever one either

I don't know the exact figures

In other words, you are uninformed and know nothing.

Ty for admitting that, not that it wasn't apparent already.

In other words, you are uninformed and know nothing.

Ty for admitting that, not that it wasn't apparent already.

Yes, because everyone here knows all the exact figures of all the units, because they were ever released to the public, I must have missed that you worked for relic. Stfu you fool.

Just to give you two some munitions to throw around, unit stats can be looked up here: http://coh-moderncombat.com/CoH2Stats/ (may go offline in the future)
Because I think the argument between you two is so far off topic and pointless that I might as well pour some fuel over the fire.

Just to give you two some munitions to throw around, unit stats can be looked up here: http://coh-moderncombat.com/CoH2Stats/ (may go offline in the future)
Because I think the argument between you two is so far off topic and pointless that I might as well pour some fuel over the fire.

Thank you, but i still cant find the penetration modifier on there for the t34, so i guess null is gonna have to deal with "slightly better" penetration seeing as I doubt he knows the modifier either.

EDIT: I just found the penetration modifier, 75.... I think its pretty obvious that is pitiful. Lets take that to 100. Better null? Still less then the p4s 110 penetration, but gives it some ability to not be laughed at. Also take fuel cost to 75. Leave its weak ass armor the way it is to balance out the fuel cost

I would also like to add that the p4 has a damage modifier of 160, penetration of 110, to the t34s damage of 80 and penetration of 75. For a very similar price range. Oh, and the t34 has less armor too. But its balanced right null? Thanks for the modifiers more proof to my point.

Ive been following that site closely since well into closed beta.

I've known these stats all along, whereas you just pull stuff out your ass.

Increasing T34s penetration to 10 below PIVs and reducing its fuel cost is quite possibly the most stupid suggestion I have read throughout the entire history of this games development.


I have nothing else to add to you. Don't address me in any of your posts.

T34 only needs a buff if SU-85 is nerfed. I don't understand why people hate T34's so much when they crush Panthers/Tigers/Elefants into the ground AND provide decent anti infantry in the meantime.

MJ, while I think Nullist is being a dick about it, I have to agree with him that you come off both biased and uninformed.

Calm down guys. (especially you Nullist and mjsegaline)