Login

russian armor

T-34 needs a buff

PAGES (20)down
13 Jun 2015, 04:44 AM
#341
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470



Soviet T4 isn't equivalent to Ostheer T4. The Panther is not a generalist tank, it's a tank hunter.


yeah, the soviet tiers are more like T1.5/2 and tier 3/3.5
13 Jun 2015, 06:11 AM
#342
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440



Holy shit dude. You can't use callins as an excuse to gimp the main faction. What about the 12 doctrines without IS2/t34/85/m4c? Should they never be used in favor of callins? Has anyone ever said that OKW is op because you can get p4 call in + kt?

The point of this thread is the need for the core soviet faction to have a decent medium tank to support itself. No army should rely on callins to such a crippling extent. Claiming that callins like the is2 are op (and rightly so), yet expecting the core army to remain as weak as it is currently is just hypocritical, when Ostheer has a great medium in the p4, yet isn't op when used to support a tiger.

If you think heavy callins meta late game is perfectly balanced and fun/ not cheesy to use and fight, then I question your sanity.

Now then, please try again.

Edit: in terms of your p4 vs. T34/76 statement. The t34 has a 100/180 chance to pen a stock P4 at mid range while the p4 has a 110/180 chance. This is at vet 0. At vet 2, the p4 gets over 220 effective armor at vet 2, giving the t34 < 50% to pen at mid and long ranges. At far, the t34 has 80 pen whole the p4 has 100. At close, both tanks have 120 pen.

And the t34 in no way is meant to be used in conjunction with other armor. It has 0 advantages that support armor foes (high dps, high survivability), and has NO LATEGAME units in its tier. People stop using t70s late game because t70s have 320hp (1 pak43/jt/ele, 2 pak), not because people suck. Su85's are almost impossible to tech to. T34s are absolutely meant to be spammed.


Dude, there is no dialogues with Zyllan, he pretends to respond but is only continuing a monologue. So all your well thought-out responses are a waste of time
13 Jun 2015, 11:42 AM
#343
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665



You still haven't answered the question of what units do the US players have that can take damage like Tigers, Panthers, Elefants, JT's, KT's? That and arguments like using dps for comparing tanks show that you either don't understand the game or are just trolling.


I dont see why you brought this up? but the answer is they dont have any units that can soak damage save perhaps the e8 which can deflect lighter AT. But thats why the usf goes full glass cannon territory. 2 Jackson will quickly destroy any tiger panther or KT. provided you use them in pairs.
13 Jun 2015, 12:05 PM
#344
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665



Edit: in terms of your p4 vs. T34/76 statement. The t34 has a 100/180 chance to pen a stock P4 at mid range while the p4 has a 110/180 chance. This is at vet 0. At vet 2, the p4 gets over 220 effective armor at vet 2, giving the t34 < 50% to pen at mid and long ranges. At far, the t34 has 80 pen whole the p4 has 100. At close, both tanks have 120 pen.


Thats why the p4 is more expensive. That the p4 wins against the t-34 is not imbalanced.



And the t34 in no way is meant to be used in conjunction with other armor. It has 0 advantages that support armor foes (high dps, high survivability), and has NO LATEGAME units in its tier. People stop using t70s late game because t70s have 320hp (1 pak43/jt/ele, 2 pak), not because people suck. Su85's are almost impossible to tech to. T34s are absolutely meant to be spammed.


Mate many usf and okw players use the jackson/howie carrier or panther/luchs combo. This is something the current su and ost cannot do. you dont see many t-34's but at the same time you dont see many p4's either.
13 Jun 2015, 13:31 PM
#345
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1132 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 12:05 PMZyllen


Thats why the p4 is more expensive. That the p4 wins against the t-34 is not imbalanced.




Mate many usf and okw players use the jackson/howie carrier or panther/luchs combo. This is something the current su and ost cannot do. you dont see many t-34's but at the same time you dont see many p4's either.


You are going in circles. First you claim that the P4 vs. T34/76 matchup isn't as skewed as I made it out to be, then when I disprove you, you state pricing. Thats not an argument, that is coming up with excuses.

The P4 can absolutely beat the T34/76 1v1. However, there is no reason for the P4 to be able to not only beat the T34/76 in a 1v1 engagement, yet also be able to get ALOT better with veterancy, and also come in the same numbers as the T34/76 for as long as it does (5v4 is still in the P4s favor, in terms of AI and AT). It would be fine if the soviets were able to reasonably get a TD out with T3, and tech up to a true T4 with good, specialist units, like the ostheer can, but currently soviet T3 < Ostheer T3, and Soviet T4 = Ost T3.

This leads to a game where the stock soviets at their latest point in the game, are worse than both German factions in every way. That is not Asymmetrical design, that is plain BAD DESIGN. If you expect the callin meta to ever be fixed, it HAS to come with a fix to the core soviet lategame, because currently the core soviets are completely hardcountered by a single Pak43/ELE/JT, since they have no armor capable of supporting their infantry against heavy TDs. (don't expect cons/penals to do shit lategame without armor support to kill axis long range lmgs squads), not to mention the fact that the low DPS zis is only enough to scare away armor, not kill it.

Just because Ostheer T3 is as rare as Soviet T3 is no reason to claim balance. Everyone plays the game to win at high skill levels, and thus go for callins, to fight Soviet callins. However, let us not forget that non-callin-meta Ostheer is perfectly viable. This is why we see so many strategies based around CAS doctrine that rely on infantry with maybe 1 tank work perfectly fine.

Soviet T3 needs to have some advantage over Ostheer lategame, seeing as how it is the end of your tech tree. USF gets great AI + great AT at the end of the tech. Ostheer gets the Panther + Brummbar, both very useful breakthrough tanks to support with your P4s that also scale very well. OKW gets the King Tiger nondoctrinally, which can be suppored by AT infantry and great armor options, as well as the Panther for the early late game. T3 soviets get 1 unit, the T34/76, which loses to everything out of the box, then loses EVEN MORE as units vet up. T3 + T4 soviets lose the armor equaity vs. Ostheer, but gain a Katyusha, which is useful to harass defensive positions and blobs, and an SU85, which is Hard Countered by a single Heavy AT source.

Price is no reason to make a unit terrible at all times in the game. The Sherman costs less than a P4, yet is much better vs. infantry and only worse vs. vehicles, plus has the utility of radio net and smoke. Grens are much cheaper than riflemen, yet scale much better into the lategame with lmgs and vet. The Jackson costs a lot less than a Panther, but is much better vs. heavy tanks. The T34/76 is less than the P4 and Sherman, but worse than both in EVERY WAY (except for like .3 speed and acceleration vs. the P4), while also being the sole source of both AT and AI in Soviet T3. If you want to increase the price, I don't think anyone will complain about the increase if it becomes a good scaling tank like the Sherman or the P4. If you decrease the price and keep same stats, noone will complain because then it will actualy be cost effective for and have the numbers it needs lategame to deal with heavies. If you do neither, and also kill callins, you get a Soviet faction that is even worse lategame than USF ever was.
13 Jun 2015, 13:39 PM
#346
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1256


That makes zero sense.


I was being sarcastic. Thank you for noticing.
13 Jun 2015, 13:48 PM
#347
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1256



You are going in circles. First you claim that the P4 vs. T34/76 matchup isn't as skewed as I made it out to be, then when I disprove you, you state pricing. Thats not an argument, that is coming up with excuses.

The P4 can absolutely beat the T34/76 1v1. However, there is no reason for the P4 to be able to not only beat the T34/76 in a 1v1 engagement, yet also be able to get ALOT better with veterancy. It would be fine if the soviets were able to reasonably get a TD out with T3, and tech up to a true T4 with good, specialist units, like the ostheer can, but currently soviet T3 < Ostheer T3, and Soviet T4 = Ost T3.

This leads to a game where the stock soviets at their latest point in the game, are worse than both German factions in every way. That is not Asymmetrical design, that is plain BAD DESIGN. If you expect the callin meta to ever be fixed, it HAS to come with a fix to the core soviet lategame, because currently the core soviets are completely hardcountered by a single Pak43/ELE/JT, since they have no armor capable of supporting their infantry against heavy TDs. (don't expect cons/penals to do shit lategame without armor support to kill axis long range lmgs squads), not to mention the fact that the low DPS zis is only enough to scare away armor, not kill it.

Just because Ostheer T3 is as rare as Soviet T3 is no reason to claim balance. Everyone plays the game to win at high skill levels, and thus go for callins, to fight Soviet callins. However, let us not forget that non-callin-meta Ostheer is perfectly viable. This is why we see so many strategies based around CAS doctrine that rely on infantry with maybe 1 tank work perfectly fine.

Soviet T3 needs to have some advantage over Ostheer lategame, seeing as how it is the end of your tech tree. USF gets great AI + great AT at the end of the tech. Ostheer gets the Panther + Brummbar, both very useful breakthrough tanks to support with your P4s that also scale very well. OKW gets the King Tiger nondoctrinally, which can be suppored by AT infantry and great armor options, as well as the Panther for the early late game. T3 soviets get 1 unit, the T34/76, which loses to everything out of the box, then loses EVEN MORE as units vet up. T3 + T4 soviets lose the armor equaity vs. Ostheer, but gain a Katyusha, which is useful to harass defensive positions and blobs, and an SU85, which is Hard Countered by a single Heavy AT source.

Price is no reason to make a unit terrible at all times in the game. The Sherman costs less than a P4, yet is much better vs. infantry and only worse vs. vehicles, plus has the utility of radio net and smoke. Grens are much cheaper than riflemen, yet scale much better into the lategame with lmgs and vet. The Jackson costs a lot less than a Panther, but is much better vs. heavy tanks. The T34/76 is less than the P4 and Sherman, but worse than both in EVERY WAY (except for like .3 speed and acceleration vs. the P4), while also being the sole source of both AT and AI in Soviet T3. If you want to increase the price, I don't think anyone will complain about the increase if it becomes a good scaling tank like the Sherman or the P4. If you decrease the price and keep same stats, noone will complain because then it will actualy be cost effective for and have the numbers it needs lategame to deal with heavies. If you do neither, and also kill callins, you get a Soviet faction that is even worse lategame than USF ever was.


If Zyllen doesn't understand this, he's either trolling or doesn't play the game much. I'm betting that he's just trolling.
13 Jun 2015, 14:45 PM
#348
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665

comm_ash

even if the t-34 was buffed to mirror the p4 ,tier 3 would still be useless. tigers and panthers are still going to have a field day with them.

And i didnt use ost tier 3 as an excuse but as an example. Both tiers lack dedicated TD's. Thats why they are not viable. Teching structure in both factions is the problem not the units. Your post are actually horrifying to read: you are trying to fix something that clearly isn't broken and ignore the issue that messes up the entire SU stock choices

I find a bit ridiculous that i have to explain the need for combined arms to you.
13 Jun 2015, 15:13 PM
#349
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1132 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 14:45 PMZyllen
comm_ash

even if the t-34 was buffed to mirror the p4 ,tier 3 would still be useless. tigers and panthers are still going to have a field day with them.

And i didnt use ost tier 3 as an excuse but as an example. Both tiers lack dedicated TD's. Thats why they are not viable. Teching structure in both factions is the problem not the units. Your post are actually horrifying to read: you are trying to fix something that clearly isn't broken and ignore the issue that messes up the entire SU stock choices

I find a bit ridiculous that i have to explain the need for combined arms to you.


Thats not true at all. The P4 is a great tank, and Ostheer T3 is in no way not viable. The P4 is a generalist tank with good pen, this means it can fulfill many roles equally well. The only tanks a P4 struggles with are heavy mediums (E8/T34/85) and heavies. Even then, one P4 can defeat an E8 or T34/85 with micro. There is a reason that players that go Elite Troops doctrine build P4s. They get really good with vet and are really good at punishing enemy infantry, and to support your AT guns while you wait for the TA. Your AT guns should be the units that you use with medium armor when you have no TDs, and that is what both Ostheer and Soviet T3 try to do. However, the biggest threat zis guns face are enemy long range infantry, and that is something a T34/76 doesn't handle. If the T34/76 had at least as good effective AI as the P4, it would be able to punish enemy infantry, and allow AT guns to do their job. I have seen more P4s than I have seen T34s in all the 1s and 2s I have played, purely because the P4 is a much more sensible long term investment, while the T34/76 is only useful as a rush tank that loses its advantage as soon as any AT arrives. In fact, most of the time the only reason I see a T34/76 is because a player rushed a T70, and needed some form of mobile light AT to counter a luchs or a fast P4. People do not get the T34/76 because it is a good tank. They get it because they have no choice.

In what way is Soviet T3 not broken? You make the statement that it is fine, yet I have showed you several times why it is not so. The T34/76 is absolutely the core SUs best lategame tank, and yet it sucks at its role. The SU85 is a perfectly fine unit, but is hardcountered by lategame Axis TDs. Asking T34/76 and SU85 available in the same tier fixes nothing vs. this issue, as the T34/76 is not spammable enough to defeat supported heavy TDs cost effectively, and the SU85 is unable to flank due to its immobile nature. Making the SU85 and T34/76 in the same tier will just see nothing but Su85s being spammed, with a T70 for scouting and AI. There will literally be no reason to get the T34/76, if it comes with a better alternative to both AI and AT. It will get SU76 syndrome.

The T34/76 is the worst lategame tank, both out of the box and with vet. It is also too expensive to be spammed. WHY IS THIS ALRIGHT?
13 Jun 2015, 15:35 PM
#350
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 906

I don´t see a problem making it as cheap as a StuG. 230mp 80 fuel so it can be spammed. It should be an expandable tank, which you can lose. Mirroring it with the P4 is boring.

I want to see T-34 swarms rather than a single one fighting it out with Axis tanks.
13 Jun 2015, 16:15 PM
#351
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned
I don´t see a problem making it as cheap as a StuG. 230mp 80 fuel so it can be spammed. It should be an expandable tank, which you can lose. Mirroring it with the P4 is boring.

I want to see T-34 swarms rather than a single one fighting it out with Axis tanks.
+1
13 Jun 2015, 17:07 PM
#352
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440



You are going in circles. First you claim that the P4 vs. T34/76 matchup isn't as skewed as I made it out to be, then when I disprove you, you state pricing. Thats not an argument, that is coming up with excuses.



You are wasting your time talking to him man, he makes Alex looks like a Soloman

13 Jun 2015, 17:18 PM
#353
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10622 | Subs: 9

Note: post #332 was invised by a Moderator for breaching the NDA, and post #333 citing said NDA was also consequently invised.

Posters are advised not to cite offending posts in their own responses, where they think the offending post may be invised; they should instead refer to post #XYZ, or the name of the offender, with whose post they disagree (for whatever reason). The Report button is there to be used.

Moderators and other staff are not permitted to edit posts on the forums; this means they may have to invis an"innocent"post, which contains foul content from an offending poster.

Back to topic.

13 Jun 2015, 19:14 PM
#354
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665



Thats not true at all. The P4 is a great tank, and Ostheer T3 is in no way not viable. The P4 is a generalist tank with good pen, this means it can fulfill many roles equally well. The only tanks a P4 struggles with are heavy mediums (E8/T34/85) and heavies. Even then, one P4 can defeat an E8 or T34/85 with micro.


Being a better player doesnt mean its balanced. i have seen 3 t70 killing a panther and i have used a single puma vs a is2 and won.


There is a reason that players that go Elite Troops doctrine build P4s. They get really good with vet and are really good at punishing enemy infantry, and to support your AT guns while you wait for the TA.


And here i thought people went ET because the TA didnt cost any fuel.



Your AT guns should be the units that you use with medium armor when you have no TDs, and that is what both Ostheer and Soviet T3 try to do. However, the biggest threat zis guns face are enemy long range infantry, and that is something a T34/76 doesn't handle.
If the T34/76 had at least as good effective AI as the P4, it would be able to punish enemy infantry, and allow AT guns to do their job. I have seen more P4s than I have seen T34s in all the 1s and 2s I have played, purely because the P4 is a much more sensible long term investment, while the T34/76 is only useful as a rush tank that loses its advantage as soon as any AT arrives. In fact, most of the time the only reason I see a T34/76 is because a player rushed a T70, and needed some form of mobile light AT to counter a luchs or a fast P4. People do not get the T34/76 because it is a good tank. They get it because they have no choice.


You greatly overestimate the AI capabilities of the p4. and if you believe that the t-34 is bad at AT why no get an su85 and use callins to cover any gap.



In what way is Soviet T3 not broken? You make the statement that it is fine, yet I have showed you several times why it is not so. The T34/76 is absolutely the core SUs best lategame tank, and yet it sucks at its role.



I never said tier 3 is fine. in fact i have stated the opposite that tier is as logical as a luchs in the okw hq building. The units themselves are fine however. and their is no such thing as a core unit when it comes to tanks.


The SU85 is a perfectly fine unit, but is hardcountered by lategame Axis TDs. Asking T34/76 and SU85 available in the same tier fixes nothing vs. this issue, as the T34/76 is not spammable enough to defeat supported heavy TDs cost effectively,


Su85's are not hardcounterd by panthers. it depends on a varied of circumstances including terrain commander usage and skill of the players. but a panther attacking a su85 head one stand a very good change of losing. And spam will solve nothing. supported td's are still going to utterly wreck any medium generalist as they should because somehow you believe medium tanks should be capable of defeating its own counter.


and the SU85 is unable to flank due to its immobile nature. Making the SU85 and T34/76 in the same tier will just see nothing but Su85s being spammed, with a T70 for scouting and AI. There will literally be no reason to get the T34/76, if it comes with a better alternative to both AI and AT. It will get SU76 syndrome.


i have no issues with that because a pak would able to quickly tear such a strat apart. having a healty mix of combined arms is vital.



The T34/76 is the worst lategame tank, both out of the box and with vet. It is also too expensive to be spammed. WHY IS THIS ALRIGHT?


its the worst medium tank but still usefull for flanking and scouting and supporting the su85 or t-70.
13 Jun 2015, 19:17 PM
#355
avatar of EffenNewbie

Posts: 1256

I don´t see a problem making it as cheap as a StuG. 230mp 80 fuel so it can be spammed. It should be an expandable tank, which you can lose. Mirroring it with the P4 is boring.

I want to see T-34 swarms rather than a single one fighting it out with Axis tanks.


Reduce the pop cap to 8 for it, and then along with the price decrease this would be a great idea. A horde of T34's versus a couple of Panthers and some AT guns would be much more fun.
13 Jun 2015, 19:47 PM
#356
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3087 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 19:14 PMZyllen
And here i thought people went ET because the TA didnt cost any fuel.

Which allows you to spend fuel on other stuff, like a PIV as comm_ash suggests, and still get a really powerful tank.

Don't spend the fuel the TA "saves" you, the lack of a fuel cost isn't an advantage. And wouldn't you try to use advantages?
13 Jun 2015, 20:29 PM
#357
avatar of KurtWilde
Donator 11

Posts: 440

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 19:14 PMZyllen



I never said tier 3 is fine. in fact i have stated the opposite that tier is as logical as a luchs in the okw hq building. The units themselves are fine however. and their is no such thing as a core unit when it comes to tanks.




Tier 3 is NOT fine but the tanks are FINE? Were you talking about the aesthetics of the building? I would have preferred it in black
13 Jun 2015, 20:46 PM
#358
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1132 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 19:14 PMZyllen


Being a better player doesnt mean its balanced. i have seen 3 t70 killing a panther and i have used a single puma vs a is2 and won.



So now you are saying that the ability for a tank to punch above its class should have nothing to do with micro? Then why do you think the Jackson is so great, seeing as it can only beat panthers and tigers because the player decides to move it out of range. Does that also make shrecks OP, since it requires micro to kite shrecks? Obviously not. COH2 is a game that is heavily reliant on player micro to get the most out of their units.



And here i thought people went ET because the TA didnt cost any fuel.



If the P4 is as bad as you say, why don't people just get panthers and brummbars? After all, the TA costs no fuel, so obviously players will skip the P4 since it sucks so much. (Hint: It probably doesn't)


You greatly overestimate the AI capabilities of the p4. and if you believe that the t-34 is bad at AT why no get an su85 and use callins to cover any gap.


Because callins are very fuel expensive. T34/85s and IS2s are in the neihborhood of 230+ fu. Buying 1 SU85 costs 240 FU. That means that using callins with stock armor is the LEAST efficient way to play the game.

The point of this thread is to buff the T34/76 so that callins can safely be ignored and nerfed. (Read OP if you need reminder). Having the ability to use stock units with callins makes no sense. Does that make the JP4 + P4 combo OP?



I never said tier 3 is fine. in fact i have stated the opposite that tier is as logical as a luchs in the okw hq building. The units themselves are fine however. and their is no such thing as a core unit when it comes to tanks.


Tech costs only affect unit timing. So yes, with current tech costs, the T34/76 is TIMED at a good point, but the issue is getting subsequent T34s out, and currently, just about everyone in this thread has agreed that the T34/76 needs a cost decrease so that subsequent tanks can be fielded faster. If you want to know why, go ahead and read the posts of just about everyone else.


Su85's are not hardcounterd by panthers. it depends on a varied of circumstances including terrain commander usage and skill of the players. but a panther attacking a su85 head one stand a very good change of losing. And spam will solve nothing. supported td's are still going to utterly wreck any medium generalist as they should because somehow you believe medium tanks should be capable of defeating its own counter.


Im not talking about panthers, you can see quite clearly that I reference Axis Superheavy TDs, which is the Pak43, JT, and ELE. Killing a JT/ ELE is impossible with the SU85, since it needs to engage frontally. This means that the T34/76 should be the viable unit, since it is the only Soviet stock tank. However, the T34/76 is FAR too expensive to be used in such an assault. As USF, I typically want 1-2 Jacksons + 1-2 Shermans, if I want to go deep on a superheavy. An equal investment would be 4 T34/76s, assuming you were preparing all game to fight the superheavy (that means no fuel spent on T70 or SU85). If the JT/Ele has 3 shreck volks or 2 Paks by the unit, then I can expect to lose at least 1-2 Shermans. The 2 Jacksons, however, will bring enough damage to bear that the JT/Ele will go down quickly enough. The DPS of the T34s, however, is much lower. As result, I will prbably lose 2-3 tanks. Losing 200-300 fu is not feasable when the T34/76 is the only way you are holding back Axis lategame armor. If I have a no callin doctrine (which we are trying to make more feasable), I have no counter to the axis infantry, while the Axis player now only has to deal with 1 T34/76 shooting at him.


i have no issues with that because a pak would able to quickly tear such a strat apart. having a healty mix of combined arms is vital.


A Pak would also tear the T34/76 up, so I don't understand what you are saying here. Soviets have no non-doc breakthrough unit like the Panther/ Brummbar/ KT.



its the worst medium tank but still usefull for flanking and scouting and supporting the su85 or t-70.


I already told you, just because a unit fulfills a role doesn't mean it is performing cost effectively or well at all. A 600mp ober would still kill enemy infantry very well, but would still be very inefficient.

Forcing a player to use a shite unit because its the only choice is probably the worst way to design a game. If you expect callins to be nerfed, you need to do something about the T34/76. I really don't see whats so hard to understand about this. The current T34/76 would be useful at one thing, flanking, but it doesn't have the DPS to justify using it except as a last resort. No Medium should be relegated to being a shitty flank assaulter that cannot even deal much damage. The Sherman, for 10 fu more, gives you amazing AI, decent AT, and smoke utility. The P4 gives you survivability, decent AT DPS, and decent AI DPS. The T34/76 gives you .3 speed, terrible DPS, Sherman survivability, a terrible vehicle snare, capture territory, and terrible DPS. (It also flanks worse than the P4 since P4 has blitz and better DPS).

But hey, dat 40mp 25 fu savings, thats like subsidized molotovs/AT nades. At 12 minutes into the game.

Also, please hurry with the actual arguments, I believe that some people tire of this game.
13 Jun 2015, 21:12 PM
#359
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 19:47 PMVuther

Which allows you to spend fuel on other stuff, like a PIV as comm_ash suggests, and still get a really powerful tank.

Don't spend the fuel the TA "saves" you, the lack of a fuel cost isn't an advantage. And wouldn't you try to use advantages?


Its true you can go for a p4 but i generally do not do so. if i tech to tier 3 its usually to get a ostwind to decisively win the game with a shock unit. if i feel the game can swing either way i still get a panther first .


Im not talking about panthers, you can see quite clearly that I reference Axis Superheavy TDs, which is the Pak43, JT, and ELE. Killing a JT/ ELE is impossible with the SU85, since it needs to engage frontally. This means that the T34/76 should be the viable unit


Its impossible with the t-34 as well. Hell a good player is going to those teller mines with a fury making it impossible for any tank to flank such TD's . generally long range units need to have large amounts of support to function to prevent from being flanked and considering the speed your opponents they are sitting ducks to arty. once again you try to buff the t-34 for the wrong reasons.


A Pak would also tear the T34/76 up, so I don't understand what you are saying here. Soviets have no non-doc breakthrough unit like the Panther/ Brummbar/ KT.


paks can be flanked with t-34's and while i will risk a kt or brumbar against one ATG im sure as hell not going to use send them straight into 2 ATG's. and panthers , because the lack of ai ,are not a breakthrough units at all. flanking is important and even breakthrough units need to use it.


The current T34/76 would be useful at one thing, flanking, but it doesn't have the DPS to justify using it except as a last resort. No Medium should be relegated to being a shitty flank assaulter that cannot even deal much damage.


Well every medium is a shitty flanker when it comes to heavies. or do you think you can use p4's to take an is2 head on? and the sherman will be as effective against the tiger as the t-34 is.

just about everyone in this thread has agreed that the T34/76 needs a cost decrease

looks at the poll numbers :rolleyes: riiiigght .Sry mate im not convinced by your arguments. you wish to spam a medium and face roll everything with it. use combined arms and very soon the su will be able to use combined arms. see you at 26th. ;)
13 Jun 2015, 21:47 PM
#360
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1132 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2015, 21:12 PMZyllen


Its true you can go for a p4 but i generally do not do so. if i tech to tier 3 its usually to get a ostwind to decisively win the game with a shock unit. if i feel the game can swing either way i still get a panther first



Then you are in the far minority.


Its impossible with the t-34 as well. Hell a good player is going to those teller mines with a fury making it impossible for any tank to flank such TD's . generally long range units need to have large amounts of support to function to prevent from being flanked and considering the speed your opponents they are sitting ducks to arty. once again you try to buff the t-34 for the wrong reasons.


So core soviets should just give up? Hell no. Turreted tanks counter heavy TDs. That is the way the game is designed. Losses are expected, but it should still be realistic to breakthrough the enemy line and kill the TD using combined arms. The problem is, there is no combined arms for core soviets against super heavy TDs. Soviet core infantry will be cut to ribbons by lmgs, leaving the T34/76 as the only viable counter. The T34/76, as I showed above, is not up to the task. It is too cost inefficient at 100fu and with such a shitty DPS. 4 Shermans have far more DPS than 4 T34/76s. In fact, it takes 10 Shermans (110fu) before you get a free T34/76 (100fu), assuming no popcap, and the Shermans are literally better in every way.


Paks can be flanked and while i will risk a kt or brumbar against one ATG im sure as hell not going to use send them straight into 2 ATG's. and panthers because the lack of ai are not a breakthrough unit at all. flanking is important and even breakthrough units need to use it.


Paks can be flanked, yes. But the thing is, why bother wasting 100fu on a tank when infantry does just as well? Hell, the T70 is a much better flanking unit to kill soft targets than the T34/76 is, so I still see no reason to build the T34/76.



Well every medium is a shitty flanker when it comes to heavies. or do you think you can use p4's to take an is2 head on. and the sherman will be as effective against the tiger as the t-34 is.


The Sherman and the P4 are both excellent flankers. They have good DPS, speed, and utility to help them with this task (smoke/blitz). They also typically come with great infantry support, in terms of riflemen, paratroopers, and grenadiers/panzergrenadiers to kill AT guns and enemy infantry. They cannot kill an IS2/Tiger by themselves, but medium tanks have supporting fire to do the main DPS from the front while they block the escape. The T34/76 on the other hand, has no easy way to flank. It cannot smoke a supporting unit, cannot blitz to the point it needs to be at, and does not have the DPS to really do much to the tank or to the suporting infantry either. Its supporting infantry consists of cons, and penals, which also need to close to close range to be of use. The SU85/Zis can do good damage frontally, but if the T34/76 cannot get behind the enemy tank to cut off retreat, then the tank will just fall back.

Riddle me this. If you had all the soviet tech buildings, when would you ever build a T34/76?
PAGES (20)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Thank you everyone for making WCS possible!
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • The British Forces flag [c.B] Guard2707
  • Soviets flag [c.B] Brosras
  • Oberkommando West flag 女性主意
  • Ostheer flag 101 Airborne Divison
uploaded by koreanmaphack

Board Info

146 users are online: 4 members and 142 guests
Stug life , comm_ash, Stormjäger, Serrith
218 posts in the last 24h
1615 posts in the last week
7103 posts in the last month
Registered members: 65374
Welcome our newest member, chaaseunder111
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM