russian tanks

im just going to get right to the point.
tanks, especially the t34 are too good for how much they cost. not just the individual price but how much it takes to acquire tanks.
for example. from the start of the game to having 1 sherman on the field takes 245 fuel if just get the barracks supply yard and tank depot. also shermans are worse in every respect and each unit costs more. for the germans if they get panzer 4s as fast as possible (no wehr quarters no krieg barracks NO NOTHING) it takes 265 fuel and once again each unit cost more. the soviets only need 175 fuel to get a t34 on the field and each t34 is 15 fuel and 120 manpower less than a sherman and 5 fuel 110 manpower less than a panzer 4.

my problem isnt with the price of each unit so much as the cost to get there. if each t34 is so cheap it needs to cost considerably more to field your first one especially considering the t34 has about 10% more health and a gun (with 300 munitions) that does 25% more damage than the sherman and p4.

I disagree entirely, Unvetted Panzer 4's always beat my unupgraded T34 in a head to head battle, the Panzer 4 generally having about 20-30% health left and Vet 2 or 3 vs my upgraded T34 with about 10%.  I can never even rely on the unupgraded T34 to beat Stugs. Its a crapshoot, sometimes i wont even bother buying a T34 and go right to the IS-2, or back up my T34 with a T-70 to micro around to their rear just to get the cutting edge in a fight.

I think that at least the Armoury building should cost 30 fuel, to delay some tech. Originally, wehr's vet building costed 30 fuel too, but it was removed due to the fact that the vet upgrades themselves consumed fuel. But that's not the case with the russians.

Only the IS 2 is a good tanks, wehr tank and paks eat the others one.

The SU are powereful but die easily.

The T34 is good only when spammed a lot.

The T70 is never used and the T90 is not that useful.

The ISU 150 is not that great : long time for reload, slowest tank in the game.

Oxygen wrote:
I think that at least the Armoury building should cost 30 fuel, to delay some tech. Originally, wehr's vet building costed 30 fuel too, but it was removed due to the fact that the vet upgrades themselves consumed fuel. But that's not the case with the russians.

You keep forgetting that Soviets can`t get that x2 fuel Germans get when they secure point`s with OP. In fact, if played right, Axis can get tanks faster then Soviets... But, what do I know, I always push with infantry.

Iglooman wrote:
The T70 is never used and the T90 is not that useful.

Must disagree, T-70 may not be very effective, but it is a great recon vehicle and can take resonable amount of damage from any unit, T-90 is VERY useful against all but the most elite infantry (I suggest using two of them together, then they really pack a punch).

Last edited January 24, 2010 at 3:34 PM by Capt. Malashenko

Russian tanks are better int his patch, probly because of overall balance has being much much better then it was before.

also some tanks, like the IS -2 should not have such big blast of an attack like the tiger has. against infantry, most of the times one sh ort kills 2 or 3 man, where an panther only kills one, even at  vet3.
it should be the same as an panther.. against infantry.
since ant panzerthreks  should be just a little better against its back and side armour of T35 or IS2s...

Well, IS-2 was armed with A-19 122 mm gun, it`s main task was to fight infantry and especially German fortifications with high-explosive shell`s, so it`s not unreal it is so effective against infantry, but Panther should be a little more effective against Soviets , yes.

Not everything in this game has to be realistic... it is more about balance with relation to the other factions while keeping some idea of realism... but not realism for its own sake.

I just posted a new thread on the IS-2 I suggest reading about what happened to me in fighting those monsters.  They are way OP!

Ouhh, to Axis players everything is OP, more then once my IS-2 fell from PaK`s, not to mention tanks and arty.

Capt. wrote:

Oxygen wrote:
I think that at least the Armoury building should cost 30 fuel, to delay some tech. Originally, wehr's vet building costed 30 fuel too, but it was removed due to the fact that the vet upgrades themselves consumed fuel. But that's not the case with the russians.

You keep forgetting that Soviets can`t get that x2 fuel Germans get when they secure point`s with OP. In fact, if played right, Axis can get tanks faster then Soviets... But, what do I know, I always push with infantry.

Right now people play mostly russians, but when players start mix factions, like rus+usa and rus+brits, then there will be secured points and rus will tech faster.
Also, PE very rarely secure points, and they have a lot of fuel expenses. And wehr rarely secure fuel points in maps without +10 or +16fuel sectors.

Even so, it takes time to deploy Soviet tanks, and the only real threat to Germans is IS-2 (wich is 150fuel btw) for that amount you can get 3 Marders or 2 Pz4`s and with no micro (head on) wipe it out.
Sov+Brit, now that could be a great combo, gotaa try that one :)

It hurts... bad... the Soviet trenches are not as strong as the brit trenches from what I have seen, so put the brit trenches with some Red Banner Strelky or two sniper teams... holy infantry rape

dogfood wrote:
im just going to get right to the point.
tanks, especially the t34 are too good for how much they cost. not just the individual price but how much it takes to acquire tanks.
for example. from the start of the game to having 1 sherman on the field takes 245 fuel if just get the barracks supply yard and tank depot. also shermans are worse in every respect and each unit costs more. for the germans if they get panzer 4s as fast as possible (no wehr quarters no krieg barracks NO NOTHING) it takes 265 fuel and once again each unit cost more. the soviets only need 175 fuel to get a t34 on the field and each t34 is 15 fuel and 120 manpower less than a sherman and 5 fuel 110 manpower less than a panzer 4.

my problem isnt with the price of each unit so much as the cost to get there. if each t34 is so cheap it needs to cost considerably more to field your first one especially considering the t34 has about 10% more health and a gun (with 300 munitions) that does 25% more damage than the sherman and p4.

Huh.. i was thinking that the soviet tanks were way too expensive and underpowered. I mean, wasnt the main point of the soviets beating the germans that there tanks were cheaper and were mass produced?

If Panthers and Tigers (and even Pz4`s) would have a decent range, all would fit to it`s place, but right now, a damn 50mm Pak has bigger range then KT`s 88. T-34 are not expensive at all, and they can easily be countered by faust`s and schrecks

DiegoTheGreat wrote:

dogfood wrote:
im just going to get right to the point.
tanks, especially the t34 are too good for how much they cost. not just the individual price but how much it takes to acquire tanks.
for example. from the start of the game to having 1 sherman on the field takes 245 fuel if just get the barracks supply yard and tank depot. also shermans are worse in every respect and each unit costs more. for the germans if they get panzer 4s as fast as possible (no wehr quarters no krieg barracks NO NOTHING) it takes 265 fuel and once again each unit cost more. the soviets only need 175 fuel to get a t34 on the field and each t34 is 15 fuel and 120 manpower less than a sherman and 5 fuel 110 manpower less than a panzer 4.

my problem isnt with the price of each unit so much as the cost to get there. if each t34 is so cheap it needs to cost considerably more to field your first one especially considering the t34 has about 10% more health and a gun (with 300 munitions) that does 25% more damage than the sherman and p4.

Huh.. i was thinking that the soviet tanks were way too expensive and underpowered. I mean, wasnt the main point of the soviets beating the germans that there tanks were cheaper and were mass produced?

im sick the 'realism' argument, BALANCE is more important. whats next the fuel cost of each vehicle is based on how many miles per gallon it gets? on a side note, about the same amount of shermans and t34s were produced in ww2. more than 50000 sherman medium tanks with MANY more variants.

i would rather suggest removing the t 70, and replacing it with a armored car equivalent

i mean, the british have the stuart which can serve as an ac
pe also have an ac
us have an ac
and lastly so do wehr.

or just lower the health on the t 70, and make it somewhat a reasonable cost as an armored car, and probably the same with the t 90.

and possibly, make some sort of upgrade from the tank hall that lets you build the is2 and su. like a  simple 100 mp and 20 fuel lets u have access to su and is2, but make the upgrade take some time to complete. wehr or pe are not gonna get a panther out in 10 mins, and an is2 shouldnt be an exception to that

other than that t34 unupgraded is pretty fine as is, a medium fighting tank similar to the p4

Problem with the T70 is not with its cost, just that when the tank hall comes out after 100 fuel its usually better to go for a t34.  Problem with the t34/76 is that it cant hit ANYTHING even at point blank range.

I feal it is my duty to protect the little ones :)
T-90 is phenomenal against PE light vehicles and all but the most elite infantry, it is a unit I value more then some other heavier vehicles.
Try using two of them together and you`ll see what I mean.
T-70, however, is less effective, but it is fast and good in recon and against fortifications, it`s damage and penetration have to rectify ASAP, cozz for a 45mm gun it`s damage even against the lightest vehicles sucks, but you have to love them when they start running around the field in frenzy :)

Ja I think the T70 and T 90 could have the armor upgraded slightly.
At least give the T70 a little more Hard Attack value.

Last edited January 25, 2010 at 5:50 AM by Razz

How about a T-70 accuracy buff?

More like T-70 damage buff, accuracy is fine,
or maybe some critical ability, like thread-breaker on AT halftrack, only now it`s disabling the main canon instead of tracks, 45mm could do that at point blank...

I think the russians don't need any further abilities. They picked the best from all factions allready

Picked the best and payed highly for it.

i suppose the issue i have with russian tanks is that a t34 can come out somewhere around the 7 - 8 min mark if the russian holds atleat half of the map (or 2 of the fuels on langres) which isnt exactly a bad thing, but considering its the standard tank for the russians, an armored car like the t 90 or t 70 should be out at this point in the game, with the t34 up somewhere around the 10 - 15 min mark

lol The best one! lol :D

whats next the fuel cost of each vehicle is based on how many miles per gallon it gets?

Actually I was wrong, T70 can be useful against PE. It is a sort of armored car. It is fine like it is right now. :)

T-70 have no LMG, and its almost useless vs infantry. And his 45mm is too weak vs german tanks (it appeares when germans already have tanks).
And it could not capture points...

xenotype wrote:
Problem with the t34/76 is that it cant hit ANYTHING even at point blank range.

+1.

And this is why the T-34 is not OP. All in all it is well rounded: terrible against infantry but good for handling Pumas and Halftracks, can go toe-to-toe with P4 (but will usually lose unless supported), and can be easily countered with Paks, StuGs, or shreks. It does what it was designed to, be good in numbers.

Imo they should replace the T70 with BA10/11.  Faster armored car armed with same gun but less armor.

DiegoTheGreat wrote:

dogfood wrote:
im just going to get right to the point.
tanks, especially the t34 are too good for how much they cost. not just the individual price but how much it takes to acquire tanks.
for example. from the start of the game to having 1 sherman on the field takes 245 fuel if just get the barracks supply yard and tank depot. also shermans are worse in every respect and each unit costs more. for the germans if they get panzer 4s as fast as possible (no wehr quarters no krieg barracks NO NOTHING) it takes 265 fuel and once again each unit cost more. the soviets only need 175 fuel to get a t34 on the field and each t34 is 15 fuel and 120 manpower less than a sherman and 5 fuel 110 manpower less than a panzer 4.

my problem isnt with the price of each unit so much as the cost to get there. if each t34 is so cheap it needs to cost considerably more to field your first one especially considering the t34 has about 10% more health and a gun (with 300 munitions) that does 25% more damage than the sherman and p4.

Huh.. i was thinking that the soviet tanks were way too expensive and underpowered. I mean, wasnt the main point of the soviets beating the germans that there tanks were cheaper and were mass produced?

You are right. They correct way to respond to your point is gameplay balance. Not actual WW2. 88 would take out those US\Brit shermans and M26's in 1 shot if realism was what were were after.

M26 could probably withstand an 88 shell to frontal armor at some distance.

Russian tank is too silly in the mod.

It's ridiculous that Puma can kill ISU-152, SU-85 :)

ISU-152, IS2 should be like Jag Panther & KT

Well,  Su-152 takes damage from almost every unit, then again it has a big weapon damage to compensate, double then Jag or KT, but some things make no sense, I sow more then once how Marder shell`s bounce off T-34 in point blank range?

ISU-152  like Jag Panther - can fire only direct ;), so any tank can cruise around and kick ISU-152 ass

But, you can compare IC2,  ISU-152,Jag Panther,SU-85,SU-100,King Tiger

Last edited January 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM by kabak

Funny i said exacly the same thing in another post
ISU-152 is not OP if you know how to confront it.

kabak wrote:
ISU-152  like Jag Panther - can fire only direct ;), so any tank can cruise around and kick ISU-152 ass

But, you can compare IC2,  ISU-152,Jag Panther,SU-85,SU-100,King Tiger

thats the same as you would say circle strafe a firefly

the isu152 has 55 (firefly) range almost as much as an AT gun (60 range)
compared to tigers or PIV stugs with 40 range

this is my posting to isu152 from octobrary

there where some little changes but the mean thing still fits

moonblood wrote:
The ISU-152 is massively OP imho.

I know its a doctrinal endtree unit like pershing, tiger, jagd and kt and costs 1000MP to callin.

But what you get is insane. That thing has the best armor of the game (jagdpanther) 200 more hitpoints than a jagd longest tank range of the game (like firefly 55 range) and does incredible 300damage (KT/Jagd 150dmg) with penetrating everything (due to 10 penetration modifier at each range) and has the biggest splash damage of the game (tiger splash range with 300 damage) and is not limited to one per game

i know that its not as fast as a jagd and has a long reload but with all that stuff i mentioned above its completely out of balance imho

comments?

moonblood wrote:
e.g. the ISU-152 combines the most strong tank abilities with almost no weakness

- best armor
- one of the most hitpoints
- highest gun range
- highest penetration
- highest splash
- highest damage

without much weakness

its like grabbing the best stats of some units and throw them together

my suggestion to balance that:

1. hardcap to one per game since its a supertank like jagd and KT
2. lower its range to 40 like Tiger and Pershing
3. remove that 10x penetration modifier at all ranges

the high damage is ok since it has a long reload
maybe decrease its HP from 1800 to 1600 and when it keeps that splash make its armortype to a new armor type and increase pak38 penetration against it

Last edited January 26, 2010 at 4:20 PM by moonblood

An he`s slow like hell so outrun it, it can have one hit but there is abundant time to retreat or charge him,
and yes the most annoying thing in game is when you see a PaK with bigger range then a 75 or 88mm gun!?

thats the balancing section
if you want to discuss reallife values go to offtopic section

Quote
Other Discussions -> Eastern Front

Here you can talk about history if you really feel so inclined.

thx

Last edited January 26, 2010 at 4:30 PM by moonblood

moonblood wrote:
thats the balancing section
if you want to discuss reallife values go to offtopic section

Quote
Other Discussions -> Eastern Front

Here you can talk about history if you really feel so inclined.

thx

No I`m on the right place, balance is when you have a single Tiger or King Tiger, but having their range 40 and PaK`s 60?- that`s just sad...

AT guns are Hardcounters to tanks that has always been in COH since Sept 2006
and its balanced around this

I know, I know...
but to see any Allied 75mm tank shell bounce of King Tiger and then that pesky little PaK stabbing it`s 57mm shell`s in frontal armor... it makes no sense ? Game is well balanced but still some things should be given more thought.

Last edited January 26, 2010 at 6:47 PM by Capt. Malashenko

kabak wrote:
ISU-152, IS2 should be like Jag Panther & KT

the ISU-152 is exact like the Jagdpanther (same fire power and armor) and the IS-2 is very similar to the King Tiger as well. However KT has still better armor and better firepower.

In the COH World builder i let each tanks fight against to test which is better in 1 vs 1. And here's the result:

IS-2 vs Tiger = IS-2 wins 30-40% health.
IS-2 vs KT = KT wins with 50-60% health
IS-2 vs 2 Panthers = 2 or 1 Panther survives, another Panther can be killed though).
ISU-152 vs Jagdpanther = Jagdpanther wins only 10 & health

and more tests with heavy tanks:

IS-2 vs 3 Panzer IV G = IS-2 loses, 1 Panzer IV killed, 2 survives
KT vs 3 T34-85 = KT wins 10-20% health
KT vs 4 T34/76 = KT wins 5-10% health (at the end with main gun destroyed in the test)
KT vs 5 T34/76 = KT loses, 2 T34s killed.
Tiger vs 3 T34/76 = 2 of 3 T34s win 1 killed.
Tiger vs 2 T34&76 = Tiger wins 30 % health.
Tiger vs 2 T34-85 = Tiger wins 10-20 % health
Tiger vs 3 T34/85 = Tiger loses, 1 T34 killed.

I'll upload the videos later on youtube if needed.

BlackDahliaMurder wrote:

kabak wrote:
ISU-152, IS2 should be like Jag Panther & KT

the ISU-152 is exact like the Jagdpanther (same fire power and armor)

with almost doubled splash means it shredds infantry too
and with 55 range (as firefly Jagd has only 45)

Did you make this test with tanks positioned head on ?
meaning, 4 T34`s would all shoot KT`s frontal armor, right?
in gameplay, 3 out of 4 T34`s would micro to the flanks and rear ...

Capt. wrote:
Did you make this test with tanks positioned head on ?
meaning, 4 T34`s would all shoot KT`s frontal armor, right?
in gameplay, 3 out of 4 T34`s would micro to the flanks and rear ...

nope, the AIs became clever now. AIs always tried to flank all my tanks. even the IS-2 flanked my Panzter 4s out which made me lulz. that was quite annoying... i dont know if this influences the test in a good or bad way. but i think its more fair.

in any fight the T34s flanked my Tiger / Panther / King Tiger out and could shot the rear/side armor. i could keep the frontal armor to only one of the enemy tanks. but the other ones were still abale to shoot on the sides/rear. 

after your post i've made new tests like you said and the result was very different. during this test the T34s shot only the frontal armor - result of this test:

KT won against  5 T34s (not upgraded) with 20-30 & health left... o.O This proves how important it is to flank Tigers in COH!

Yeaahh, that`s why I asked. With T`s and KT`s I always try to defend the flanks, couse the frontal is very effective in bouncing enemy tank shell`s, but as you proved - it`s not always possible to avoid flank attacks, especialy with fast M10`s and now T-34`s...
Upgraded T-34`s are best tank killers, with 115 dmg they are as good as PaK`s.

What about killing SU-85 by 1 Puma without upgraded gun ?

It's ridiculous.

QuoteIS-2 vs 3 Panzer IV G = IS-2 loses, 1 Panzer IV killed, 2 survives

Vetted or not vetted?  Question goes to the others too.  Any comparisons with panthers?

IS2 should kill a tiger head on.  600MP/150fuel is more valuable than 900MP instant call in.  If anything is going to be done to the IS2 (and I dont think anything should be done), raise the cost.  Historically, the thick armor and 120mm gun would have been more than a match for a tiger.

I think that the IS-2 is too strong. IS-2 was rather comparable to a panther. Panther, in fact, could destroy the IS-2. Somewhat weak argument that the IS-2 was able to destroy the tiger 1 hit. Remember that this game will never be realistic. The game must be balanced for both parties. The cost of IS-2 would be higher because you have a lot of them. Germany may have 1 Tiger or 1 King Tiger. And Russians may have multiple IS-2. Playing 3vs3 without v1 germany are not able to destroy the Russian masses, and sooner or later even the veterans of Germany will begin to slowly bleed. To do this if engineers repairers wrecks ... Russians should pay more for improvements because the ammunition does not require them to virtually any support for free. Germany paid for improving the fuel so as to be quickly at the Russian tanks since the prices are astronomical? Russians should be a little difficult access for heavy tanks. There are only 2 solutions for the life of this mod, or seriously undermine the Russians or as soon as possible or add ostherr. Soon it comes to this that the players will be playing the Russians against the computer opponents only because no one will want to play for Germany.

Last edited January 27, 2010 at 9:35 AM by Bauer

xenotype wrote:
Vetted or not vetted?  Question goes to the others too.  Any comparisons with panthers?

not vettet. Which comparison with Panthers do you mean? i'm not sure what you meant but here is a list of quite a few tests (met head on head - frontal armor):

T34-76 vs Panther = Panther wins 70% health
T34-85 (upgraded) vs Panther = Panther wins 40% health
IS-2 vs Panther = IS-2 wins 60% health

xenotype wrote:
IS2 should kill a tiger head on.

read again, it did.  :)

xenotype wrote:
Historically, the thick armor and 120mm gun would have been more than a match for a tiger.

historically, it was a 122mm gun ;) but of course, in terms of firepower and armor protection, the IS-2 was far superior to the Tiger I. Only the Tiger II was again superior to the IS-2 including any other russian tank built in WW2.