T34/85

I have been gathering these for a while with a simple script (I also use a script that hides Nullist posts if anybody's interested )

put that script on filehosting site, please

put that script on filehosting site, please

+1

He won't, you know why, because it most likely doesn't exist.

-Remember
Remember
Remember

And do you remember how many arguments and inflammatory comments and personal attacks he was responsible for?

Every topic he got into turned into nasty arguments and flame war until he started getting so much flak he had to make some changes, but its all calculated. Just look at all his latest dishonest statements making it sound like he "never" gets out of topic and attacks anyone. Give him some breathing room and he will get back at it.

If you cant remember here is a nice little example for you to see how he derailed a thread out of its topic and argued about something he had absolutely no knowledge about. The forum is full of worse examples too.

http://www.coh2.org/topic/8384/tanks-lose-accuracy-on-the-move

By the way, no offense intended, but using "nullist" analogy, with 22 posts you would have to be a "second account".

He won't, you know why, because it most likely doesn't exist.

I am using it right now, and this really makes you sound like a "second account".

I really don't want the T-34/85 to be equal to the Panther. The reality was that only the turret and gun was upgraded, the hull was mostly the same.

However, the additions to the turret were substantial, it had a turret basket, positions for loaders, commander, and gunner, so a 3 man turret. In the 76 version, they would stand on top of ammo boxes to reach the 2 man turret controls. T-34 crews would steal the seats out of American supplied Shermans.

It doesn't take crack German training to load a gun quickly.

Increasing penetration to 160 will never do that and here are the numbers to illustrate the change:

T-34/85 finishing off a Panther: (960/160)*8.575/(40.74%) = 126.288 sec

T-34/85 (buffed) finishing off a Panther: (960/160)*8.575/(59.25%) = 86.835 sec

Panther finishing off T-34/85: (800/160)*6.45/(100%) = 32.25 sec


I think you can see that currently T34/85 takes 126 seconds to finish a panther and post suggested buff takes 86 seconds, where as the panther takes only 32 seconds to finish T34/85. The current difference is so insanely huge.

I hope that clarifies my suggestion.

Increasing penetration to 160 will never do that and here are the numbers to illustrate the change:

T-34/85 finishing off a Panther: (960/160)*8.575/(40.74%) = 126.288 sec

T-34/85 (buffed) finishing off a Panther: (960/160)*8.575/(59.25%) = 86.835 sec

Panther finishing off T-34/85: (800/160)*6.45/(100%) = 32.25 sec


I think you can see that currently T34/85 takes 126 seconds to finish a panther and post suggested buff takes 86 seconds, where as the panther takes only 32 seconds to finish T34/85. The current difference is so insanely huge.

I hope that clarifies my suggestion.

I would pay a 600/130FU price tag for something exactly like a panther rather than a POS which cost for 760/260FU for double call-in-only and with reloading time of 8.575 but only do the same amount of damage of a PZIV....

T-34/85 need both rof increase and pen rise....the cost effectiveness of this TOP 1 POS deserve to be looked at for a long time.

This thre3ad has been so much derailed .

Imo the 34/85 needs either a small cost reduction 10% mp + `10% fuel or a combination of slightly increased weapon reloading speed and some additional damage . Anything more and the commander who has both 120 mm , guards and mark target and doesnt need engies to repair tanks freeing them to plant mines etc will become OP and mess up soviet internal balance

This thre3ad has been so much derailed .

Imo the 34/85 needs either a small cost reduction 10% mp + `10% fuel or a combination of slightly increased weapon reloading speed and some additional damage . Anything more and the commander who has both 120 mm , guards and mark target and doesnt need engies to repair tanks freeing them to plant mines etc will become OP and mess up soviet internal balance

Did they balancing Tiger consider the strafing run? Smoke charge? Assualt Cheese Genedier? Or Oppel Blitz? Or The blitzkrieging ability?

Did they balance the Elephnat consider the combination of recon plane/no smoke warning stuka bomber/Spotter scope?


The words "Only, become OP, Mess up" sounds harsh for just applying to a specific unit.

The sheer volume of valid suggestions for T34/85 improvements speaks to the issue being real.

I side with a non-Commander upgun for muni solution that specialises the T34 from AI to AT, at roughly PIV equivalency in penetration and RoF, for the following reasons:
-This doesnt upset PIV balance because its still a superior chassis.
-The cost is laterally diverted to Muni, which is a largely voluntary resource pool that doesnt directly screw with tech speeds, but rather diversifies each respective tier internally. Basically allows a 0.5 tier progression.
-I think its crucial, that this is non-Commander. This kind of dedicated AT is needed to reinforce Sov roster UNIVERSALLY vs more AT dedicated armor options, which, as someone very validly pointed out recently, and damn that I cant cite the writer, is a systemic problem for Sov, that basically Ost armor, throughout, is always a Sov armor counter, because it is almost all AT centric, whereas Sov armor has an AI impetus it doesnt even really need.
-I model this largely on the 222 precedent. Its a 0.5 tier muni upgrade that makes Ost vapable of responding to, primarily, T70s.
-For the T34 to be the "workhorse" it is touted as, it needs this AT upgrade option. It used to be argued that Ram provided thr necessary slack, but that is now an outdated notion due to Ram changes and indirectly AtNade/Faust changes.
-Let Sov specialise its T34s for AT, at muni cost, and relative detriment to AI. Atleast give Sov the choice to do so.
-As to the 2xT34/85 callin commanders, improve those mainguns to the same as thr muni upgun. Otherwise, do not change price from what it is now. Result? You save approx 200 munis in fielding them from this Commander, and as is a native and important facet of call-ins, you wont need the building to bring them in, meaning players with these Commanders can focus on other things, not have to build t3, amd save 200 muni in conparison to other Commanders, for the same net AT specific armor result.

The next is radical, but I still suggest it for future and larger meta consideration. It concerns ATGs.
-Im a huge proponent of imprpving MP and infantry specific AT options, specifically the ATG. I cant speak for 2v2+, but in 1v1, I want to see infantry/MP builds extending further in the meta, rather than the game incentivising teching, hard, to armor. Imo 1v1 has TOO MUCH ARMOR as is, and the nature of this armor, as AT centric on Ost, systemically creates a problem for Sov.
-PaK is graced with a better RoF, ZiS gets Barrage. But wtf, Sov doesnt NEED AI Barrage, it NEEDS better MP AT!
-Give PaKs the Barrage, and ZiS the better RoF.
--Ost lacks indirect fire options vs larger Support teams, Sov lacks better T2 AT. Swap them, and both units fit their meta role better.

Now for the really radical part:
-Move ZiS to T1.
-Move T70 to T2.

This thre3ad has been so much derailed .

Imo the 34/85 needs either a small cost reduction 10% mp + `10% fuel or a combination of slightly increased weapon reloading speed and some additional damage . Anything more and the commander who has both 120 mm , guards and mark target and doesnt need engies to repair tanks freeing them to plant mines etc will become OP and mess up soviet internal balance

You see from the previous numbers I posted the t34/85 can not beat a panzer4 1v1 even with mark vehicle enabled. As for the other commander abilities, guards can button the pnazer4 but so can pg fire shreks on the t34/85. I think if you look at the tank numbers and use this unit you will have no doubt that its severely under performing its cost and role.

The sheer volume of valid suggestions for T34/85 improvements speaks to the issue being real.

I side with a non-Commander upgun for muni solution that specialises the T34 from AI to AT, at roughly PIV equivalency in penetration and RoF, for the following reasons:
-This doesnt upset PIV balance because its still a superior chassis.
-The cost is laterally diverted to Muni, which is a largely voluntary resource pool that doesnt directly screw with tech speeds, but rather diversifies each respective tier internally. Basically allows a 0.5 tier progression.
-I think its crucial, that this is non-Commander. This kind of dedicated AT is needed to reinforce Sov roster UNIVERSALLY vs more AT dedicated armor options, which, as someone very validly pointed out recently, and damn that I cant cite the writer, is a systemic problem for Sov, that basically Ost armor, throughout, is always a Sov armor counter, because it is almost all AT centric, whereas Sov armor has an AI impetus it doesnt even really need.
-I model this largely on the 222 precedent. Its a 0.5 tier muni upgrade that makes Ost vapable of responding to, primarily, T70s.
-For the T34 to be the "workhorse" it is touted as, it needs this AT upgrade option. It used to be argued that Ram provided thr necessary slack, but that is now an outdated notion due to Ram changes and indirectly AtNade/Faust changes.
-Let Sov specialise its T34s for AT, at muni cost, and relative detriment to AI. Atleast give Sov the choice to do so.

The next is radical, but I still suggest it for future and larger meta consideration. It concerns ATGs.
-Im a huge proponent of imprpving MP and infantry specific AT options, specifically the ATG. I cant speak for 2v2+, but in 1v1, I want to see infantry/MP builds extending further in the meta, rather than the game incentivising teching, hard, to armor. Imo 1v1 has TOO MUCH ARMOR as is, and the nature of this armor, as AT centric on Ost, systemically creates a problem for Sov.
-PaK is graced with a better RoF, ZiS gets Barrage. But wtf, Sov doesnt NEED AI Barrage, it NEEDS better MP AT!
-Give PaKs the Barrage, and ZiS the better RoF.
--Ost lacks indirect fire options vs larger Support teams, Sov lacks better T2 AT. Swap them, and both units fit their meta role better.

Now for the really radical part:
-Move ZiS to T1.
-Move T70 to T2.

For once I agree with you nullist. I think a large portion of the community would love to see the T34/85 attainable in normal build and i think it is well needed.

The thing is I don't see the balance team doing it. Ever since a release they have had a don't rock the boat sort of mentality and haven't changed units in anything other then stats. Still a part of me wants to believe it's possible.

Not until the game is okey balanced(revised 5 days ago)

Top 25 1v1

German WR 80.568% (81.03% today)

Soviet WR 76.5% (76.5% today)

Top 25 2v2

German WR 81.992%

Soviet WR 74.98%

Top 25 3v3

German WR 82.116%

Soviet WR 75.356%

These numbers don't mean anything as top players/teams often play vs weaker players/teams

Hence you have people with 5-1 win ratio. Its difficult to conclude anything from that

p.s. Not disputing anything other than validity of numbers.....

-Move T70 to T2.

t70s in the first few minutes? sorry but thats a horrible idea.

t70s in the first few minutes? sorry but thats a horrible idea.

Perhaps.

But in order to shift ZiS to T1, something has to be moved to T2 to fill the gap.

I think Ost should be able to respond with Shreks, PaKsl 222s, as well as ubiquitous Fausts. Or hard tech toT3.
T70 may need a small nerf in relation to its change to a lower tier to account for the problem you highlight.
Cost may also need adjusting inline with its earlier tier.

This thre3ad has been so much derailed .

Agreed, less Nullist-chat more on-topic pretty please.

You see from the previous numbers I posted the t34/85 can not beat a panzer4 1v1 even with mark vehicle enabled. As for the other commander abilities, guards can button the pnazer4 but so can pg fire shreks on the t34/85. I think if you look at the tank numbers and use this unit you will have no doubt that its severely under performing its cost and role.

t34/85 is not supposed to beat a p4 head on even with mark target ( which benefits all the units so its kinda silly to use on a head on 1on 1 tank fight ) , the reason being , because its just marginally more expensive , retains the ram ( even though its stupidly implemented ) ,doesnt doesnt need t3 thus enabling to use t4 and allowing more flexibility and doesnt have any build time .

Guards are not the only ability this commander has to offer , in fact if the commander didnt have the 120mm , mark target and maybe the crew repair thingy id hardly ever pick him , its the whole commander that is supposed to work with 34/85s not the other way around . If you fail to gain map control with guards , 120mm , mollies , atg indirect fire , mines , flares and su76s then 34/85s are not your problem you d loose even if they were panther like

T34/85 didn't get changed when the T34/76 got a 50% damage and a small penetration buff. At the time T34/85s weren't too unpopular because the SU-85 was OP enough that someone supplementing one with the other wouldn't really notice. Hence they massively underperform against everything compared to the T34/76 now.

Hence, they need a buff. Rate of fire seems like the most sensible one.

This. Put simply the rate of fire is too low on the T34/85s if they were to fire faster (Around 6.5 seconds maybe) then I think they would be much more viable. Maybe a slight price reduction as well.

t34/85 is not supposed to beat a p4 head on even with mark target ( which benefits all the units so its kinda silly to use on a head on 1on 1 tank fight ) , the reason being , because its just marginally more expensive , retains the ram ( even though its stupidly implemented ) ,doesnt doesnt need t3 thus enabling to use t4 and allowing more flexibility and doesnt have any build time .

Guards are not the only ability this commander has to offer , in fact if the commander didnt have the 120mm , mark target and maybe the crew repair thingy id hardly ever pick him , its the whole commander that is supposed to work with 34/85s not the other way around . If you fail to gain map control with guards , 120mm , mollies , atg indirect fire , mines , flares and su76s then 34/85s are not your problem you d loose even if they were panther like

How did you come to that conclusion?

The devs always stated that the t34/76 was mainly an AI unit and not meant to be good counter to tanks yet they decided to buff it's AT ability. I personally never heard them say that about the t34/85. And even if they did their design concept could prove to be wrong in game play.

Looking at the commander as you suggest, I see almost half its abilities dedicated to AI including heavy mortar and guards (except for button they dont do much damage to tanks). Field repair helps tanks but hardly when rounds keep bouncing. Mark vehicle also helps allot again if rounds penetrate and that's the problem with this tank it just doesn't penetrate.

See where the problem is?

PS. often times in 1v1 you have to skip t4/su85 to get the t34/85

What I hope to change for the T34/85:

-AoE and scatter nerfed to 7,5 scatter and 1 AoE.
-Lower reaload to 6 sec.
-Increase penetration to 150.
-Increase frontal armor to 140.
-Increase main gun range to 50.

Push it more into an AT role then AI.

How did you come to that conclusion?

The devs always stated that the t34/76 was mainly an AI unit and not meant to be good counter to tanks yet they decided to buff it's AT ability. I personally never heard them say that about the t34/85. And even if they did their design concept could prove to be wrong in game play.

Looking at the commander as you suggest, I see almost half its abilities dedicated to AI including heavy mortar and guards (except for button they dont do much damage to tanks). Field repair helps tanks but hardly when rounds keep bouncing. Mark vehicle also helps allot again if rounds penetrate and that's the problem with this tank it just doesn't penetrate.

See where the problem is?

PS. often times in 1v1 you have to skip t4/su85 to get the t34/85

1) I came to this conclusion for various reasons the primary ones being the RAM and the fact that mark target gives 50% extra damage , that means that its supposed to be used by uits with relatively small damage and relatively good penetration like atgs su76s , guards and even at grenades ( the 2 latter used from behind ) . Other than that there were many more cooler ways to give a hard at unit on this commander other than the 34/85s (like is2 for example or kv1 ) but they didnt want any because the commander is supposed to buff many aspects of your army but not by much

2) I think you are using the commander in the wrong way . 1st of all guards are soft antiinfantry , hard antilightvehicle and soft antitank (though with good micro they get a lot better against tanks and infantry ) and the 120mm hits light vehicles like a ton of bricks . Regardless of that you are supposed to have early game dominance using this commander , that is what i told you in the first place , that is why you have the 120mm and the guards and since you dont have big munitions abilities you are supposed to spam mines and flares like a madman in order for your cons guards mortar atg etc to kille even more germans . Under those premises you should have a large combined arms force kicking ass long before you call in the t34/85s , you aslo should have a fuel and manpower advantage over your opponent which will allow you to call the 34/85s and creaTe a really big combined arms force that can deal with anything , you cant be on the back foot all game relying on just t1 or just t2 and expect to turn around the situation with that ability .

All that said , i do think the 34/85s need a small buff and definitely same fire rate as t34s , i said so before .

But if you want them to beat p4s head on , then you need to have the ram removed and they cant be a call in , they should be recruited like normal units and the mark target and crew repair need to take a hit with the nerfbat as well . Or go the way nullist proposes with a munitions cost upgrade , allthough imo you should also need to upgrade it from the t3 building in order to use