Soviet tanks are garbage

this is great observation from hitler right here

I actually had to laugh.

Still they managed to lose more soldiers despite having every conceivable advantage.

Idk about that, surprise is the biggest advantage. Russians thought they had non-aggression pact, Nazis basically were like "just kidding!"

Idk about that, surprise is the biggest advantage. Russians thought they had non-aggression pact, Nazis basically were like "just kidding!"

Their army was sort of "headless" after purges in Soviet officers' corps in the 1930s

Idk about that, surprise is the biggest advantage. Russians thought they had non-aggression pact, Nazis basically were like "just kidding!"

If you carefully read soviet diplomacy letters - no one thought that pact will give peace with Germany. It looks more like 2 cowboys - who first could reload gun and shoot first. Both sides make preparitions to war against each other. Also Reich was capitalistic country and Hitler very often said, "that communism the biggest threat to Europe and must be defeated in first order". Holy Crusade against communistic plague. Stalin thinking the same: "Hitler is natural enemy for workers and any communist adn for our young country."
Failures of first monthes were maded because Stalin thought that Hitler can't start war in summer 1941, thinking about summer or autumn 1942. Red Army didn't prepare good - t-34 were raw and new vehicle, they broke more often then fight, like first german panthers. Big problems with armor forces control - tactic how to use big groups of tanks was in progress, while germans can got very good experience when fought against Britain, France and Poland. If you read how used armored forces of RA in early period - it looks as big groups tanks without infantry support, without air support and with bad artillery support. Only with time was known that tanks need infantry, need air support and artillery. Such big groups of tanks (those who didn't broke) were easily destroyed by combined arms of german forces.
In fact, Stalin afraid Poland invasion on West with Finland on North and Britain bombing Caucasian oil fields on South, that could completely broke any preparations to future war with German. Thats why Finland and Poland must be deleted from big game. Britain didn't start war in alone. SU got more territory and could move away enemy forces from borders and will win more time.

SU offered to France and Britain collective plan about overall defense in Europe "some kind of modern NATO", where each country must have their own area of interests. Finland and Poland were against it, because they are will be in SU zone. Britain also was against, because it will be increase power of SU and in future could make overall Europe under soviet control. Hitler in such perspective don't look so bad. He also was weak in that moment.
WHile in Asia, Britain make preparations to lead Japan on war near borders of SU that could lead attention of Stalin away from Europe. Japan in that moment had 2 main ways: Northern territories or Asia. But after Halhin-Ghol, plans about Northern territories were ruined and Japan start look on Britain territories in Asia. To make these planes alive, SU helped Japan with info and supplements and make peace pact with Japan. This pact also give some defense to east borders of SU in future war in Europe.
USA in that moment was completely in inner politics and try to pulled out themselves from problems of Great Depression. But they started look with great suspicions on SU preparitions for Japan, because it make threat for USA territories and interests in that region.

To prevent themselves from war against Japan, USA make veto to oil and other strategis resources trade with Japan, but it only make future Japan war in Asia more inevitable. Because without oil any control over Asia for Japan was unrealistic. In that moment Japan heavily relied on US oil. WIthout it, it can't fight in China. To help Japan more deeply pulled in China, SU helped communistic forces in China by weapons and supplies. The same did USA, but when war with Japan started. Were made very interesting projects that americans did to suppply China against Japan. From air supplies to completely new railroad. Were builded tons various stuff.

The Soviets did not produce 20 times more tanks than the Germans did, the margin isn't even close to that high, also the Germans actually built more assault guns and tank destroyers than they did tanks, the Stug iii being the most built.

More importantly though the T-34 and Panzer iv both had their own qualities and flaws which changed over the course of the war as both were upgraded, and at no point did either vehicle "roflstomp" the other.

in 1941 panzer 4s and 3s were utterly helpless when confronted by T-34s and KVs... but of course the wehrmacht as a whole had combined arms to deal with these tanks... a midrange PaK 40 or a FlaK 36/88 shot can deal with the T-34 quite effectively... and although stukas werent really good at knocking out tanks... they were good at either rendering them combat ineffective or forcing their crew to start running out of the tank...

The matchup between the T-34 Model 1943 and Panzer IV Model G was like this:

The T-34 has some 90-95mm effective armor due to slope to the Panzer IV's 80mm (50mm + 30mm), but the F-34 main gun is outclassed by the KwK 40. The Panzer IV Ausf G still held the advantage by a couple hundred meters, but was outnumbered.

Now add the T-34 Model 1944 (T-34-85) against the Panzer IV Model H and it's a different story.

The Panzer IV's armor gets a minuscule improvement as it is now a solid piece rather than a 30mm plate welded to the 50mm glacis. But now the D5-T gun far outclasses the KwK 40, and the Panzer IV is now out-ranged by a thousand meters and outnumbered.


Bonus fun fact:
The Tiger I had 100mm frontal armor; that's right, the T-34 was nearly as armored as a Tiger tank.

in 1941 panzer 4s and 3s were utterly helpless when confronted by T-34s and KVs... but of course the wehrmacht as a whole had combined arms to deal with these tanks... a midrange PaK 40 or a FlaK 36/88 shot can deal with the T-34 quite effectively... and although stukas werent really good at knocking out tanks... they were good at either rendering them combat ineffective or forcing their crew to start running out of the tank...

Yes it is true that the Wehrmacht had combined arms set up to deal with tanks and it's also true that most tanks overall were destroyed by infantry based AT weapons such as AT guns, but the idea that the Panzer 3 and 4 were "utterly helpless" against the T-34 in 1941 is completely false. The T-34 may have had more arnor and more penetration than the Panzers but this didn't mean they were helpless. Both Panzers had several advantages over the T-34 which allowed them to defeat their more armored foes.

The Panzers 3 and 4 had much better optics than the T-34 as well as more vision ports and probably most importantly the commander had a cupola which allowed him to observe the battlefield and identify targets much faster and easier than the T-34. This is especially important when you know that the main deciding factor in a tank engagement is which tank sees the other and fires first because even with a non-penetrating hit the crew will still be confused and probably panicking aswell. In addition to much better vision, each Panzer 3 and 4 was also equip with a radio which meant that movement and attacks could be much better coordinated and that Panzer 3s and 4s could react much faster and easier than a group of T-34s could. The Panzer 3 and 4 were also more reliable than the T-34 especially in 1941 and as you've already mentioned the ergonomics of the Panzer 3 and 4 are much better aswell.

So basically while the T-34 might look good on paper with it's better armor and gun, the reality especially in 1941 was that the Panzer 3 and 4 were much more effective fighting tanks because they could be operated much more effectively and bring what they had to bear on the enemy faster which is why many T-34 were easily outflanked by German tanks due to being practically blind and having no good line of communication with their fellow tanks.

I encourage you to watch "Panzer III vs. T-34 (featuring Cheiftain)" by Millitary History Visuallized, it's a very interesting and informative video.

The matchup between the T-34 Model 1943 and Panzer IV Model G was like this:

The T-34 has some 90-95mm effective armor due to slope to the Panzer IV's 80mm (50mm + 30mm), but the F-34 main gun is outclassed by the KwK 40. The Panzer IV Ausf G still held the advantage by a couple hundred meters, but was outnumbered.

Now add the T-34 Model 1944 (T-34-85) against the Panzer IV Model H and it's a different story.

The Panzer IV's armor gets a minuscule improvement as it is now a solid piece rather than a 30mm plate welded to the 50mm glacis. But now the D5-T gun far outclasses the KwK 40, and the Panzer IV is now out-ranged by a thousand meters and outnumbered.


Bonus fun fact:
The Tiger I had 100mm frontal armor; that's right, the T-34 was nearly as armored as a Tiger tank.

A few things that you have to keep in mind is that the Panzer 4 had much better visibility and optics than even the T-34-85 which meant that it was usually able to use it's gun much faster and more accurately than the T-34. Both guns on the T-34 had rather bad gun depression which can also hinder the ability of a tank to fire on a target.

Also the T-34s armor was less effective than the Tiger's because on average it was going up against larger guns with more penetration. Most T-34s were also terribly welded and were made out of more brittle non-heat treated steel which often lead to cracking around the weld seams when a round ricocheted. Also the Tiger's armor was not actually flat, the upper plate was angled at 10 degrees and the lower one was angled even more so.

Soviets were vastly undertrained and had a very depleted officer corps as a result of the purges.

Even though units might have had modern equipment, the few officers around were terrified to train with it as any major breakdowns or losses could result in a trial for sabotage.

Soviets were vastly undertrained and had a very depleted officer corps as a result of the purges.

Even though units might have had modern equipment, the few officers around were terrified to train with it as any major breakdowns or losses could result in a trial for sabotage.

That applies to early war, not late.
Late war soviet army was full of experienced veterans.
That's why everyone considers it pretty damn stupid that we have conscripts in multiplayer, which happens in 44-45 years despite there being strelky in game(soviet campaign).

That applies to early war, not late.
Late war soviet army was full of experienced veterans.
That's why everyone considers it pretty damn stupid that we have conscripts in multiplayer, which happens in 44-45 years despite there being strelky in game(soviet campaign).

5 tier vet would make sense for soviets for the game context, but I think it's a little late for that.

E: the first mission in the campaign is Stalingrad, so it's more like late 42-45

If you carefully read soviet diplomacy letters - no one thought that pact will give peace with Germany. It looks more like 2 cowboys - who first could reload gun and shoot first. Both sides make preparitions to war against each other. Also Reich was capitalistic country and Hitler very often said, "that communism the biggest threat to Europe and must be defeated in first order".

Oh a lot of people knew it was coming. But the guy who mattered most (Stalin) basically refused to believe it or just didn't plan for it at all. Soviets weren't even close to prepared for an invasion

Oh a lot of people knew it was coming. But the guy who mattered most (Stalin) basically refused to believe it or just didn't plan for it at all. Soviets weren't even close to prepared for an invasion

In the USSR, they were not fools and understood that war was inevitable. Therefore, the Army was increased many times, which of course influenced the first years of the war - a lack of training. A large-scale rearmament began - self-loading rifles for soldiers, the development of new fighters, new tanks. In 1941, the T-34 was to be replaced by a T-34M with 60 mm frontal armor, three turret people and of the 500 T-34M that were to be built in 1941, 380 were supposed to be with ZiS-4 (tank version of ZiS-2 ) 57 mm cannon - a very powerful anti tank gun.
Show Spoiler
At the same time, the USSR was supposed to get the ultimate KV-3 with a powerful 107-mm gun.
Show Spoiler
The USSR simply did not have time to reorganize, if the German attack had been postponed until 1942, this would give significantly more opportunities for the USSR in the beginning.

So basically while the T-34 might look good on paper with it's better armor and gun, the reality especially in 1941 was that the Panzer 3 and 4 were much more effective fighting tanks because they could be operated much more effectively and bring what they had to bear on the enemy faster which is why many T-34 were easily outflanked by German tanks due to being practically blind and having no good line of communication with their fellow tanks.

I encourage you to watch "Panzer III vs. T-34 (featuring Cheiftain)" by Millitary History Visuallized, it's a very interesting and informative video.

Yea, p3 could fight against t-34 mod.1941. Like T-70 could fight against panther (was T-70 tank crew that could destroyed 2 panther from 40 meters, start shoot to thin side armor). You have chances if could hit to rear or side armor.
But when deal comes to P4. It got the main upgrades in summer 1942 (thicked armor of turret from 30 to 50 and frontal to 80 + longer gun). Mogel H become the most perfect model from all P4. Model J in 1944 got only manual turret rotation and reduced amount of optics to become easier to produce. T-34/76 in 1943 became perfect from terms of reliability and production. While in 1944 it was fully replaced in factories by t-34/85 with much more powerfull gun and 90 mm thick turret armor (all P4 had the same 50mm turret like it was maded in 1942).
Germans could went to Moscow had only couple p4 with 75mm short gun and thin armor and tons of light tanks. While soviets had more heavier and better armored, but very unreliable tanks.
Panther was medium tank from german idea (it used as p4 replacement and must do the same work as p4), while have weight only 1.5 tons lesser than is-2 with 122mm gun and 120mm sloped armor. In fact, main problem was that P4 became outdated and p5 couldn't became good replacement. IT had problems. that couldn't be resolved, because by design decisions.
Ther were many reasons for it: from very strange style of development new tanks, when all companies have 1 task with detailed description which parts must use new tank. To have only Knipkamp, who carry on yourself all vision about future tanks in 6-th Department. Without any serious contender (from terms of political power, not technical knowledge), who can had different opinion. As result many good ideas of tanks, were not realised, because 1 company can't make the whole tank in alone. If 6-th Department made mistake in vision, this became fatal.
Such style of development was born from mistakes of 1936-1937, when multiple companies couldn't make project of medium tanks and heavy tanks even not started to develop. Army was without proper mediums and without heavies. Each company had own vision. The decision was made to create one main department which will be lead all tanks development and production and create vision of future tanks. 6-th department was born. It could fast resolve bunch of problems and gave to army medium tanks (p3) and heavy (p4). But in long distance it became weak side of tanks development.

Initial idea of how to use tnaks in war for Germany was - speed. Tanks must have much higher speed to destroy enemy command points and comunications. While other low-speed tanks must help to infantry destroy encircled enemy forces. Main medium tank must have high speed (65-80 km/h) and thin armor (not against shells), because as was said:"Much easier to increase ATG capability neither tank armor". Thats why was vision that - better to destroy enemy as soon as possible. ATG and enemy tanks useless without shells and good commands in encirclement.

ooooh finally a decent counterargument

Yes it is true that the Wehrmacht had combined arms set up to deal with tanks and it's also true that most tanks overall were destroyed by infantry based AT weapons such as AT guns, but the idea that the Panzer 3 and 4 were "utterly helpless" against the T-34 in 1941 is completely false. The T-34 may have had more arnor and more penetration than the Panzers but this didn't mean they were helpless. Both Panzers had several advantages over the T-34 which allowed them to defeat their more armored foes.

while you are correct that the T-34 mod 41 had its disadvantages... ranging from the mundane such as the inadequacy of the cyclone engine filter to the glaring weaknesses such as the lack of a cupola/radio/turret basket and the 2 man turret... all these disadvantages except one are not too relevant when the opponent cannot even penetrate your armor...

of course the exception im referring to is armor quality... im surprised you havent mentioned how early T-34s were vulnerable to 37mm guns at close range when the pzgr hit the welding spot between the hull plates... im also surprised that you didnt mention the spalling issue the T-34 had aswell...

now as for whether panzer 3s and 4s were helpless... im still inclined to the idea that they were helpless... since in a direct engagement between panzer 3/4s vs T-34s the former would require a near point blank shot fired at just the right area of the T-34 in order to cause penetration...

this means the panzer 3/4 is utterly helpless in normal combat ranges (500-1000) despite the T-34 being blind as a bat at long range (2km) engagements... and would have to be dangerously close in order to knock out T-34s... at which point i doubt even the worst T-34 crew would have a problem with...

The Panzers 3 and 4 had much better optics than the T-34 as well as more vision ports and probably most importantly the commander had a cupola which allowed him to observe the battlefield and identify targets much faster and easier than the T-34. This is especially important when you know that the main deciding factor in a tank engagement is which tank sees the other and fires first because even with a non-penetrating hit the crew will still be confused and probably panicking aswell. In addition to much better vision, each Panzer 3 and 4 was also equip with a radio which meant that movement and attacks could be much better coordinated and that Panzer 3s and 4s could react much faster and easier than a group of T-34s could. The Panzer 3 and 4 were also more reliable than the T-34 especially in 1941 and as you've already mentioned the ergonomics of the Panzer 3 and 4 are much better aswell.

the real advantage isnt soo much soo optics here tbh... soviet optics (albeit crude at the time relying on a single tube as opposed to the hinge type german optics).. had fairly good lens quality...until the factories were moved to the urals that is... but no the real advantage here is the commander`s cupola... and while your response is correct it is not entirely complete....

the original T-34 was designed around the soviet strategy of fighting unbuttoned... this was a horrible concept... since in battle the commander is effectively blind without the presence of the commander`s cupola... in order for soviet tankers to spot targets effectively (since the periscope is quite narrow) soviet tankers literally had to unbutton their tanks... this of course left commanders vulnerable to enemy fire which caused a large portion of T-34 commanders to get sniped from enemy fire... after that the overall fighting effectiveness of the tank that recently lost its commander crashes to near zero and the tank is essentially useless...

of course the russians werent stupid...supposedly this would be rectified with the T-34M however that variant never came into production thanks to barbarossa.... eventually however they introduced the cupola on the T-34-85 which fixed the issue of the 2 man turret aswell (but did not introduce the cupola)

So basically while the T-34 might look good on paper with it's better armor and gun, the reality especially in 1941 was that the Panzer 3 and 4 were much more effective fighting tanks because they could be operated much more effectively and bring what they had to bear on the enemy faster which is why many T-34 were easily outflanked by German tanks due to being practically blind and having no good line of communication with their fellow tanks.

while you are correct that the gap between the T-34 and panzer 3 arent as large as the paper stats suggest... the probability of a panzer 3 knocking out a T-34 at combat distances is close to impossible regardless of the disadvantages....

the panzer 3 instead close in enough to accurately hit the joint between the welds of the armor in order to score a penetrating hit... the probability of this... though far more likely than an engagement from standard combat distances... still seem very unlikely...

I encourage you to watch "Panzer III vs. T-34 (featuring Cheiftain)" by Millitary History Visuallized, it's a very interesting and informative video.

i am quite familiar with MHV and ive watched several of his episodes including the panzer 3 vs T-34 and the panzer 4 vs sherman videos...

We are fabulously going off topic.

Their army was sort of "headless" after purges in Soviet officers' corps in the 1930s

Here’s a very nice video explaining how that’s not the case:

https://youtu.be/JnWNnI6YlQQ