T34/85

Are you actually saying T34 and Panzer 4 are "equal"???

0.o you just lost all credibility. either you are trolling hard in which case, kudos, or more likely you honestly think the units should be an equivalent mirror. I never said t34s = p4s, but soviets have other tanks like t70s, su85, is2, isu152 whatever to fit into their strategy. An effective t70 rush will control the battlefield before p4s become an issue

Tactics and combined arms should win battles, not any one unit, be it german or soviet.

If you are having trouble killing p4s adjust your gameplay and builds.
Even small things in the start of the game like cutting the fuel off more regularly will decrease the number of p4s the enemy can field, if any. I can say from daily experience that I regularly lose p4s to t3 build opponents because they micro well and combine the tanks with zis, mines, buttons, whatever it takes. P4s are NOT the rape machines you seem to fondly remember them being 2 months ago at release

I just think just making it a single call-in doesn't change anything really other than you can get it cheaper to get one, so may as well leave it at 2.

WOW!!! what a insightful an informative argument, now you're just making stupid excuses

but soviets have other tanks like t70s, su85, is2, isu152 whatever to fit into their strategy. An effective t70 rush will control the battlefield before p4s become an issue

Tactics and combined arms should win battles, not any one unit, be it german or soviet.

russian player dealing with german armor
t70 mines, atnades, rifles, is2 isu152......

Tactics and combined arms!!
let me juggle up some mines.

german armor dealing with russian army


yeah, no contribution to the discussion!

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.

Are you saying you can survive with Pios only until you get Tiger or Elephant in 1v1 game?

That is what you are saying.

Because I can play entire game as Soviet, with that particular commander, having only HQ

Not sure why you giving me numbers and stats, I even said that T34/85 is quite useless if you don't use it that way........

The problem is you want t34/85 to be something they are not designed for. Tech up and build T34/76, Its a lot better option for you

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.

I have seen Symbiosis (I think) use strat, quite effectively if I am not good enough for your liking. Players don't use it that much, because there are less risky ways to win a game as Soviet. Me including, it doesn't make it any less viable strat if you choose to employ it.

If you cant get through the game with con-rifle-120mm mortar- 2X T34/85, then it says something about you, not other players who use it quite effectively.

Calling something crap, without ever trying it, well what can I say to you without being insulting?

Are you saying you can survive with Pios only until you get Tiger or Elephant in 1v1 game?

That is what you are saying.

Because I can play entire game as Soviet, with that particular commander, having only HQ

To be fair, Germans can now go without buildings as well if they use the new mech assault commander.

russian player dealing with german armor
t70 mines, atnades, rifles, is2 isu152......

Tactics and combined arms!!
let me juggle up some mines.

german armor dealing with russian army


yeah, no contribution to the discussion!

do you even use panzer4s? they really arent that great. Their AI is "meh" and yes they can chase off a t-34 or two on their own, but thats your fault for using a t-34 by itself

here is the math if you add mark target

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

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

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV plus Mark Target: (640/160)*4.2875/(68.75%)=24.9454sec

Correction

Mark vehicle gives 50% more damage not 50% reduction in reload time. Therefore, it should be:

160x1.50 or (640/240) x 8.575 / (68.75%) = 33.2606 seconds

But (640/240)= 2.667 so we have to round to 3 shots the and figures will be:

3 x 8.575 / (68.75%) = 37.4181 seconds

In that scenario 1 t34/85 cant beat 1 panzer4 even with the help of mark vehicle.

Solution

I think making the t34/85 cheaper or a single call in are all nice things to have, but the one thing that is badly needed is a penetration increase. If penetration is increased from 110 to 160 it will become a match to panzer4:

T-34/85 finishing off a PZIV: (640/160)*8.575/(100%) = 34.3sec

And this will enable 2 t34/85 to stand a better chance fighting the less expensive Tiger call in.

russian player dealing with german armor
t70 mines, atnades, rifles, is2 isu152......

Tactics and combined arms!!
let me juggle up some mines.

german armor dealing with russian army


yeah, no contribution to the discussion!

lmao this is sooo fucking true. State of the game right now is this. Dude you should make this a new thread with just this post. Classic.




I Agree with Abdul they t34/85 badly needs more penetration for a high fuel late game call in tank. A lot of times it cant even penetrate a p4 and it just seems like a marginally better t34 to me, (and I don't like t34s very much because its outclassed so much by p4) For it to be using the 85 which is supposedly the su85's weapon, (or the Zis weapon? cant remember) it should atleast have the penetration of a su85.


BTW Immortal, have YOU tried playing SOVIET lately?

lmao this is sooo fucking true. State of the game right now is this. Dude you should make this a new thread with just this post. Classic.




I Agree with Abdul they t34/85 badly needs more penetration for a high fuel late game call in tank. A lot of times it cant even penetrate a p4 and it just seems like a marginally better t34 to me, (and I don't like t34s very much because its outclassed so much by p4)


BTW Immortal, have YOU tried playing SOVIET lately?

nope, Immortal can't even recall a cost of a T-34/76 last time I saw him

This is the problem with people that only play one faction. It's really impossible not to be biased. It's human nature to think we are great players and we only lose because our own faction is weaker.

This is the problem with people that only play one faction. It's really impossible not to be biased. It's human nature to think we are great players and we only lose because our own faction is weaker.

Many false implications and conclusions in this statement.

A) Implies that people who play both factions cannot be biased, which is false.
B) Implies that people who only play one faction are automatically biased, which again, is false.
C) Stating its impossible to be biased, is somewhat true, but only to a degree. It is also impossible for you, personally to be unbiased. You are biased also.
D) Its not human nature to think one is a great player. I know I am a terrible player, hence, premise crushed and disqualified.
E) Sometimes people do infact lose because that faction is weaker in that situation. So false implication that that could not be the case.

Frankly, posts like this make me angry, because nobody sensible would ever be caught dead eliciting such false things to say. It should be obvious to any individual that thinking, let alone saying, things like this just makes you look a complete fool. Basically, think before you speak, and save other people the trouble of having to correct all the wrongness of it.

just make it a global upgrade and the call in of 2 slightly cheaper than manufacturing + you don't need to upgrade and even get the building.

increase the penetration slightly and everyones happy.

just make it a global upgrade and the call in of 2 slightly cheaper than manufacturing + you don't need to upgrade and even get the building.

increase the penetration slightly and everyones happy.

The 8.575 Rof make it on par with a elephant and a JS-2, slightly increase penetration and ROF


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
T-34/76 finishing off a PZIV: (640/120)*4.875/(50%)=52sec
Panther finishing off a T-34/85: (800/160)*6.575/(100%)=32.875sec
T-34/85 finishing off a Panther: (960/160)*8.575/(40.7407)=126.286sec

as I've stated over and over again, the T-34/85 means you pay the price tag of 760/260FU at the late game to buy something than can do no better than a price tag of 280/85FU AKA T-34/76, or something vastly inferior to a 320MP/115FU one AKA PZIV.

This is the problem with people that only play one faction. It's really impossible not to be biased. It's human nature to think we are great players and we only lose because our own faction is weaker.

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%

Interesting WR stats. Thanks for compiling those.

Pretty small discrepancy, especially in 1v1.

Though they are not entirely accurate of current balance, since they still carry all previous patches as well as ladder decay has not yet set in.

Actually, you can have an inherent subconscious bias, especially so if you are not experienced with what you talk about. This is human nature, and you have to deliberately try to go against it. And you are definitely not experienced playing Soviets.

There is also the dunning kruger effect, which affects both sides of any balance argument.

Top 25 1v1

German WR 80.568%

Soviet WR 76.412%

Top 25 2v2

German WR 81.992%

Soviet WR 74.98%

Top 25 3v3

German WR 82.116%

Soviet WR 75.356%

And also note this is win ratio, not number of wins. The fact that more people play Germans has no bearing on these stats.

Notice how the gap gets wider at higher player counts.

I'd also love to see a top 1000 or more added to this. I suspect the gap widens even further. The top 25 can be seen as outliers, people of exceptional skill, or good skill with exceptional talent (natural ability). They'll always be good at eking out as much as possible from a faction.

A subconscious bias will express itself as an overt and measurable bias anyways.
Experience with what one is talking about is no measure or guard against subconscious bias.
Infact, its the exact opposite.
Experience is likely to increase subjective bias, because it is, by definition, an increase in subjective experience.

Everyone has to deliberately "go against" being biased. Its called "being objective".
Experience of playing as Sov is not necessary to objective perception of balance at large, nor is playing as Ost.

A first-time observer can correctly observe and evaluate balance without ever even having played either.

You are misapplying Dunning-Kruner.
If a player thinks he is better at playing a faction, than what he objectively is, that is Duning-Kruner.
If a player thinks his perception of balance is automatically good becsuse he has a good win ratio, that is Duning-Kruner, because one does not automatically follow from the other.

As related to myself, personally, I challenge anyone to present a quote from me that evidences bias.
So far, no such quote has been produced. Merely ad hominem attacks which engage my person, not the objective topics of discussion or any statement from me that is demonstrably, objectively, biased.

The gap does not get wider at higher player counts.

You are incorrect.

It is:
7.012 in 2v2
6.76 in 3v3

As is completely clear from that, the gap infact decreases.

There is no basis for speculating the gap gets wider in larger samples.

Asn you pointed out, this top 25 is a sample of players who, ON BOTH SIDES, can eke out maximum advantage, meaning the sample is consistent ON BOTH SIDES.

In wider samples, the respective ability of players to eke out advantage DECREASES PROPORTIONALLY ON BOTH SIDES AT THE SAME RATE, meaning that as far as that quality is concerned, and its influence on the result, it will remain proportionately representative in larger samples.

So, pretty much wrong on every single account. This is all self-evident, obvious stuff, and it should not need to be separately and specificaloy disproven as it should never be claimed as "fact" in the first place, because it. Is. False.

Top 200 players w/r, first row is sov, second germans (1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4)
there's so little fluctuation it's hard to draw something out of it, only clear thing is that germans are OP in 3v3 and 4v4, which was already obvious

pre 20/08 patch
67.6	69.4	68.0	60.1
70.9	71.2	75.0	75.1

pre 10/09 patch
67	68.8	67.5	60.2
71.9	72.6 	76.2	76.2

12/09
67.1 	68.9	67.5	60.3
72.2	72.6 	76.1 	76.2

16/09
67.3	68.8	67.7 	60.3
72.1 	72.8	76.2 	76.4

24/09
67.8	68.9	68.1 	60.6
72.1 	72.8 	76.7 	76.4

26/09
67.7 	69.6 	67.8 	60.7
72.5 	72.9	76.6 	76.5

02/10
67.6 	69.3 	67.5 	60.4
72.1 	73.1 	76.4 	76.6

10/10
67.4	69.2 	68.0	60.5
72.4	72.9	75.8	76.7

15/10
67.4	69.4	67.8	61.2
72.2 	73.1 	76.0	77.0

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 )