Kind of, the more crewmembers it has, the slower the gun fires.
Basically look at the zis-3, biggest crew, slowest rate of fire  |
"The gun sights and range finding for the F-34 main gun (either the TMFD-7 or the PT4-7[52]) were rather crude, especially compared to those of their German adversaries, affecting accuracy and the ability to engage at long ranges.[53] As a result of the T-34's two-man turret, weak optics, and poor vision devices, the Germans noted:
T-34s operated in a disorganised fashion with little coordination, or else tended to clump together like a hen with its chicks. Individual tank commanders lacked situational awareness due to the poor provision of vision devices and preoccupation with gunnery duties. A tank platoon would seldom be capable of engaging three separate targets, but would tend to focus on a single target selected by the platoon leader. As a result T-34 platoons lost the greater firepower of three independently operating tanks.[54]
The Germans also noted the T-34 was very slow to find and engage targets, while their own tanks could typically get off three rounds for every one fired by the T-34."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34
The T-34 proofed to be a very clumsy vehicle. The only advantage it had, was it´s availability. It was always there. Engaging German armor was another thing though.
Wikipedia is not a very reliable source. It is constantly getting editing and is filled with conflicting information everywhere. However, for example US testing of the t-34 noted that the optics of the t-34 were superior to anything they had. And the US like i said were rather critical of the t-34, even tho some of the flaws they noticed was because they did not know how to handle the vehicle properly.
In the same article wikipedia claims that the t-34 is the best tank in the world, then goes on rambling how horrible the t-34 actually was :/
And that the reason why the t-34s acted in a disorganized fashion and very slow to find targets can be atributted to the 2 man turret, poor coordination and crews or perhaps vision, not gun optics and cam pretty much be only contributed to the very early versions of the t-34.
If the t-34 was so crappy, then why did the germans base their panther on the t-34? Why did the germans value captured t-34s and used them to great effect? |
I said the Panther in this game has roughly the rate of fire it actually had. Which is every 6 seconds ... 60 seconds (that´s one minute, Burts) --> 10 shots per minute. ISU-152 could fire once a minute. Ingame it does so about every 10 seconds ---> 6 shots per minute. That makes a factor of x1 for the Panther, and a factor of x6 for the ISU-152.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjHkm-h_IJo#t=7m02s
I think they all made that up.
Not really, like i said, even modern tanks only have a rate of fire of 6 rounds per minute (M1 Abrams for example). And isu-152 had a rate of fire of 2-3 rounds per minute, not 1.
And i'd actually like a source of soviet optics being "bad" instead of a video and some saying that russians always miss the first shot.
Hell, even the americans admitted that the optics of the t-34 were superior to anything they had. And they were rather critical about the t-34. Mainly because the early t-34 models weren't exactly reliable.
|
T-34/85s and SU-85s have roughly a 50% chance to go through Panthers frontal armor atm. In reality it was near impossible. Add to that that the Panther could take out T-34s from 2km + and the 85mm would struggle to go though the Panthers front at all you get the picture.
IS-2 and ISU 152 shots are tuned down? Well, so are the shots of a Panther. Both could take out with one shot. The difference is that the Panther has roughly its historic rate of fire, while ISU-152 reload 6x faster and IS-2s about 3x faster. Guess who is comes out of this worst?
No, it hasn´t. Add to that, that the gun of the IS-2 didn´t fit the turret and had to be readjusted to reload and it´s even worse.
You are mistaking theoretical rate of fire with real combat rate of fire. Even modern combat tanks only have a rate of fire of only about 6 shots per minute. You can't just factor the reload rates, you also have to factor the fact that the crew has to aim.
These huge distance kilomer engagements rarely ever happened.
And ISU-152 rate of fire was 2-3 per minute. So according to you panther could shoot 18 times per minute? Wow.
Not really sure where exactly do you get these facts that soviet optics were inferior at all. Never heard about that IS-2 gun not fitting the turret either. |
Actually late game in this game means tanks. And that´s where Germans were better in 1944. We have Su-85s with more range than a Panther despite better optics on the latter, IS-2s and ISU-152 firing super fast despite being able to lob a shell once or twice a minute. If you want Allies to have the number advantage, because of realism, their tanks should be way less effective. Especially the overrated Russian stuff (deficit in crews, optics, ergonomics, accuracy, reload speed) and so on. So German late game advantage is fine.
Also this game is set around a local engagement and with the right equipment (aka tanks) Germans achieved local victories. The thing is that on other fronts, where there wasn´t that equipment around, they would get overrun. But unless we don´t see horses in this game, the game is set at a place with a well equipped German force - so late game advantage isn´t illogical.
Which tanks exactly are too effective? IS-2s and ISU-152s have faster reload times, but their destructive power is alot weaker than it was in reality.
The superior optics thing has been disproven many times.
And better crews? This game is set in 1944, not 1941.
|
I'm almost pretty sure T-34/76 costs 90 fuel now.
No it doesn't. It costs 100 fuel. |
|
I think kubels are somewhat too strong. But on their own they are mostly fine. However combined with truck push abuse they are simply horrible and fucking ridiciluos.
With the WC51 at 1 cp, there is practically no counter to this thing now. Just rush your sturmpios+kubel to cutoff, and truck push anything that manages to flank. |
|
I dunno, gaurds this patch are really meh.
Either make then anti infantry or anti tank, not this horrible mix of both....
Make them start with 6 mosins, and be able to upgrade to either 3 PTRS rifles or 2x DP |
Look at the post where i said that Sherman doesnt feel any better.
Well, it is better, because that is what the stats say. Even with AP rounds turned on, the sherman is already better than the t-34 in terms of anti infantry, HE rounds are just icing on the cake.
And 1 second reload difference is HUGE in tank vs tank engagements.
Say you have a panzer IV engaging a t-34, whoever fires first, generally will win, panzer IV still had the advantage due to better pen and armor, but it was negligible, now PIV just rolls over T-34, while being mostly equal to the sherman.
Most people i feel haven't seen just how weak the t-34 is this patch. |
Still would rather have a T34 anyday
And why exactly is that? |
0
Cheese
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
