Login

russian armor

since we are adding prototype tanks in game

PAGES (19)down
6 Sep 2022, 14:50 PM
#21
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1190

Because the original bergetiger (returning) and vampire half track weren’t a stretch either right, or the luftwaffe existing in any strength with 44-45 vehicles on the ground. Jags tigers and elefants in almost any 4’s match? Or the original tiger ace, and it’s successor in coh 2. How about invulnerable aircraft dropping fuel to Germans also in the 44-45 period. But no the black prince is the straw that breaks the German camels back? Kinda comical. The vehicles may have existed but their performance in coh was beyond fantasy, personally not much bothered to see the allies get some wunderwaffe treatment after two games of German abilities and units that test the deepest depths of historical fiction.


  • Luftwaffe actually had a very large ground army for either reco or dive bomber support. In late war they fought like good old soldiers by decree signed by Goering himself.
  • Jagdtiger and Elefants existed and fought outside of some technician's pocket drawings.
  • Tiger Aces existed ie. Tiger crews that had 5 or more kills the most known of them is Wittmann.
  • Airdropping supplies were attempted by Goering personally on efforts to save the army at stalingrad which ended in total failure however the aesthetic is still relevant.
  • Agreed, tanks in game should be way more powerful than 1 snare + 2 atgs killing them.
6 Sep 2022, 14:50 PM
#22
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1190

I actually agree with the wehraboo. All the excuses for why the Black Prince should be added are retarded. There isn't any balance reason to add an out-of-frame unit. There rarely ever is - it's an admission that you don't know how to balance a game.

And we shouldn't pretend that's the real reason for it either. It wasn't even to try and appeal to tank nerds who might recognize it. It's just part of the piss-poor research and care for historical authenticity that Company of Heroes gets worse at every single iteration.

M24 Chaffee light tanks and M18 Hellcat tank destroyers in 1943 Italy are also an abomination, so is the Captain being issued a LMG that wouldn't have seen use by most of the US Army in Italy (the 1919A4s are a mainstay of armored/mech formations and not infantry, as COH2 makes them out to be, and were rare even then at this point in time). The Germans also get their fantasy StG44s (in 1943 Italy... don't give me the MkB42 crap) and a Wirbelwind.

It's all a bad joke and it's high time to stop giving them money for it. They're just going to abandon the game without any sort of modding support after a few years of cash grab DLCs and poor design decisions anyway, and then it'll be managed by a small few 'community' developers with a laser focus on their own specific idea of what the 1v1 'competitive' meta should be and not a care in the world for anything else balance-wise.


based furry supporter
6 Sep 2022, 15:28 PM
#23
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289



classic coping bla bla bla



100% agreed.


We agree on something great.

The black prince is a upgunned version of a acutual tank. Simaler to the sherman firefly yet the bp didnt see action/deployment. Its retarted to go ape over this. But for wheraboo it isent aperently. The horror of axis not having an armour advantidge in a coh game must blow their minds.
Also going full extreme to the ratte wich is a non excisting/working concept so over the top it wont even work to try and justify not adding the bp is actualy retarded.

If the bp is released shut up and cope, to please the axis fanboys and get some cash they will release all the good old wunderwaffe we saw before such as kt ele jagd st tiger ace etc for sure.

6 Sep 2022, 16:04 PM
#24
avatar of BasedSecretary

Posts: 1190



We agree on something great.




Yes.

The black prince is a upgunned version of a acutual tank. Simaler to the sherman firefly yet the bp didnt see action/deployment. Its retarted to go ape over this. But for wheraboo it isent aperently. The horror of axis not having an armour advantidge in a coh game must blow their minds.
Also going full extreme to the ratte wich is a non excisting/working concept so over the top it wont even work to try and justify not adding the bp is actualy retarded.

Look I know what the BP is in a historical context and what lelic attempts to make out of it.

However, one cannot overlook the fact that it sets a dangerous precedent in the way this kind of games are handled. COH games, for all their shortcomings, were right on the razor's edge of historical accuracy.

Sure, tanks don't jus point blank shoot at each other nor is it realistic for planes to be lazer accurate BUT said tanks existed and said planes existed. Their way of moving is historically accurate IF somewhat simplified to make a fun game.

Sure, all the Sturmtigers combined cannot exceed 20 (some historians put their real numbers on 12 lol) BUT they existed, they functioned as portrayed in the game and in the army that utilizes them.

Fallschimjager-Gewehr-42 (the wep Falls have) total production volume must have been less than 7k pieces (peanuts compared to kar98k or M1) BUT it existed and it actually serves as the model for all modern assault rifles due to its technical excellency.

Putting a BP in COH3 on the other hand sets the precedent of going off-history completely, in to the realm of historical fiction. As you may understand, a conflict like WW2 spanned just over 6 years, but served as the making of the world for centuries to come. So it's natural to feel the need to make every inch of it count. Ignoring the monstrous real life developments to go slightly into the unreal is --to me-- a dangerous step and sets a bad precedent.

But, ofcourse, it remains to be seen.

If the bp is released shut up and cope, to please the axis fanboys and get some cash they will release all the good old wunderwaffe we saw before such as kt ele jagd st tiger ace etc for sure.


Of course I will cope if it gets released what am I a non coper
6 Sep 2022, 17:53 PM
#25
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 197



  • Luftwaffe actually had a very large ground army for either reco or dive bomber support. In late war they fought like good old soldiers by decree signed by Goering himself.
  • Jagdtiger and Elefants existed and fought outside of some technician's pocket drawings.
  • Tiger Aces existed ie. Tiger crews that had 5 or more kills the most known of them is Wittmann.
  • Airdropping supplies were attempted by Goering personally on efforts to save the army at stalingrad which ended in total failure however the aesthetic is still relevant.
  • Agreed, tanks in game should be way more powerful than 1 snare + 2 atgs killing them.


Jagd/Ele never made a significant impact on the war except further straining german logistics attempting to construct, repair and upgrade them (Ferdinand>Elefant)

There is no such thing as a "Tiger Ace", having them ingame sets up the precedent for T-34/76/85,Sherman,IS-2/KV-1/Firefly aces to also be included.

The allies utilitized airdropped supplies to a larger and greater effect than the Germans.

Agreed, tanks in game should be way more powerful than 1 snare + 2 atgs killing them.



L2P, tanks are already game-changing and you WILL eventually lose a match without any tanks of your own.That's why fuel control is so important, if you don't have fuel you will get flattened by the enemy's tanks.

ATGs being able to hold back tanks combined with infantry support for a time is entirely possible and makes sense, as in it's literally what they accomplished irl too.Don't blindly A-move your P4 into double ATGs next time and get a werfer if you are facing support weapons.
6 Sep 2022, 22:40 PM
#26
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13409 | Subs: 1



Jagd/Ele never made a significant impact on the war except further straining german logistics attempting to construct, repair and upgrade them (Ferdinand>Elefant)
...

You are simply wrong.
Elefant was the most successful mass produced TD in kill ratio with around 10:1 score.
6 Sep 2022, 23:53 PM
#27
avatar of Rubberluck

Posts: 42



he who commands a phd degree is called "doctor" that's how you should call me


You may or may not have a PhD, but using the title bestowed upon you is contingent upon respect. With the way you talk to people on this forum, you neither command respect nor deserve it. You'll be called whatever people feel appropriate and that is enough.
7 Sep 2022, 01:13 AM
#28
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1920

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Sep 2022, 22:40 PMVipper

You are simply wrong.
Elefant was the most successful mass produced TD in kill ratio with around 10:1 score.


No, he's right. A total production run of 91 is not mass produced by any stretch. They defeated around 320 allied vehicles out of probably 200,000 total. It's such a miniscule percentage that Germany would've been better off just building a bunch more PIV's or Panthers.

Also, only 13 out of the 91 were lost in combat. The others were lost due to lack of spare parts or fuel. If you factor in the other losses, it's K/D ratio is more like 3.5 to 1, which probably isn't any better than a Panther.

7 Sep 2022, 01:34 AM
#29
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1920



You may or may not have a PhD, but using the title bestowed upon you is contingent upon respect. With the way you talk to people on this forum, you neither command respect nor deserve it. You'll be called whatever people feel appropriate and that is enough.


In this case, I think it is a "Piled higher and Deeper" title, and has something to do with sanitation.
7 Sep 2022, 07:37 AM
#30
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13409 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Sep 2022, 01:13 AMGrumpy


No, he's right. A total production run of 91 is not mass produced by any stretch. They defeated around 320 allied vehicles out of probably 200,000 total. It's such a miniscule percentage that Germany would've been better off just building a bunch more PIV's or Panthers.

Also, only 13 out of the 91 were lost in combat. The others were lost due to lack of spare parts or fuel. If you factor in the other losses, it's K/D ratio is more like 3.5 to 1, which probably isn't any better than a Panther.


You are are wrong, the units 91 produced, destroyed around 900 vehicles hence the (10/1 ratio) and a great number of fortification.

The 320/13 vehicle you are talking about was in single battle by a single unit...

Germany did not lose the war because it build elefants but because it become involved is a war against the 3 empires of it time and a federation. The combined resources of the allies where multiple times the axis resources and Germany was bound to lose regardless of what they build.

Elefant on the other hand was excellent project since it took the failed design of the Tiger and created a TD with one of the best kill ratios in the war.
7 Sep 2022, 08:07 AM
#31
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2120 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Sep 2022, 01:13 AMGrumpy


No, he's right. A total production run of 91 is not mass produced by any stretch. They defeated around 320 allied vehicles out of probably 200,000 total. It's such a miniscule percentage that Germany would've been better off just building a bunch more PIV's or Panthers.

Also, only 13 out of the 91 were lost in combat. The others were lost due to lack of spare parts or fuel. If you factor in the other losses, it's K/D ratio is more like 3.5 to 1, which probably isn't any better than a Panther.


The Elephant may not be the most mass-produced tank, but the threat of the new self-propelled gun and the long-barreled 88mm cannon was taken seriously by the Soviet leadership. So the development of new tanks began that could be protected from the Pak 43/Kw.K. 43 this way the T-44 and IS-3 appeared.

The USSR also lost a promising light tank during the war because the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense demanded 90-mm frontal armor from the new light tank like the T-44, which protects against Pak 43/Kw.K. 43

And all this only from the appearance of the Elephant at the front.
7 Sep 2022, 09:23 AM
#32
avatar of Katukov

Posts: 782 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Sep 2022, 22:40 PMVipper

You are simply wrong.
Elefant was the most successful mass produced TD in kill ratio with around 10:1 score.


the elefant/Ferdinand had been the product of a "mistake" (it was never really planned to exist in the first place), and had been made with extreme flaws that were never fixed. The vast majority of kills have been made during the battle of Kursk, taking down around between 200 and 300 tanks (vast majority being the T-34/76), and essentially all of the losses were due to mines and mechanical breakdowns (around 10-15 elefants damaged). having a massive anti tank gun and extreme frontal armor (200mm) basically ensured that it would hit first, and no hits could really harm it

but, "most successful mass produced TD" is a completely moronic term used in the context, because the elefant was not successful at all beyond in paper. it has theoretically gotten up to 320 tank kills, but this number "could" be inflated. If it wasn't, the tank had been riddled with problems that hindered it extremely (it would catch fire when driving up small slopes, endless transmission and engine problems, etc). It was NOT mass produced/limited numbers (all production numbers are converted from already existing tank hulls), it's relevance has gone down significantly after the battle of kursk (it was used to the end of the war, but it wasn't an effective TD), and the list goes on

in a vacuum (and in the game), the elefant is a very good vehicle. But in reality, it was probably more trouble than it was worth. "The most successful" axis tank destroyer, or tank in general, was more the stug, because it's war impact and effectiveness (for its cost) was significantly higher than most of these big "terror" machines


The Elephant may not be the most mass-produced tank, but the threat of the new self-propelled gun and the long-barreled 88mm cannon was taken seriously by the Soviet leadership. So the development of new tanks began that could be protected from the Pak 43/Kw.K. 43 this way the T-44 and IS-3 appeared.

The USSR also lost a promising light tank during the war because the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense demanded 90-mm frontal armor from the new light tank like the T-44, which protects against Pak 43/Kw.K. 43

And all this only from the appearance of the Elephant at the front.


well to be fair, the soviets have faced the 88mm AT gun in larger quantities both before and after the elefant, so this was a completely sensible decision.

unfortunately neither of the tanks would be used before ww2 ended. Fortunately they made 3000 IS-2s, whose protection was at least partly resistant, and whose guns blew apart even jagdtigers
7 Sep 2022, 09:39 AM
#33
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2120 | Subs: 2



well to be fair, the soviets have faced the 88mm AT gun in larger quantities both before and after the elefant, so this was a completely sensible decision.

unfortunately neither of the tanks would be used before ww2 ended. Fortunately they made 3000 IS-2s, whose protection was at least partly resistant, and whose guns blew apart even jagdtigers


The 88-mm guns in the USSR were met on the Tigris, but it was 8,8 cm KwK 36. The Elephant was a surprise for the Soviet military (no intelligence was received about it), and it was the meeting with Elephants and the long-barreled Kw.K. 43 88-mm guns that raised the level of military demand to tank protection. Since it was perhaps the most powerful of the commonly used guns, it was the protection of long-barreled 88 guns that became the standard for designing new tanks.
7 Sep 2022, 10:04 AM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13409 | Subs: 1



the elefant/Ferdinand had been the product of a "mistake" (it was never really planned to exist in the first place), and had been made with extreme flaws that were never fixed. The vast majority of kills have been made during the battle of Kursk, taking down around between 200 and 300 tanks (vast majority being the T-34/76), and essentially all of the losses were due to mines and mechanical breakdowns (around 10-15 elefants damaged). having a massive anti tank gun and extreme frontal armor (200mm) basically ensured that it would hit first, and no hits could really harm it

but, "most successful mass produced TD" is a completely moronic term used in the context, because the elefant was not successful at all beyond in paper. it has theoretically gotten up to 320 tank kills, but this number "could" be inflated. If it wasn't, the tank had been riddled with problems that hindered it extremely (it would catch fire when driving up small slopes, endless transmission and engine problems, etc). It was NOT mass produced/limited numbers (all production numbers are converted from already existing tank hulls), it's relevance has gone down significantly after the battle of kursk (it was used to the end of the war, but it wasn't an effective TD), and the list goes on

in a vacuum (and in the game), the elefant is a very good vehicle. But in reality, it was probably more trouble than it was worth. "The most successful" axis tank destroyer, or tank in general, was more the stug, because it's war impact and effectiveness (for its cost) was significantly higher than most of these big "terror" machines
...

You will have to take up with the sites that actually use the term. Elefant it did have one of the best kill ratios.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elefant

"The Ferdinand/Elefant may have been the most successful mass produced tank destroyer employed during the war in kills per loss[citation needed], reaching an average claimed ratio of approximately 10:1. During the Battle of Kursk, sPzJgrAbt 653 claimed to have knocked out 320 enemy tanks, for the loss of 13 Ferdinands.[10] This impressive average ratio was due to its superior firepower and protection, which gave it an enormous advantage when used in head-on combat or a static defensive role (however note that claimed tank kills are well-proven to invariably greatly exceed actual kills, and different organizations have different standards of defining a 'kill'). However, poor mobility and mechanical unreliability greatly diminished its operational capability."

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/weapons-the-elefant-tank-destroyer/

"Limited by poor mobility and being underpowered, the Ferdinand-Elefant was plagued by mechanical issues throughout its career; however, the heavy tank destroyer may have been the most successful employed given that it had an estimated kill ratio of 10 kills to every one vehicle lost. Because of this, the Ferdinand-Elefant had a significant influence on the outcome of most armored clashes in which it was engaged"

https://tankhistoria.com/wwii/elefant/

"And how did it do in that new role? Well, quite fantastically.

With only 90 to begin with, Elefants claimed an enormous number of enemy tanks, guns, trucks and,"
7 Sep 2022, 10:24 AM
#35
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2120 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Sep 2022, 10:04 AMVipper




The key word is "claimed". Modern research has long dispelled the myth about the huge numbers claimed by German tankers or pilots. Especially considering that the battlefield was not left behind by the German troops. And the unit was forced to retreat
7 Sep 2022, 10:50 AM
#36
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13409 | Subs: 1



The key word is "claimed". Modern research has long dispelled the myth about the huge numbers claimed by German tankers or pilots. Especially considering that the battlefield was not left behind by the German troops. And the unit was forced to retreat

All sides made "claim" and created myths.
7 Sep 2022, 10:54 AM
#37
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 2230 | Subs: 1

7 Sep 2022, 11:19 AM
#38
avatar of OKSpitfire

Posts: 166

finally history expert thread again


That's essentially what it boils down to, yeah.

"Everyone, look how much I know about ww2'
7 Sep 2022, 11:56 AM
#39
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 2982 | Subs: 2

I think people are so divided about the Black Prince because the "against" party is right when they say that it was never used in WW2 and too late in development. On the other hand, using and adjusted base of the Churchill and the 17pd gun as well as it's designated role in combat as an infantry tank, it visually and thematically fits into WW2.

That's why I assume that many people don't have issues with it being in the game: It "looks" like a Churchill, therefore it is believable to have been used in WW2. A Centurion for example wouldn't have that, this would be a completely "new" tank.

Overall, I am still against using it. While it probably would not break immersion (for 99% of players, it would just be a beefy Churchill), as others said, it would give a bad precedent. CoH2 using a ton of unicorn tanks is one thing, but at least you can imagine that you actually have one of those few in your specific battle even if chances are slim. The Black Prince however has never seen any front line. And while I personally could tick that off as "just another Churchill variant", I am afraid Relic would start implementing stuff that does not belong into CoH3 even by my comparatively lax standards, just because it can be sold well. Their CoH2 monetization strategy was already quite shitty, I don't have enough reason to trust them to not implement more post WW2 units into the game.
7 Sep 2022, 12:09 PM
#40
avatar of rumartinez89

Posts: 593

I think people are so divided about the Black Prince because the "against" party is right when they say that it was never used in WW2 and too late in development. On the other hand, using and adjusted base of the Churchill and the 17pd gun as well as it's designated role in combat as an infantry tank, it visually and thematically fits into WW2.

That's why I assume that many people don't have issues with it being in the game: It "looks" like a Churchill, therefore it is believable to have been used in WW2. A Centurion for example wouldn't have that, this would be a completely "new" tank.

Overall, I am still against using it. While it probably would not break immersion (for 99% of players, it would just be a beefy Churchill), as others said, it would give a bad precedent. CoH2 using a ton of unicorn tanks is one thing, but at least you can imagine that you actually have one of those few in your specific battle even if chances are slim. The Black Prince however has never seen any front line. And while I personally could tick that off as "just another Churchill variant", I am afraid Relic would start implementing stuff that does not belong into CoH3 even by my comparatively lax standards, just because it can be sold well. Their CoH2 monetization strategy was already quite shitty, I don't have enough reason to trust them to not implement more post WW2 units into the game.


I personally could care less if it was never deployed as long as they had a prototype. My concern is the same as yours, once you let one random make believe unit in you let them all in and it is an easy way for relic to implement pay to win.

This thread is weird though as people want historically accurate but this game is not accurate in the slightest. Panthers should not be diving with their weak side armor, KV series should not be competing with late war tanks. Hell, right now the P4J is probably one of the best meds competing with the T3485 and E8. When it was first introduced it had horrible turret rotation to simulate german late war lack of resources. It was buffed since it sucked because balance. Similar situation with ISU152/IS2 stun mechanic, the gun wouldn't penetrate as often but the stun mechanic kept them in the fight allowing for support to come in and do their job. This game doesn't even attempt to simulate the upkeep of fielding heavy tanks, the closest was the Tiger ACE.
PAGES (19)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

179 users are online: 3 members and 176 guests
Hannibal, bahissiteleri6, spectre645
41 posts in the last 24h
248 posts in the last week
1276 posts in the last month
Registered members: 38700
Welcome our newest member, bahissiteleri6
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM