T34/85

Ugbear you can calculate as much as you can,but Im sure relic is changing nothing ^^ maybe a reduced price. I've heard quite often that the don't want to change the ability.
You can't compare the call in T-34/85(720MP/260F) with two Panthers( 1200MP/260F + building costs)

the best solution is a little price decrease (620MP/240) imo

Id be very surprised if they dont get adjusted sooner or later.

They just are rather marginal since they are only present on 2 commanders, and since they are not OP, they dont really "break" anything, so their priority remains low in the list of "to-do-things".

Many possible solutions, including making them purchaseable one at a time, reducing price for the bulk purchase. I dont think there will be much stats change though, owing to it being a call-in. Makes more sense to adjust the cost/timing of it, than stats.

I think making it a single call-in is necessary at this point. The only thing to have to ever be called in in pairs before was the panther with the PE. That was only exceptable because they were a faction that didn't have any real armor. It doesn't really work with the t34/85 because they are more fragile.

As double call in if you lose one the effectiveness is halfed and you need to call in another two if you want to replace it at all.
Imagine if when your tiger lost half it's health, it's rate of fire was cut in half and you couldn't repair it more then half way.

Id be very surprised if they dont get adjusted sooner or later.

They just are rather marginal since they are only present on 2 commanders, and since they are not OP, they dont really "break" anything, so their priority remains low in the list of "to-do-things".

Many possible solutions, including making them purchaseable one at a time, reducing price for the bulk purchase. I dont think there will be much stats change though, owing to it being a call-in. Makes more sense to adjust the cost/timing of it, than stats.

I wouldn't be too sure. It's DPS is less then that of the normal t34. That fact alone needs to be changed.

It's DPS is less then that of the normal t34.

T34/85 vs T34
160 vs 120 dmg
110 vs 80 pen
8.575 vs 4.875

Might be lower DPS (damage per second) yes, due to the lower fire rate, but that lower fire rate coupled with penetration and higher dmg, delivers more actual damage to an armored target.

Just saying. Not taking a side on whether that AT increase is sufficient to offset the loss in general DPS.

Keep in mind that:

1) The T-34/76 was buffed hugely. That´s why the dps is so similar.
2) The (regular) commander that contains the T-34/85 has the "mark target" ability, which enables two microed T-34/85 to beat a Panther. Any bigger buff to the T-34/85s dps would totally screw armor balance.

Keep in mind that:

1) The T-34/76 was buffed hugely. That´s why the dps is so similar.
2) The (regular) commander that contains the T-34/85 has the "mark target" ability, which enables two microed T-34/85 to beat a Panther. Any bigger buff to the T-34/85s dps would totally screw armor balance.

Well T33/85 are hugely costly, and yes they are inferior to t34/76 when you look at the cost of 1 t34/76 and compare it to how much one T34/86 ends up costing.

But a lot of people here forget that you don't actually need to tech up and go through tier buildings.

You have everything you need to win, with this commander, from HQ and CP units alone!!!

As you say Cardboard Tank, If T34/85 is any better when hitting field in 1v1 (assuming someone uses no teching up tactic) this commander would be just about invincible.

Once again, if you are teching up through tiers, yes T34/85 is inferior tank. But please guys, try to look at the commander. Its clearly made for that purpose, cons > guards > T34/85. It works quite well, and obviously t34/85 hits the field roughly when Piv does too. I doubt thats by accident...

Well T33/85 are hugely costly, and yes they are inferior to t34/76 when you look at the cost of 1 t34/76 and compare it to how much one T34/86 ends up costing.

But a lot of people here forget that you don't actually need to tech up and go through tier buildings.

You have everything you need to win, with this commander, from HQ and CP units alone!!!

As you say Cardboard Tank, If T34/85 is any better when hitting field in 1v1 (assuming someone uses no teching up tactic) this commander would be just about invincible.

Once again, if you are teching up through tiers, yes T34/85 is inferior tank. But please guys, try to look at the commander. Its clearly made for that purpose, cons > guards > T34/85. It works quite well, and obviously t34/85 hits the field roughly when Piv does too. I doubt thats by accident...

For "you don't need to tech up" you don't need to tech up on tiger and elephant as well. It's really biased for exaggerating the "No tech up" to an specific unit which is more or equally same price as German end-game heavys but only 1CP earlier. OR Make it 5 CP but receive a huge buff to a normal standard and single call-in.


That's why for 1v1 purpose make it only available when you build either T3 or T4.As German you need to reach battle phase T4 or build T3 factories.

I don't think there exists a common sense that you pay the 720/260 fuel at 4CP to buy two individually inferior and more costly tank than the other side is called balance.and you can see the T-34/76 can do equally the SAME amount of damage to the PZIV compare the to the T-34/85.


either remove the T-34/85 from the game for the sake of the 10 month suffering from this POS and make the T-34/76 double call-in.I'll have to bring this up to show how retarded the vehicle balance is:

PZIV(320MP/115FU), T34/76(280MP/85FU), T-34/85(720MP/260FU,4CP for pack of 2)

PZIV finishing off a T-34/85: (800/160)*5.825/(88.7097%)=32.8318sec

PZIV finishing off a T-34/76: (640/160)*5.825/(95.6522%)=24.3591sec

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV: (640/160)*8.575/(68.75%)=49.8909sec(WTF?)

T-34/76 finishing off a PZIV: (640/120)*4.875/(50%)=52sec

Well T33/85 are hugely costly, and yes they are inferior to t34/76 when you look at the cost of 1 t34/76 and compare it to how much one T34/86 ends up costing.

But a lot of people here forget that you don't actually need to tech up and go through tier buildings.

You have everything you need to win, with this commander, from HQ and CP units alone!!!

As you say Cardboard Tank, If T34/85 is any better when hitting field in 1v1 (assuming someone uses no teching up tactic) this commander would be just about invincible.

Once again, if you are teching up through tiers, yes T34/85 is inferior tank. But please guys, try to look at the commander. Its clearly made for that purpose, cons > guards > T34/85. It works quite well, and obviously t34/85 hits the field roughly when Piv does too. I doubt thats by accident...

Your argument is full of crap and make absolutely no sense, doing something as simple as making the t34/85 a single tank call in and reducing the firing rate will brake the game? Are you crazy? Your teching up theory is full of crap to I never seen that crap work, give me one replay of it working against a competent axis player, I doubt it even exist.

PZIV(320MP/115FU), T34/76(280MP/85FU), T-34/85(720MP/260FU,4CP for pack of 2)

PZIV finishing off a T-34/85: (800/160)*5.825/(88.7097%)=32.8318sec

PZIV finishing off a T-34/76: (640/160)*5.825/(95.6522%)=24.3591sec

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV: (640/160)*8.575/(68.75%)=49.8909sec(WTF?)

T-34/76 finishing off a PZIV: (640/120)*4.875/(50%)=52sec

im not saying the t34/85 doesnt need a change, but spamming this math all over this thread isnt really "evidence" of anything. you tried doing the same thing when comparing the is2 and tiger. youre still using the logic "the soviet tank is more expensive, it should win" which is a flawed argument. youre completely ignoring the role of the soviet tanks.

just like the is2, the t34/85 has very low scatter. it also has good AOE. combine that with with only 110 pen and its pretty clear this is another AI focused tank. now before you get all mad, im not saying this is right or that i agree with it, im just analyzing the numbers. i actually agree with most of you when you say the soviets should have another tank for AT besides su85.

my point is, comparing tanks based on cost and ignoring roles doesnt make for a strong argument. try running your same numbers for su85 vs brummbar or t34 vs ostwind. both of these will result in the cheaper tank winning and isnt evidence of any kind of imbalance.

im not saying the t34/85 doesnt need a change, but spamming this math all over this thread isnt really "evidence" of anything. you tried doing the same thing when comparing the is2 and tiger. youre still using the logic "the soviet tank is more expensive, it should win" which is a flawed argument. youre completely ignoring the role of the soviet tanks.

just like the is2, the t34/85 has very low scatter. it also has good AOE. combine that with with only 110 pen and its pretty clear this is another AI focused tank. now before you get all mad, im not saying this is right or that i agree with it, im just analyzing the numbers. i actually agree with most of you when you say the soviets should have another tank for AT besides su85.

my point is, comparing tanks based on cost and ignoring roles doesnt make for a strong argument. try running your same numbers for su85 vs brummbar or t34 vs ostwind. both of these will result in the cheaper tank winning and isnt evidence of any kind of imbalance.

I forget about the ROLE OF T-34/85?For it's being the most expensive investment than any other German heavy tank?

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV: (640/160)*8.575/(68.75%)=49.8909sec(WTF?)

T-34/76 finishing off a PZIV: (640/120)*4.875/(50%)=52sec

It's performance is no better than a T-34/76 but ridiculously 720MP/260FU to buy 2 of them, and it's doctrinal 4CP, even a people with a brain can tell this is FULL-RETARDED.

You are telling me the T-34/85 AI is better than the T-34/76 for it's firing 56.85% slower than the T-34/76 with same AOE radius but 3m better scatter?

A most expensive end-game tank investment loss to everything German can build is called "The role"




As for SU-85, have you ever use the SU-85 after the patch? Seriously, you haven't at all.

The T34-85 is really suffering from being the only non-tweaked tank since the major balance patches began.

They are now far too expensive for their degree of ineffectiveness. Costing 60 more fuel to call-in than a Tiger or IS-2 is not acceptable.

As a doctrine-specific call-in unit, they should be noticeably better than the regular T34-76's in all areas, I think.

T34-85's are already tougher due to their larger HP pool, but the reload time on their guns is too long and this neuters their dmg output.

Reduce their reload time (6.5s ?) and maybe tweak the cost to 800mp/220fu, making it 280mp/85fu for T34-76 compared to 400mp/110fu for a T34-85.

I forget about the ROLE OF T-34/85?For it's being the most expensive investment than any other German heavy tank?

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV: (640/160)*8.575/(68.75%)=49.8909sec(WTF?)

T-34/76 finishing off a PZIV: (640/120)*4.875/(50%)=52sec

It's performance is no better than a T-34/76 but ridiculously 720MP/260FU to buy 2 of them, and it's doctrinal 4CP, even a people with a brain can tell this is FULL-RETARDED.

You are telling me the T-34/85 AI is better than the T-34/76 for it's firing 56.85% slower than the T-34/76 with same AOE radius but 3m better scatter?

A most expensive end-game tank investment loss to everything German can build is called "The role"




As for SU-85, have you ever use the SU-85 after the patch? Seriously, you haven't at all.

its only the "most expensive investment" because you get 2 tanks at once. so again, not a fair comparison. i already read your numbers multiples times in this thread. posting them again isnt going to change my mind. not sure why youre freaking out and trying to make things personal. your argument is weak and your numbers arent evidence of anything. apparently disagreeing with you means im brainless.

here, to prove my point, ill even make the su85 brummbar comparison for you:

su85 finishing off a brummbar: (960/160)*4.25/(85%)=30sec
brummbar finishing off a su85: (640/160)*8.5/(44.12%)=77.06sec (WTF?)

does this mean the brummbar needs a buff too? it is more expensive after all. using your logic, more expensive means it should win. i guess the brummbars role is most expensive non doctrinal tank that cant kill an su85. ill repeat this in case you missed it. i agree the t34/85 should be changed, i just completely disagree with your argument for why. as you can see from my comparison above, comparing tanks like this proves nothing.

also, i have used the su85 after the nerfs. i see nothing wrong with it. people just need to be smart with them and not leave focus sight on. if youre going to charge forward with it, just make sure focus sight is off cooldown so you can switch it off the second you need to back up. i really dont see what the issue is. not sure how you inferred that i havent used the su85 from my post anyway.

here, to prove my point, ill even make the su85 brummbar comparison for you:

su85 finishing off a brummbar: (960/160)*4.25/(85%)=30sec
brummbar finishing off a su85: (640/160)*8.5/(44.12%)=77.06sec (WTF?)

Comparing the tank-killing capability of a anti-infantry tank to an anti-tank assault gun is not the same as comparing the tank-killing ability of a T34-76 to a T34-85......at all....

The entire point of the T34-85 is to be a more effective anti-tank version of the T34-76. Hence UGBEAR's comparison is completely valid and worth noting.

The entire point of the T34-85 is to be a more effective anti-tank version of the T34-76. Hence UGBEAR's comparison is completely valid and worth noting.

and thats why it has 2.6 distance scatter? because its an AT tank? look at all the AI tanks. youll find they all have less than 3 distance scatter. ISU152 is the only exception but it has ridiculous AOE to compensate. in that last post he was comparing the t34/76 and t34/85. in the others he has been comparing it to the p4. currently, the t34/85 is not meant to be superior to the p4 in AT because it is better in AI. thats why ive been talking about roles. he tried this exact same comparison with the is2 vs tiger and its flawed for the exact same reason.

and thats why it has 2.6 distance scatter? because its an AT tank? look at all the AI tanks. youll find they all have less than 3 distance scatter. ISU152 is the only exception but it has ridiculous AOE to compensate. in that last post he was comparing the t34/76 and t34/85. in the others he has been comparing it to the p4. currently, the t34/85 is not meant to be superior to the p4 in AT because it is better in AI. thats why ive been talking about roles. he tried this exact same comparison with the is2 vs tiger and its flawed for the exact same reason.

The increased damage and penetration of its main gun (and actual history) indicate the T34-85 is intended to serve as an improved anti-tank vehicle.

I don't think anyone would be buying a pair of T34-85's for anti-infantry, when the T34-76 already has that role covered.

Heck, nerf its scatter range to weaken its anti-infantry capability if that will allow its anti-tank capability to be improved.

The increased damage and penetration of its main gun (and actual history) indicate the T34-85 is intended to serve as an improved anti-tank vehicle.

I don't think anyone would be buying a pair of T34-85's for anti-infantry, when the T34-76 already has that role covered.

Heck, nerf its scatter range to weaken its anti-infantry capability if that will allow its anti-tank capability to be improved.

Yes, I've edited in my original proposal, to make scatter to 9.5 same as PZIV, thus reduce its AI capabilities in favor of the long lacked AT

its only the "most expensive investment" because you get 2 tanks at once. so again, not a fair comparison. i already read your numbers multiples times in this thread. posting them again isnt going to change my mind. not sure why youre freaking out and trying to make things personal. your argument is weak and your numbers arent evidence of anything. apparently disagreeing with you means im brainless.

here, to prove my point, ill even make the su85 brummbar comparison for you:

su85 finishing off a brummbar: (960/160)*4.25/(85%)=30sec
brummbar finishing off a su85: (640/160)*8.5/(44.12%)=77.06sec (WTF?)

Troll fail..

Did I even compare the dedicated AI unit such like OstWind and KV-8 Vs. Tanks?

If you are trying to convince everyone that the up-guned T-34/85 which comes with a payment of 720MP/260fuel of 2, should be considered as a dedicated AI unit like Brumbar or KV-8 Please, STOP TROLLING....you are already senseless.

soviet t34s and t3485s are NOT dedicated anti infantry tanks. they are both all round medium tanks. they are suppose to perform well against infantry or tanks but does not excel at either. t345 was upgunned because of german tanks so it should perform better against tanks. t3485 is as upgraded version of the t3476 so it should be better than the t3476 at everything with price being the only trade off.

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.