Regarding the T-34

[GRUNHERZ]

I didnt say you I said most..  Please read.

T34/76:

Better armor and better speed.

Panzer IVH:

Better firepower.

It's clearly not an issue of inaccurate modeling, this is how they were in RL.  Thats what we have in AH2, get used to the choices and use them appropriately.   Everyting else is just whines.

[Jester]

From what I have read the PANZER IVH's 75mm (L42 ?) gun was FAR superior to any other 75mm tank gun fielded by the Allies except for maybe the 76mm on the Sherman Firefly.

Even against the later war T34's with the 85mm gun it could still hold it's own in a tank duel though the IVH's non-sloped armor couldn't stand up as well. One reason for the extra "Side Skirts" hung on the IVH.

The T34/76 real strength was in speed and numbers. Same as the American Sherman. It's 76mm gun was short barreled and although serviceable - wasn't the best. Even after the T34 was upgraded to the 85mm gun it still wasn't in a class with the Panther's 75mm or the 88mm's of the Germans.

Brady and I used to argue about which one would be best the T34/76 or T34/85. My big issue about the T34 is not it's gun (Which does seem a little slow to reload) but with it's transmission which is practially USELESS! Very hard to shift for different terrain. Any of you Russian folks want to weigh in on this? Was the T34 this big a pig? Always thought it handled pretty well over the turff.

Also IMO a light MG should have been stuck on top. Either that or be able to carry troops to jump off and fight.  

[Urchin]

No Groinhurts.... I'm not asking for one tank to completely dominate the other.  I'm asking for two tanks that are roughly equal.  

As far as your argument for "better armor vs better gun" goes.. it sounds nice, except it isn't really applicable since the "better gun" goes through the "better armor" without much trouble.

I'm definately no tank expert, like you are Groin, but it doesn't seem to me that the "better armor" is much better anyway, according to those charts that were posted

Looks like the T-34 has 45mm on the front hull, the Panzer IV has 80mm, the T-34s front turret has 40mm, the Panzer IVs has 50mm.

And that is on the front, where you said the disparity is greatest in favor of the T-34.  Granted, having anywhere from 50% to 80% of the Panzer IVs armor is threatening, especially given the outstanding speed differential in favor of the T-34.  Well, at least as you are talking about on-road, as soon as you get off road the T-34 handles hills about as well as the M-8, and will soon be staring at the Panzer IV's ass.

From an "off-topic" standpoint your antipathy for the T-34 and anyone who would dare use it makes perfect sense, but I'm trying to keep this in an in-game sort of context.  

So, your argument is that they are "different, but equal"..

How do these numbers support that argument?  

Current Tour[/i]

Panzer IV

33185 Kills / 31901 Deaths  (K/D 1.04)

Vs Tiger 652 Kills / 6197 Deaths (K/D .105)

Vs T-34 2986 Kills / 1374 Deaths (K/D 2.17)

T-34

2503 Kills /  4781 Deaths (K/D .523)

Vs Tiger 31 Kills / 1179 Deaths (K/D .026)

Last Tour[/i]

Panzer IV

48766 Kills / 48718 Deaths (K/D 1.00)

Vs Tiger 1033 Kills / 10425 Deaths (K/D .099 )

Vs T-34 4398 Kills / 2477 Deaths (K/D 1.77)

T-34

5624 Kills / 8758 Deaths (K/D .64)

Vs Tiger 35 Kills / 2419 Deaths (K/D .014)

So, the T-34 sees about 10% the use of the Panzer IV, is killed by it roughly twice as often as it kills it, and is something like 10 times less effective vs a Tiger.  Actually that last is misleading, since the T-34 is so completely ineffective vs Tigers that I imagine the only kills were as a result of the T-34 winging the Tiger and then getting a kill after a base was captured or something.

My argument is that the T-34 is pretty worthless as it is now.  I don't know why they wasted the time modelling it since its usage will eventually fade away to nothing.  Your argument is either "Yea, it sucks, so butch up" or "It most certainly doesn't suck, it is fast like lightning and sometimes the Panzer IVs rounds will bounce off".. I can't figure out which and niether can you, apparently.  

I dont know a whole lot about the T-34/85.  If it is just an upgunned T-34/76 then it would have been a better choice, in my opinion.  

I don't think the Panzer IVs gun has any trouble at all defeating the "superior armor" on the T-34, but a bigger gun on the T-34 might give it a chance it a slugging match.

[MiloMorai]

Maybe this has something to do with the inability of the T-34 to get 'kills'.

"Also, it is important to understand that realistic penetration values in 1941-1943 was reduced significantly due to low quality ammo.

from http://www.battlefield.ru/guns/defin_4.html

[GRUNHERZ]

Urchin:

Kewl post.

One thing to note is that the T34s 45mm frontal armor is sloped very heavily so its much more effective than Pz4s vertical 80mm.  For example Panther had 80mm frontal armor just like Pz4 - but its 80mm was sloped very heavily so Panther was much more effective.  

I's guess T34s frontal hull armor is about almost as strong as tiger 1 front hull armor, ceratinly it its more effective than than Panzer 4 frontal armor.

As for AH turret front armor it has been my experience that T34 has considerablt stronger turret front armor thatn Pz4.  How did I come to this conclusion? Remember how I use the T34? I use it to defeat spawn campers.  

From this experience I know t34s 76mm will penetrate Pz4 turret front rather easily, however it is imposssible to defeat T34 turret frontal armor witha nother T34 at even 20 yards. So clearly the T34 has the stronger armor b4ecause it can resist frontal fire from other T34s at close range, whhich the Pz 4 cannot.  And trust me one T34 and I shot prolly 40 rounds at each other point blank before I figured out how to kill him.

In fact there is only 1 spot where T34 will penetrate another T34 from the front, and that is the small recatanglar curved armor strip between the top and bottom frontal hull plates.  

Note I never said that the two tanks were equal, I even said that I prefer Pz4 firepower for general fights.  

All I said was that T34/76 was clearly better in armor and speed but weaker in firepower. And thats just teh way it is - you have a choce now between tyhsoe factors.  I certanly now see people making similar choices as I do, Panzer is upped for general fights where firepower is better, T34 is upped for spawn camping defence when armor and turret traverse are required or for some field ttcak roles where its armor makes it impervious to field acks and aircrfat cannon attcak.

Its a choice.

The real issue then never was that T34 had weak armor, which it does not have because its greatly better armor  thak Pz4. The issue is the relative firepower between the two. The only next step in T34 is the 85mm model, which would then make Pz4 useless as t34/85 turret is armored like tiger 1 turret and its side hull armor is thicker too whils still being 30-35mph in speed with similar gun power.  Ask yoiurself, would you ever druve Pz4 if you could drive a 40% faster, twice as heavily armored turret, more heavily armored front and hull sides T34 with the same firepower as Pz4? Obviously not, its a no brainer, its no choice - T34/85 is better in every way. So thats why Pyro said this 85mm T34 wont happend until a Panther is introduced.

I'm sorry is anything i said upset people, but I'm not sure wehat I can do or say to make u guys feel better about T34/76 beyond that yiou simply make that choice of when u need armor and speed or when u need firepower...

[GRUNHERZ]

And yes Jester T34 was a very hard tank to drive in real life, the transmission and stering were very demanding on the driver and the suspension was a very rough design.  However the T34 was still  fast and had great armor.

[Tilt]

The only area that i am dissappointed with the T34 model is the speed and gearing over different tarrain surfaces....... whilst faster on the flat the fall off with respect to terrain texture (rocky grass?) seems higher thna I would expect.

However Urchin is right.... in a fight v MK IV it has to have options to hit and run and hide and hit and run and hide etc.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
The real issue then never was that T34 had weak armor, which it does not have because its greatly better armor  thak Pz4. The issue is the relative firepower between the two. The only next step in T34 is the 85mm model, which would then make Pz4 useless as t34/85 turret is armored like tiger 1 turret and its side hull armor is thicker too whils still being 30-35mph in speed with similar gun power.  Ask yoiurself, would you ever druve Pz4 if you could drive a 40% faster, twice as heavily armored turret, more heavily armored front and hull sides T34 with the same firepower as Pz4? Obviously not, its a no brainer, its no choice - T34/85 is better in every way.

I disagree.  The Panzer IV H would still have the firepower advantage and the armor advantage.  The Panzer IV H has 80mm of armor on the front.  The T-34 has 45mm of armor at a 60° slope which gives it an effective 72mm of armor on the front, 8mm less than the Panzer IV H.  And that is assuming the round is coming straight in from the front.  Any down arc on the round's pather decreases the T-34's effective armor while such and arc increases the Panzer IV H's effective armor.


As to the comments about a choice, well, no there isn't.  In tank A you drive for 9 minutes and have much harder time of killing anything, even if you get the drop on it.  In tank B you drive for 10 minutes and can kill tank A or tank B with ease.


It is like saying that there is no choice for a low altitude fighter sweep because the La-7 is in the game.  However, the La-7 is reasonably killable by a Fw190A-5, for example, whereas the Panzer IV H is not reasonably killable by the T-34/76D.  The T-34/85 would be overall better than the Panzer IV H, but at least both are fully killable to eachother and that means that there are to viable choices.  Right now there are not.

[GRUNHERZ]

And people still despertly try to deny advantages of sloped armor when it comes to deflection...

Its quite clear in AH2 that T34 has more effective frontal armor than Pz4, both on the hull and the turret.  This is clear from in game testing.

The only issue is relative firepower...

You want the 85mm to eliminate or level  even that sole advantage of Pz4..

Not only that, but it would increse the T34s armor advantage to Tiger 1 levels.
90mm turret front and sloped/curved will be very much like the tigers 100mm vertical. 75mm sloped turret sides would be like tigers 80mm vertical... And all this at 35mph top speed...

You just want a tank that holds every advantage - because thats exatly what T34/85 would be.. And its hillarious that you dont even have the decency to admit it...

Anyone who requests a T34/85 is simply shamlessly asking for a T34 with Pz4 firepower, Tiger 1 turret armor and a 40% speedcadvantage over other tanks.  

No wonder you all want thatr, it would be an awesome tank..

And you will get that T34/85 when the Panther comes..

Until then you can just whine.

[Urchin]

No, we already have a tank that holds every advantage.  That is called the Tiger.  

What I want, which I've said several times, is a more even contest.  

If that means the poor fascist Panzer isn't "better" than the evil communist T-34 in "any way" that'd be fine by me, as long as the Panzer had a reasonable chance of winning half the time.

As it stands now, the T34 does not have a realistic shot at winning half the time.

[GRUNHERZ]

Now Urchin is getting despereta on us by pushing his political agenda as if it made any difference..  Its not like I wouldnt drop the Panzer 4 like a wet rag if we could get a T34/85, it wopuld hold every advantage  and only incree its armor advantages to Tiger 1 levels...  It should be telling that Urchin is now justifying a free T34/85s huge advantages by saying we allredy have a PERKED Tiger 1...

But you just have to whine...

WAAAAAAAAA



Cry me a river Urchin...

[Urchin]

Oh, I already figured you'd be in the T-34 if we got an 85mm version, apparently your antipathy to the Soviet Union couldn't hold a candle to your "score".  As for me, I'd probably be in the Panzer in that case, and as long as it stood a reasonable chance of killing the T-34 I'd be happy.  

See, the difference between you and me is I play to be challenged.  This is why I'm typically fighting in planes whereas you are typically flying the fastest plane you can get in as cautiously as it can be flown.  

So when I go to play in GVs, I don't nescesarily want to be in the "best" tank there is.  However, I also don't want to be a free kill for someone.  I wouldn't mind being at a disadvantage, so long as that disadvantage is able to be overcome.  

Is this some anniversary of some horrible communist repression or something?  You seem even more bitter and antagonistic than usual for the past couple days.

[GRUNHERZ]

Hillarious...  I couldnt care less about score...  How many score guys up constanly during vulches like I do?
How many score guys up constanly in spawncamps, just to see iof I can defeat them.. But hey you have to take it personal and yiou have to make up BS disatractions because you have been wrong on all the facts so far...

You want a T34 with tiger turret armor and pz4 firepower, thats what u want. Well you wont get it till Panther gets here - just like Pyro said.

Keep crying Urchin...

And i look forward to your next creative distration as you continue to be unable to argue the issue at hand in any reasobale way...

[Urchin]

Lol, Herr Groinherz... I'm not crying.  You just aren't smart enough to see that I guess.  

Maybe you outta catch up on your reading, I'm sure your hero Der Fuhrer had something to say about situations like this.

[GRUNHERZ]

Wht not just save time urchin and say:

"I, Urchin, have nothing useful to say so I try to distract the issue with meaningless personal attacks."

Wouldnt that be nicer?