Unit - Reward suggestions thread:

Whatever works as long as I can get my Black Sea Marines.

What would we have though as both sides. The Soviets they gave uses almost everything the USSR had.

Reward unit suggestions:
1). Offer Replacement of T70 with BT5, BT7, or BT8 as a recce tank for the light tank support role. The high speed, 20 mm armor and oversized armament should satisfy most everybody when offered as a reward unit.
It would provide an early recce function, equal or superior to the T70 as a light AFV destroyer, and with its thin thin 20 mm skin have sufficient liabilities to keep the most rapid of kraut nerfers uninvolved in the discussion. Please remember any proposed TO&E unit must have an Achilles Heel.
2). Offer the KV85 as a reward replacement for ISU2 in the role of PZV counter. Its shorter length will give it more maneuverability than the ISU with the trade-off of lighter armor thickness. (Oh and with all respects to the EF skins artists it is not anywhere near as ugly as the ISU2).
3). Offer as a rewards replacement to the T34/76 a "Stalingrad T34/76".The rust colored skin would provide a change of pace. The gear-boxes on these tanks were so hard to change that a mallet was supplied at the factory to facilitate gear changes, (translate to reduced maneuverability). The redesign of this AFV should also include a reduced sighting capability which was a feature of all Soviet tanks with four man crews. (The tank commander had to help load as well as maintain battle awareness. And the top hatch design of the vehicle forced an aggressive commander to expose himself too much to enemy fire. consequently Soviet tanks mostly(?) went into combat buttoned-up. (note to the designer: a proportional penalty equivalent to the sight reduction of a Cromwell with and without a commander would do it. Tanks with a certain level of veterancy, a commanders cupola or a five man crew would not accrue the sight penalty. After the design works it could be reverse engineered into other 4 man crew AFVs in the TO&E in a future patch. A nerf but a realistic/historical one!).
4). Going back to reply #5, Offer a female Hero of the Soviet Union as a reward replacement to the Sniper Ace. A new skin, a new voice track, (the music changes often enough), more women playing EF, and oh yes for the vulnerability, a slight edge if your playing a female in guessing their doctrinal selection.

New units:
5). Armored cars: An early BA series and a BA64 upgrade option. There are two slots available In the T3 Tank hall And one of two Slots in the T4 Armory for the upgrade. The rationale is the same as for the BT5 suggestion in 1). above with the added vulnerability of poorer cross country performance for the early BA series and lighter armament for the BA64 option. Alternately availability could be made as a build or at start unit from Field HQ.
6). Maxim Wheeled MG in the short range support role. please, please, please.

And now for something completely different:
7). Cossack Cavalry in  the recce role
8). Soviet Paratroopers. At the Start of Barbarossa the Soviet Union had a reserve of 2 million "trained" paratroops. Operationally they were succesfully used in 1943-4 in the Donets Basin Offensive, (my history might be flaky on those details), In any case the drop zones were all in swamps and marshes because many, (most?) did not have parachutes!

Needless to add I am very enamoured of the EF mod.

^I like all of it. If the EF team permit's I can fiddle with my usual unit stat template and go for a couple versions of those 'Soviet Airborne/Paratroopers' (which someone would need to come up with a name for, I don't know any Russian for the life of me). The Stalingrad T34 might be iffy, as it's a cheap unit and the T34 relies on that speed; otherwise it's a worthless tank (in 34/76 terms).

TheVolskinator wrote:
^The Stalingrad T34 might be iffy, as it's a cheap unit and the T34 relies on that speed; otherwise it's a worthless tank (in 34/76 terms).

1. I agree, don't change the speed, change the maneuverability. Historically the period AFV duel for the Minsk or Moscow maps converts in game terms to a duel between T34/76 and PZIVd. In ranged combat the penetration of the T34/76 should eat the PZIVd. PZIVd penetration sucks against AFV's; as it should! The point blank death tangos that feature so prominently in CoH are annoying at worst. My experience in these point blank duels T34/76 tops PZIVd. Historically PZIIIs, 38Ts and PVIVbs ate Soviet medium armor by aggressiveness, maneuverability, and Surprise. The "Stalingrad T34" is proposed not as an improved unit but as an optional reward/replacement AFV that can be used for play balance or historical aesthetics AND is an off the shelf AFV that can be nerfed without a new design. Yes, "the Play is the thing". History and aesthetics are secondary; BUT giving the Designer options to more quickly deal with the glitz will allow more time to be allocated to develop the Mod. Or maybe your happy with the time it is taking to get out Ostheer?

2. To illustrate the maneuverability/speed issue Play Test an ISU2 and a T34 in a race track around the graveyard, and a drag race down the highway on the Highway N13 map.

---

Post Merge: [time]1301415903[/time]

---

I am interested in the possibility of creating several historical reward factions:Sov 1938-1941; Sov 1941-1942 etc.

As a gamer it doesn't matter what the name or historical unit stats or periods of deployment are. "The Play's the Thing". Every unit needs a role. Every unit needs a counter. Kaput.

A historical reward faction would add historical relevance to the the game. No king Tigers at Moscow in 1941. No prototype units. eg T90, (experimental two T60s were converted). MBT's would be Appropriate to the time period 1941-1942 KV-1 MBT Heavy, 1943-1945 ISU2 MBT heavy. Has anyone ever seen a picture of a BergeTiger? (PzIs were converted to the role since there were so many of them and they had limited survivability  on the front lines. PzVIs were far too valuable and expensive to use in this role; although every Tiger had a factory supplied towing system installed. It typically took four Tigers working together to get a disabled Tiger out of a ditch). No more stupid StugIV. (The name and skin, not the role/unit. The PzIV MBT medium was the most produced of all German tanks. The PzIII chassis had much higher production, Most (?) were used for the Stug AG role).

Replacement unit stats would more closely approximate "actual" unit stats/performance. The challenge to the players would be to come up with suitable counters to the TO&E of the period chosen for an individual game.

The benefit to the game system: Less nerf/buff patches the designers have to contend with when what they really would rather work on their own project or ideas allowing new concepts/mods to come on-line faster.

The benefit to the players: Different Strategies would need to be developed to overcome the weakness of a particular unit/role in that
particular game/time period. History nuts would take up less time/space on the threads, (which really seems to annoy a lot of you), so gamers can engage in the chat that really does enhance the enjoyment of the gaming experience: (not to mention taunting your opponent into doing something dumb)!

The benefit to the Community: More interest to a larger group of people. New or continued interest in the existing community to keep them playing. (How many times can you use the very effective WM SupportVetStrat before you get bored?)

I know this idea is not for everybody. It would take a lot of work to implement. Its beauty lies in the fact that you don't have to use it. (The Ket is so much more effective for my style of play I never use Schwims). Let the Dev Team know what you want.

Last edited March 29, 2011 at 4:25 PM by tpcoughlin

In my opinion the best reward units can be: ( not at the same time, only 3 reward must be added like other armys )

1. First Add a "moto-anti sniper role" unit like BA64 and this unid can be changed by T37A or T38 Amphibius tanks in reward section. T40 no because it have better armour and for expample swingwagen is like a jeep, EDITED: te moto role is no only anti sniper, is a observer.

If BA 64 is added it can have the same stats than the PE scout car, and T37A/T38 can be Amphibius but more slower with more HP.

2. Amored cars instead ligth tanks, more fast and less HP and armour.

BA-6
BA-10

3.T28 instead the doc3 sherman, better vs inf
4.KV1 with flame upgrade instead de doc 2 KV2

4.SU 76 instead SU 85 with less Hp and more demange maitaining the Su 100 upgrade and unit.

Last edited April 8, 2011 at 1:42 PM by Hamasei

1. Nah, soviets can chase snipers with their mega blobs. SU doesn't need motorbike.
2. Maybe BA-10 as reward for T-70?
3. No, no, no, no... T28 is sooo lame, three turrets? Why not five? But I agree that SU needs somethong to replace L-L Sherman. Maybe KV-85?
4. KV-2 FTW, I love it :D
5. SU-76 could do as replacement for L-L sherman.

cephalos wrote:
1. Nah, soviets can chase snipers with their mega blobs. SU doesn't need motorbike.

+1

2. Maybe BA-10 as reward for T-70?

+1 to that and BA-64 for T-90 :P

3. No, no, no, no... T28 is sooo lame, three turrets? Why not five? But I agree that SU needs somethong to replace L-L Sherman. Maybe KV-85?

Other suggestions have been BT-7 and T-26

4. KV-2 FTW, I love it :D

My prefered candidate for this spot was T-28 (3 turr) or T-35 (5 turr)

5. SU-76 could do as replacement for L-L sherman.

Nah its too early for a Tank destroyer to be moving out L-L sherman is more anti vehicle. Considering SU-100 is being removed Su-76 as a reward for SU-85 is probs a better choice. Maybe being faster, cheaper and gaining a special ability (somewhat like a cross between a Marder and SU-85) instead of HP and excellent penetration etc.

These are just my opinions (ntm repeats from recent topics)

Last edited April 7, 2011 at 10:56 AM by Raider217

hey guys, how about making an upgrade for the t34 by changing its 76mm main gun with 1 or 2 36m AA gun just what they used to do in WW2 ? 

Mr.Q wrote:
hey guys, how about making an upgrade for the t34 by changing its 76mm main gun with 1 or 2 36m AA gun just what they used to do in WW2 ? 

WTF? ???

Mr.Q wrote:
hey guys, how about making an upgrade for the t34 by changing its 76mm main gun with 1 or 2 36m AA gun just what they used to do in WW2 ? 

36 metre gun... I'd like to get my hands on that :P

No, never was the T-34 be equipped with AA (or at very minimum to an extent that it gains large recognition), that role is taken anyway with T-90 and would have to be a call in like Wirblewind.

Last edited April 7, 2011 at 10:53 AM by Raider217

Mr.Q wrote:
hey guys, how about making an upgrade for the t34 by changing its 76mm main gun with 1 or 2 36m AA gun just what they used to do in WW2 ? 

Only SPAAG variant of the T-34 in WW2 was a single captured T-34 being converted into a Flakpanzer by the Germans. You may be thinking about the Type-63-AA which is neither Soviet nor WW2.

LOL, I found this  :-X
OMG

Am I right in saying thats a Flak-88 on a T-34...

Do want

Looks like one. If this existed, then it only was an early eastern front provisional self propelled anti tank gun that helped the Germans against the mass of Soviet tanks because they where lacking a good one.

cephalos wrote:


LOL, I found this  :-X
OMG

keep dreaming

I guess we need LordRommel's answer to prove it's existence.

I think it existed - Look at the infanterists looking up to the FlaK.
Doesn't look like something done with PS.

This seems to be an original.

Raider217 wrote:

cephalos wrote:
1. Nah, soviets can chase snipers with their mega blobs. SU doesn't need motorbike.

+1

2. Maybe BA-10 as reward for T-70?

+1 to that and BA-64 for T-90 :P

3. No, no, no, no... T28 is sooo lame, three turrets? Why not five? But I agree that SU needs somethong to replace L-L Sherman. Maybe KV-85?

Other suggestions have been BT-7 and T-26

4. KV-2 FTW, I love it :D

My prefered candidate for this spot was T-28 (3 turr) or T-35 (5 turr)

5. SU-76 could do as replacement for L-L sherman.

Nah its too early for a Tank destroyer to be moving out L-L sherman is more anti vehicle. Considering SU-100 is being removed Su-76 as a reward for SU-85 is probs a better choice. Maybe being faster, cheaper and gaining a special ability (somewhat like a cross between a Marder and SU-85) instead of HP and excellent penetration etc.

These are just my opinions (ntm repeats from recent topics)

BA 64 - t90? no thx Ba 64 is a scout car with machine gun, Ba-6 have 20mm weapon

KV 85? no thx, is a heavy tank.

cephalos wrote:


This seems to be an original.

he's right. the pic is a fake. the background and the soldiers are the same while the details on the tank are changed (hatch is closed, tracks on the side removed,...) and take a close look at the soldier standing at the right side of the faked pic (the helmet looks awfully strange).

REDcomissar wrote:

cephalos wrote:


LOL, I found this  :-X
OMG

keep dreaming

Well. This tank was real. This photo is a fake ;)
During the last months of WW2 some Landser had mounted a single 88 on a captured T-34 tank. It was an field improvisation
to make 88 more mobile.
1 - max. 2 88 were mounted on T-34. So they were an absolute curiosity on battlefield.

Ah! So T-34 88mm existed  :D awesome, I just love those strange and crazy weapons  ;D

@88mm t34 wow imagine seeing this abomination!  :Dhaha

@su-76 replacement/reward for LL sherman. yes thankfully comrades agree with me to ditch that sherman finally for a great idea that is the su-76 Brilliant!

Hamasei wrote:
BA 64 - t90? no thx Ba 64 is a scout car with machine gun, Ba-6 have 20mm weapon

KV 85? no thx, is a heavy tank.

That for a T-90... Im thinking of a fast firing mobile armoured vehicle as a replacement for the T-90, oh and the BA-6 had a 45mm so if you meant as a reward unit for T-70 then maybs.

Last edited April 9, 2011 at 6:17 AM by Raider217

@Raider217
Why? There's already T-70 for that matter.

IJoe wrote:
@Raider217
Why? There's already T-70 for that matter.

What? Im trying to make sense of what Hamasei meant because Ba-64 to T-90 make's more sense than BA-6 to T-90 so im just assuming he meant it as a replacement/reward for T-70

IS-4 Heavy tank would be a nice reward

yes it would ive been pushing for addition of IS-3 or 4 for a week or 2 now

there seems to be a good amount of support for the unit

REDcommissar wrote:
yes it would ive been pushing for addition of IS-3 or 4 for a week or 2 now

there seems to be a good amount of support for the unit

Nope, IS-4 wasn't used on WW2, IS-3 still has chances to be considerated.

aircraft4life wrote:
IS-4 Heavy tank would be a nice reward

meh, find me one battle during WWII it took part, and I'm okay with it  :-\

Yeah this is true IS-4 never took part in WWII but atleast the IS-3 was around at the time even if it didnt see frequent use

The only reason i can see why it would receive negative feeling is because the axis players are reluctant to give up total armor superiority! :P

REDcommissar wrote:
Yeah this is true IS-4 never took part in WWII but atleast the IS-3 was around at the time even if it didnt see frequent use

The only reason i can see why it would receive negative feeling is because the axis players are reluctant to give up total armor superiority! :P

... I'm playing EF just because I can play Soviets :) but I find balance pretty important.
As far I'm fine with the fact that there's no tank that can beat KT in 1v1, and it should stay as it is. That's why this beast is total economy killer and true king of the battlefield. And every time I destroy it I feel damn good  :D

cephalos wrote:

REDcommissar wrote:
Yeah this is true IS-4 never took part in WWII but atleast the IS-3 was around at the time even if it didnt see frequent use

The only reason i can see why it would receive negative feeling is because the axis players are reluctant to give up total armor superiority! :P

... I'm playing EF just because I can play Soviets :) but I find balance pretty important.
As far I'm fine with the fact that there's no tank that can beat KT in 1v1, and it should stay as it is. That's why this beast is total economy killer and true king of the battlefield. And every time I destroy it I feel damn good  :D

I understand your feeling comrade cephalos.

I agree that king tiger should be top dog since the Mp drain is so dramatic. but thats not a reason to downplay the fact that IS-3 was a superior tank to the king tiger in every regard. wouldnt you agree? its factual

However If the IS-3 were to be implemented as reward I would most certainly want the same Mp drain that king tiger comes with to effect soviet as well. It wouldnt be balanced to have it any other way. and it would also allow the mod to keep that same historic flavor it currently has
and not penalize the IS-3 to being downplayed as second fiddle to KT. because vcoh axis always had armor superiority

Last edited April 11, 2011 at 10:01 PM by REDcommissar

I hardly think so. KT and Jagdpanther are unique and very badass, and I totally understand why - they have little weak points and are very tough. Soviets are about "quality of quantity", so they shouldn't get only-one-call-in units. ISU-152 is slow, rotates slow, shoots once for ages and is pretty expensive. And it can be beat by single 50mm Puma. Try this trick with T-60 and KT. Good luck :)

The phenomen of Soviet tanks lays in way they were constructed. Better armoured and armed with bigger gun IS-2/3 was 20-30 tonnes lighter than Tiger II. This is damn miracle of soviet engieneering.

cephalos wrote:[...]The phenomen of Soviet tanks lays in way they were constructed. Better armoured and armed with bigger gun IS-2/3 was 20-30 tonnes lighter than Tiger II. This is damn miracle of soviet engieneering.

Tiger II had better armor and gun (more penetration and accuracy) than the IS-2 and a far bigger rate of fire. the IS-3 had similar armor protection and fire power (while 20t lighter).

Ghost wrote:

cephalos wrote:[...]The phenomen of Soviet tanks lays in way they were constructed. Better armoured and armed with bigger gun IS-2/3 was 20-30 tonnes lighter than Tiger II. This is damn miracle of soviet engieneering.

Tiger II had better armor and gun (more penetration and accuracy) than the IS-2 and a far bigger rate of fire. the IS-3 had similar armor protection and fire power (while 20t lighter).

yeah the king tiger has the advantage over range no doubt about it.

king tigers armor was roughly the same as IS-2. is2 had slightly better rear armor and king tiger had slightly better frontal armor. and by slightly i mean less half an inches difference.

however the IS-3 outclasses king tiger by a good amount. it was better armored, probably the best protected late war era tank to hit the field. and you cant argue with a 130mm gun :D and dont forget IS-3 was a speed demon compared to IS-2

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 8:00 AM by REDcommissar

Quoteking tigers armor was roughly the same as IS-2. is2 had slightly better rear armor and king tiger had slightly better frontal armor. and by slightly i mean less half an inches difference.

-Tiger II had 30mm more frontal armor, 20mm more rear amor, 85mm more turret frontal armor
-IS-2 had 10mm more side armor and ~8mm more turret side armor

Quoteand you cant argue with a 130mm gun :D and dont forget IS-3 was a speed demon compared to IS-2

1. it was a 122mm gun (122 mm D-25T Tank Gun) and not a 130mm gun. it seems to be the same gun like that in the IS-2 which means same performance and firing speed (3-4 shots/min while tiger II's 88mm had ~10 shots/min)
2. just because it's bigger doesn't mean it's better (e.g. tiger I's 88mm gun was about as good as panthers 75mm high velocity gun)
-88mm gun (tiger II): 207-274mm at 500m, 159-184mm at 2000m
-122mm gun (IS-2): 155mm at 500m, 125mm at 2000m
3. speed: Tiger II 15-20km/h cross country and 38-41km/h on road, IS-3 19km/h cross country and 40 km/h on road, IS-2 19 km/h cross country and 37 km/h on road -> all about the same speed

yeah sorry didnt mean 130mm :-X that wass the IS-7

Not so sure on your armor values for IS-2, but We will leave it at that for arguments sake.

IS-3 armor slope was more dramatic, it was a complete re design and was revolutionary actually and paved the way for tanks like t-54/55, t-64, T-72. and the alloys used were more modernized, not to mention the huge drop off in german metal quality as war progressed. so it was alot better protected than the tiger II. its Target profile was drastically lower/smaller than the lumbering tiger II by a lot
This tank was specifically built to counter the german 88, and its 122mm main gun was also designed to penetrate the king tiger

the most important statistic is number built ;D


3,854 IS-2's
2,311 IS-3's <--- interesting this almost merits it being reward alone
250 IS-4's <--- One time call-in like king tiger?

492 Tiger II's  :o

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 9:28 AM by REDcommissar

i couldn't find any data about is-3 armor so i can't say how good it was ;D. in all sources i found is-3 had the same 122mm gun as the is-2 which was inferior to the 88mm gun so the tiger II had an advantage as it could knock out the IS from bigger range.
but you are right, let's end this discussion ;)

about the numbers built: only ~350 IS-3 were built until the end of the war with intact russian industry...and is-4 came even later.

and the status of reward/regular/one-time call-in is not only dependent on how many were built but also a matter of balance. in vcoh we have regular units like ostwind (43 built) or bergetiger (3-8) which were rare and a more common tiger (1350) has a limit of 1 (just like the pershing with 8-20 vehicles)...only because of balance.

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM by Ghost

Ghost wrote:
i couldn't find any data about is-3 armor so i can't say how good it was ;D. in all sources i found is-3 had the same 122mm gun as the is-2 which was inferior to the 88mm gun so the tiger II had an advantage as it could knock out the IS from bigger range.
but you are right, let's end this discussion ;)

about the numbers built: only ~350 IS-3 were built until the end of the war with intact russian industry...and is-4 came even later.

and the status of reward/regular/one-time call-in is not only dependent on how many were built but also a matter of balance. in vcoh we have regular units like ostwind or bergetiger which were rare and a more common tiger has a limit of 1...only because of balance.

IS-3 armor was of similiar thickness to IS-2 it was just re designed and of better quality. it was developed in 1943 and rolled off the line in 1944. less than a year later than the Tiger II. It did see combat

IS-4 was made a full year after the IS-3 and probably did not see combat in germany, but in china it did. they took Berlin ahead of schedule and said send it the other way

Yes, I'm aware of the sense of balance the game wouldnt be any good without it :)

good debate comrade

about the is-3: most people agree that it was not used in europe but 1 platoon was used in china (i guess you mixed that up with the is-4 which was build in 1948).

i leave it for others to decide if the is-3 could be used in EF or not. historically it shouldn't but you can argue to keep up relic's sense of history and use it as a one-time call-in ;) (which the danger of some crazy people calling for a Maus ;D)

Do you support the IS-3, ghost? or the maus for that matter?

REDcommissar wrote:
Do you support the IS-3, ghost? or the maus for that matter?

I do not support the mouse. was a prototype that was developed on the orders of Hitler and against the advice of Guderian. It should never, never, never be used in EF'

The ISU 3 was not produced in quantity, (compare with  1000 T34's per month), during the war, but would be a useful
addition to EF for play balance. IE If some  8) model screws up the game The ISU3 could be added to the game, as a patch to fix this.

IMHO the ISU3 is much prettier than the ISU2.

(Tovarich it is 12 noon as I write this, lunch time. Get back to me on PM)

Ghost wrote:
i couldn't find any data about is-3 armor so i can't say how good it was ;D . in all sources i found is-3 had the same 122mm gun as the is-2 which was inferior to the 88mm gun so the tiger II had an advantage as it could knock out the IS from bigger range.
but you are right, let's end this discussion ;)

about the numbers built: only ~350 IS-3 were built until the end of the war with intact russian industry...and is-4 came even later.

and the status of reward/regular/one-time call-in is not only dependent on how many were built but also a matter of balance. in vcoh we have regular units like ostwind (43 built) or bergetiger (3-8) which were rare and a more common tiger (1350) has a limit of 1 (just like the pershing with 8-20 vehicles)...only because of balance.

The Germans sold the machinery used to build:  Heavy IE thick, curvilinear armor, That is so characteristic of the ISU2 IsU3 designs; to Russia when they were still allied with the Soviets. They didn't think they would ever need such heavy armor. Boy were they wrong! The BergeTiger is a special case in CoH. It was not used for its historical authenticity  but to fill a role IE all other factions have a bunker. In EF the SovBunker is the outpost. In OF\PE The BergeTiger is a fancy rolling MG bunker, with a vehicle recovery option. Beware the BTiger_ it is subject to the White Tank Bug.

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 4:28 PM by tpcoughlin

"No matter how many rocks you throw to the water or how much time you try to step on your own shadow, the water will stay, just like the shadow."

Maus is a No-No. You shouldn't put the IS-3 in the same bag than the Maus.

From Wikipedia:


The first group of pre-JS-3 left the factory in mid-May 1945. These cars did not participate then
any action in the European theater of war, the Germans despite claiming to have destroyed many
during the Battle of Berlin. At least one regiment of JS-3 was sent to the Far East, but it is unknown whether
have ever been involved in actions against the Japanese army. On September 7, 1945 52 floats participated
the victory parade in Berlin, caused a sensation in Western observers. The first series of tanks,
complete with every feature of design, were produced in 1946. In the same year, two wagons were
also sent to Poland for evaluation purposes. In 1950, a wagon was sent to Czechoslovakia. China
received several wagons, only after the Korean War. The only direct use of the T
by the Red Army was in 1956 in Budapest
In the late 50s the Egyptian army received the first three JS-3, although the majority were
acquired between 1962 and 1967. The Israeli army captured some of JS-3 in the Six-Day War (1967) and
in the Yom Kippur War (1973) and re-equip them with the T-54 engine.


IS-3 was most a "Cold War Tank", and I don't think it can be placed in EF.

Moonwalker wrote:
From Wikipedia:


The first group of pre-JS-3 left the factory in mid-May 1945. These cars did not participate then
any action in the European theater of war, the Germans despite claiming to have destroyed many
during the Battle of Berlin. At least one regiment of JS-3 was sent to the Far East, but it is unknown whether
have ever been involved in actions against the Japanese army. On September 7, 1945 52 floats participated
the victory parade in Berlin, caused a sensation in Western observers. The first series of tanks,
complete with every feature of design, were produced in 1946. In the same year, two wagons were
also sent to Poland for evaluation purposes. In 1950, a wagon was sent to Czechoslovakia. China
received several wagons, only after the Korean War. The only direct use of the T
by the Red Army was in 1956 in Budapest
In the late 50s the Egyptian army received the first three JS-3, although the majority were
acquired between 1962 and 1967. The Israeli army captured some of JS-3 in the Six-Day War (1967) and
in the Yom Kippur War (1973) and re-equip them with the T-54 engine.


IS-3 was most a "Cold War Tank", and I don't think it can be placed in EF.

Wikipedia is not really the most accurate source when it comes to very specialized subjects. Soviet war records(what has been released anyways) are a very 'grey area'.
Eg. T44 was only thought to have made it to prototype stage up until a couple of decades ago, only to find out that there had been almost 1000 produced before the war ended(1000 tanks built and not used??).

The units where re-equipped with T34s before going into action in Berlin. Considering T44 units were stationed in Berlin during the cold war as top secret weapon and no westerner ever saw them, it'd be a safe bet to say the units were re-equipped to fight in Berlin with T34s so as to avoid any chance of the western allies seeing them. Its also a reasonable assumption that these units saw action before reaching Berlin. A test unit with 3 T44s 'is now known' to have been deployed.
Now, also given that an army would never miss the opportunity to use a new weapon in war conditions, I find it neigh unbelievable that the soviets didn't use both these tanks in the last few months and made sure no records of their actions fell to allied intel.
A collapsed retreating german army would hardly try and obtain details of any new allied/soviet weapon encountered so any eyewitness claims would more than likely be discounted as mistaken sights.

keep in mind that in certain german accounts it is mentioned that they faced up-armoured T34 assault leaders which they misnamed T43s . This account is in one of Steven Zalonga's books who is considered as authority on the field. What are the chances of these and other similar instances actually involving T44s?
You just never know really...same goes with the IS3s

Regardless, as an eye candy and cool factor, I'd say that if we ever got hold of an animated IS3, we'd put it in EF  ;D
But nothing crazy/experimental would make it in.

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 5:54 PM by Zerstörer

The KT (if properly commanded/crewd) would almost assuredly beat the IS3 toe-to-toe. Although rare, many of the last remaining elite tank units were given glorious amounts of APCR Panzergrenate 40 ammunition. Not to mention the fact that KT crews, while fairly inexperienced with the tank they operated (as the KT served for what, 8 months?), they were seasoned veterans of tank combat--new crews would NEVER be trusted with a Tiger or panther, let alone a KT--nor the Jagdtiger/Jagdpanther; a might rarer and in the latter's case, more deadly (that speed IRL was a killer). Though if an IS3 was able to waltz up to a KT, yeah, it'd win from -900 or so meters. I'm not so keen on it, as if it replaced the IS2 it would blow, and it coultnt replace the ISU152 (it'd be blatantly OP). Atm, swapping the KV-85 for the T34/85 (or maybe the gloriously underused and under discussed SU85/SU100 (idea: the 'SU100' upgrade would just replace the SU85 with the KV-85, instead of just upgunning the SU?)

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 9:14 PM by TheVolskinator

I feel like im pissin in the wind king tiger would not beat a IS-3 in a slugfest. it wouldnt! Maybe I'm just biased, yeah I think I am  :) :P

I know its hard to come to grips that the axis just might not clearly hold total armor dominance anymore if Soviets acquire IS-3 for eastern front

And I dont know how you can try to say IS-3 shouldnt be considered for a reward/call-in when americans have the m26 pershing sitting in depots across the atlantic and the IS-3 had already rolled off the assembly line
production finally began in November 1944 for the m26 pershing. Ten T26E3 tanks were produced that month. yeah ten
And total they only produced 2000 pershings by the end of the war in comparisons the soviets produced roughly 2-300 more IS-3's than americans did pershings

Thats where I draw my relation I see the IS-3 as soviet pershing. the pinnacle of their armored might. I love my ISU-152 but its just not a true slugger like the King tiger and Pershing are.

Last edited April 12, 2011 at 10:22 PM by REDcommissar