T34 solution?

You didn't get my point.
I'd like to have decent AT tank option from my core building. Yes.
Why is it ok for Germans to have both AT and AI options available to build in both tiers and not for Soviets?

Seriously, you have at-nades, mines, at-guns, t-34/76, su-76 and su-85 and you can get guards, t-34/85, ISU-152, IS-2 etc. as call ins.

That's more than enough to deal with any german armor if you do it right.

What you actually ask for is to make soviets more like the germans. I don't understand that.

If you don't like the way the soviet AT works, just play germans instead but don't try to turn the soviet faction into an ostheer clone.

Regarding the soviet teching problem in 1v1 I made a thread with a possible solution.

Thread

What if you could build 85 out of t3 as a single unit when you had the cps for a callin of 2 ?

should the t34/85 get smoke canisters off the bat? would make them alot more survivable when doing a flank, makes some sense since they did get outfitted with smokes in the later models.

for their price and their role, i think a get-away ability isnt all that unreasonable.

I think That T 34-85 would be great T3 building Tech upgrade - Like Sherman 76mm gun in CoH, This upgrade would be serious investment, but it would convert All player T34's on field to new version and will replace previous tank in T3 building without changing it's price tag .

T34's "battle group" should stay anyway, because in many cases ability to call-in 2 T34's can be priceless and don't need invest in building T3, tech upgrade and building tanks one by one.

I don't know about all this.

Ofc the T34 is inferior to any tanks on the german side, but I find that soviets have a lot easier time laying mines and AT nading (ammunition abaundant).

Ofc in a 1 on 1, head-to head clash, soviet t34 will lose clearly, but who says that's the way you should play?

ANYWAY: If I were to suggest an option to strengthen the T34, I'd say upgrade with sand bags and logs (historical) for a bit extra HP. Sort of like the upgun on the shermans, but could be made individual upgrades.

Such a change could be made small enough not to risk turning the balance on its head.

T-34 as it is now is fine, IMO. It can fight P4s head-on; it wont win, but it can at least damage them. It's also better against infantry, for a much lesser price (240/85 is relatively cheap). I would like a (costly) upgun option to get T-34/85s in order to give T3 some much needed anti-tank punch, but as it is the tank itself is well balanced. You do need to get T2 if you go T3, as without AT gun support you will lose to panzer 4's, which hurts Soviet flexibility a lot. But that's a larger problem.

The only problem T-34s have is that they simply cannot destroy a tiger.

2 T34s can cope with a P4.

3 can kill a Panther right on. With micro you dont even need to lose one.

But 4 T34s wont kill a tiger(not even 5 maybe). The shots will just deflect.
And THATS the problem of the t34.

A tiger can make an investment of 332 fuel obsolet.

The T35/85 is just a bit too costly for its surviveability.



However I liked the idea of a buyable t34 weapon upgrade that will increase AT capabilities but at the same time reduce the AI capabilities. It should however be sth like 120 munition and the AT capabilites should be somewhere between a ZIS gun and a SU 85.

Pros:
-It would stop rendering t34s useless when a tiger comes into play
-It would be a trade between AT and AI

Cons:
- Could be too strong against Panthers? However the t34 with upgraded gun will still be easy to kill - a Pgren with shreck will kill it so its fine. What do you think?
- even more flexibility for soviets


The simplest solution would be to decrease the armor value of the tiger. However - that would equal the fractions again too much. We want variety - and a tiger in its state is nice. If it didnt counter the t34 that hard.


My two cents. What do you guys think?

hello

The T-34/85 is going to be buffed.

nordkind, the T-34/57 fits what you suggest exactly.

Seriously, you have at-nades, mines, at-guns, t-34/76, su-76 and su-85 and you can get guards, t-34/85, ISU-152, IS-2 etc. as call ins.

That's more than enough to deal with any german armor if you do it right.

What you actually ask for is to make soviets more like the germans. I don't understand that.

If you don't like the way the soviet AT works, just play germans instead but don't try to turn the soviet faction into an ostheer clone.

Regarding the soviet teching problem in 1v1 I made a thread with a possible solution.

Thread

yes, seriously soviet players have at-nades, mines, at-guns, t-34/76, su-76 and su-85 and you can get guards, t-34/85, ISU-152, IS-2 etc. as call ins.

and most of them are mutually exclusive if you played the game as soviet for once.

and, if you suggest someone dealing with German armor with T-34/85 you are definitely very very terrible at soviet. IT SUCKS

If you suggest someone dealing with German armor with ISU-152, you are definitely joking, cuz nobody could afford them during a even match.

If you suggest using JS-2 to deal with German armor, sorry, it will lose to a Panther(which costs half about its fuel) or a Tiger (which is much cheaper)

seriously, I can't take you seriously.

The only problem T-34s have is that they simply cannot destroy a tiger.

2 T34s can cope with a P4.

3 can kill a Panther right on. With micro you dont even need to lose one.

But 4 T34s wont kill a tiger(not even 5 maybe). The shots will just deflect.
And THATS the problem of the t34.

A tiger can make an investment of 332 fuel obsolet.

The T35/85 is just a bit too costly for its surviveability.

However I liked the idea of a buyable t34 weapon upgrade that will increase AT capabilities but at the same time reduce the AI capabilities. It should however be sth like 120 munition and the AT capabilites should be somewhere between a ZIS gun and a SU 85.

Pros:
-It would stop rendering t34s useless when a tiger comes into play
-It would be a trade between AT and AI

Cons:
- Could be too strong against Panthers? However the t34 with upgraded gun will still be easy to kill - a Pgren with shreck will kill it so its fine. What do you think?
- even more flexibility for soviets

The simplest solution would be to decrease the armor value of the tiger. However - that would equal the fractions again too much. We want variety - and a tiger in its state is nice. If it didnt counter the t34 that hard.

My two cents. What do you guys think?

I don't really think this is a problem. A T-34 has a decent chance of ramming a tiger, even frontally, which should discourage a tiger from taking on a T-34 pack aggressively without support on account of the risk of getting disabled by a far less expensive tank. Certainly a Tiger should encourage you to build some more proper AT or avoid it and use the T-34s to win you the infantry war rather than just blob up T-34s and charge it.

@OP:
I'd say the T-34/P-IV dynamic is one of the real highlights of COH 2 from a viewing and playing perspective, requiring a mixture of micro, positioning, timing and support coming together for an engagement that will swing the game. Ever since the T-34/76 buff they've been in a really good place as far as the balance against P-IVs go...

I prefer having an interesting asymmetrically balanced game rather than a mirror game. That may not be your preference but it's not a problem with the game's balance per se.

I agree with that UgBear.....The soviets' Achilles heel in this game is late game armor.

The new T-34/85 (if the leaked patch notes are correct) will have a increased pen (110 to 120), increased scatter, increased ROF (up to PzIV speed) and per unit cost lowered to PzIV levels.

The increased pen is vital, as now it can pen Panthers from the rear when otherwise it was terribly inefficient. This gives the soviets a much better chance against Panthers but the Tigers will still need heavy tanks to counter.

And Osts Achilles heel is lack of indirect fire and vulnerability to protracted MP bleed.

I don't really think this is a problem. A T-34 has a decent chance of ramming a tiger, even frontally, which should discourage a tiger from taking on a T-34 pack aggressively without support on account of the risk of getting disabled by a far less expensive tank. Certainly a Tiger should encourage you to build some more proper AT or avoid it and use the T-34s to win you the infantry war rather than just blob up T-34s and charge it.

@OP:
I'd say the T-34/P-IV dynamic is one of the real highlights of COH 2 from a viewing and playing perspective, requiring a mixture of micro, positioning, timing and support coming together for an engagement that will swing the game. Ever since the T-34/76 buff they've been in a really good place as far as the balance against P-IVs go...

I prefer having an interesting asymmetrically balanced game rather than a mirror game. That may not be your preference but it's not a problem with the game's balance per se.

I totally agree with you.

Soviets have their own form of bleed, a lot of that comes from direct fire since everything Soviet is more vulnerable to direct fire.

That said, I really don't see any need to buff the T-34/76 any more, at least not without increasing its cost significantly.

It's something just cheap enough to run a pack, with low enough of a manpower cost that you can afford units to support it. I just think that support is a teeny bit lacking, especially so if you don't build certain buildings. Going building 1 means you can't go with T-34s since you don't have an AT gun.

As it is t34s and y34/85s need a slight buff , either in stats or in the form of a decent vet1 ability or a small cost reduction , unfortunately ram with the distances involved is awkward and high risk to use added to the low penetration of both t34 tanks and the hudini abilities of th p4s ( blit + smoke ) means your likely to loose a t34 more often than you ll kil the p4 even with a superior tank force .

As it is now getting a p4 costs with all buildings and upgrades purchased and built about sth like 225-235 fuel in total while a t34/76 costs 215-225 and that is without upgrading either mollies or at nades ( sb might need to do the math again as i dont have the costs readilly available and might be missing sth ) . Factor in the mp drain which is usually larger for the soviets and the fact that german tech is easier to develop since upgrading to the next phase can be done while the pio is away capping , fighting etc and soviet buildings taking significantly longer than OST and the result you get is either a fast p4 even before t34 has arrived or a simultaneous arrival of the 2 tanks but with the OST having a better combined arms force .

As it is now getting a p4 costs with all buildings and upgrades purchased and built about sth like 225-235 fuel in total while a t34/76 costs 215-225 and that is without upgrading either mollies or at nades ( sb might need to do the math again as i dont have the costs readilly available and might be missing sth )

Its actually more than that.

Full tiers + PIV= 1020/225
Full tiers + T34= 995/265

If Sov skips T1 its 795/225
If Sov skips T2 its 755/215

The asymmetric tier costs seem to indicate strongly for Sov to skip atleast one tier on the way to T4.
Whereas Ost has a harder time of skipping one, but reaches the same net cost, at T4.
Overall, total tier costs are roughly similar.

The onfield Pios time during BP upgrade that you mention is negated in start of match, by Pios having to build T1.
Sov has the immediate onfield advantage, that Ost catches up later by being able to BP1 while onfield.
After that, its a direct onfield advantage in onfield terms, for BP2-3.

And Osts Achilles heel is lack of indirect fire and vulnerability to protracted MP bleed.

I getcha on the last part, not so much the first. Germans feel the MP bleed more than the soviets mostly due in part to needing to field high MP late game tanks. Soviets don't have late game tanks that don't also take 240+ fuel so they're a bit free to not have to float up to 600-700 manpower.

Also when adding up the cost of tier buildings and tech, it's probably worth taking into account what units and upgrades each faction might need or want before the first tank hits the field.

Soviets have the choice to spend fuel on m3 scout cars, AT nades, and molotovs. The latter two of which are almost necessities to conscript competency and utility. Scout cars are an expensive unit fuel-wise in the early game (20) and are essentially hard countered by the German's base unit's first ability: panzerfaust.

Germans have the choice to spend fuel before t3 to field Scout Cars and Halftracks. Scout cars are very effective units for the early game, but they can be ignored. Halftracks are kind of the flagship early game unit for the Germans, especially with the flame upgrade.

With this in mind, Soviet players are generally assumed to have invested 50 fuel into equipping their conscripts to handle German t1 and t2. German players have a choice to spend fuel to field units that are effective counters to soviet t0 and t1. (and two of the three units from their t2.) It's actually rather balanced, with the initiative of course being in the favor of germans due to them having access to a complete army.

But essentially the point is: those resources spent on upgrading conscripts are more expensive than a scout car or halftrack, and the conscripts themselves remain just as flimsy, and only providing the soviet player with the option for spending munitions to soft counter. Where soviets have to invest to counter, germans can invest in two mobile units, one that reinforces squads and can be upgraded to effectively force soviets into getting ATnades or some kind of ATG, and another that can be upgraded to hard counter m3 scoutcars and soviet infantry without AT (penals, shocks, conscripts where the player hasn't spent fuel on AT nades).

If the soviet player skips t1 or t2, but still gets molotovs and AT nades (soviets are often kind of forced to) and manages to maintain the same resource income/map control as a german opponent rushing t3, a t34 will hit the field a bit later than a p4: 20-30 fuel later.

Which is why no soviet player that gets ATnades and molotovs in their right mind goes t1 and t2, because being 80 fuel behind for the ostwind or p4 is pretty devastating.

Breaking news: T-34/85s performed worse than Panzer IVs in reality and much worse than Panthers.

I believe that statement for a panther but not a panzer 4. Do you have a source?

I believe that statement for a panther but not a panzer 4. Do you have a source?

For StuGs at least which had the same armor and gun as the Panzer IV.



Source:

War on the Eastern Front - The German Soldier in Russia 1941-1945

by James Lucas
Greenhill Books 1979


"By the end of May 1944, more than 20000 [kills] had been logged and this figure rose to 30000 by the end of the war."

"so successful were the German SP gunners that it was a standing order to Russian tank crews to avoid a duel with an SP if at all possible."




Most of these vehicle kills were T-34s btw. and with 10k kills within the last year of the war a huge chunk of the ever increasing number of T-34/85s was lost to StuGs at least. There were only 10k StuGs produced btw. A Panzer IV with the same gun and armor as the StuG should be expected to perform - even if not as good as StuGs - better than a T-34/85.

Germans had the advantage of fighting in defensive positions but also could deliver the first shot because of better optics, a flatter trajectory, better crews. This point is actually often overlooked, but with a difference in the vehicles performance so marginal - this might be the most important point.

The T-34 was also the most lost tank of the war.