Use vehicles perks to obtain field expidient armor/protection.

[JHerne]

Imagine this guy rolling around in the EW and MW arenas...lol

[Nemisis]

I think JHerne has a good theory with the balancing things out. But we would probably have to adjust the perk system a little, or play around with the prices for a little while ***. It would take a hell of a lot of panzers kill knock out a JS-2, and if once side had the JS2 perked at 75, and another at 40, the first will see more JS-2's, king tigers, tigers, M4's, etc., which will slaughter the panzers which will make up a majority of the tanks for the first country.

Which brings in the tank destroyers, like the hetzer, and jagdpanzer IV. Both would have to get in close to get a kill, and likely have to make it from the side or rear. They are easy to hide and likely the JS2 driver will be keeping an eye out for tanks that can challenge it, and not be keeping as close an eye out for hetzers and whatever else we might get.

That said, I think we need to adjust the terrains. Add some plowed fields, and some brown and tans into the color. And once we get that, I want to be able to camouflage a tank. Have it so you can have partial camouflage (some branches tied to the hull and turret to break up the outline) and a complete, all out camo job (the branches, with shallow pit to lower your outline, maybe up to the bottom of the hull, and some camouflage netting on the top, back and sides). Maybe have the latter take 5-6 minutes to set up, and if you move at all (the tank, not move the turret), you get rid of all your camouflage.

***
It seems (to me anyway) that the perk system is linear, and doesn't take into account very well that equipment only goes so far to make up for numbers. If you had 20 players with perk prices at rock bottom (1 for the T-34 and M4, 2 for the tiger, a 15 perk 262, etc) stacked against 150 players that have only planes and tanks with 30+ eny, the guys in the 262's will be swamped by dozens of P40's and P-39's for every one plane they have up.

[JHerne]

I think the balance comes from the perked vehicle being able to die - and the subsquent loss of precious perk points. While there are obviously those don't care about wasting perks because they have 24000 of each, they're obviously the minority players in the game.

Can a JS-2 be killed by a Panzer IV with a 75mm, an 85mm, or a Sherman's 17lber? Certainly. Much the same way (historically) that 75mm Shermans had to gang up on Panthers and Tigers to kill them. There's a well documented battle where a single T-34/85 with both standard HP and HVAP rounds killed 3 King Tigers from a concealed position.

No tank was impervious to anti-tank fire. Obviously, hitting a Panzer IV with a 122mm gun is going to be, should be, and historically almost always was, a one-shot kill. But tracking a JS-2 or King Tiger, or getting a flank or rear glacis shot, were usually enough to kill them, or at least immobilize them.

I think the perk system would have to be revamped for GVs, especially with the addition of tanks like the Panther, Jagdpanther, etc., that have decided advantages in armor protection and penetration. A good balance can be found by adding vehicles with equal firepower and less armor for fewer perks. They make up for inferior armor with lower visibility and good maneuverability. We obviously don't have to balance a JS-2 with a King Tiger, because a player could simply match another JS-2. The balance would come from having the ability to up a low to medium perk vehicle that was capable of killing the high-perk tank. If you take survivability out of the equation, and give that low-perk GV a low profile, you have a semblence of balance. Here's a list of possibilities, just thinking LW at the moment, but obviously, some of these apply to mid war well. Early war would require a new list of vehicles that we currently lack, Churchills, Matildas, Crusaders, Lee/Grant, Stuart, etc.

High Perk - King Tiger, JS-1/2, Jagdpanther, SU-100, Pershing, Panther, JSU-152
Mid-perk - Jagdpanzer IV/L70, M36, Su-85, SU-122, M18
No Perk  - Su-76, Nashorn, Jagdpanzer IV/L48, Stug III, Hetzer, M10, M24, Marder III

In most cases, any of these non-perked tanks could kill a medium perk gv. Maybe even a high-perk GV if they're lucky or gang up on a player. Obviously, the medium-perked GVs could kill a higher perked GV. The trade off comes with survivability.

[Nemisis]

Depending on if your talking about a ausf A or an ausf G, the panther would be mid perk.

And we would definatly have to rework the perk system for this.

Adding to your list...

Kv-85 (wouldn't be perked too high and so we can say we have a KV tank in the game)
Cromwell Mk IV
Panzer III Ausf J and Pz III ausf N (would use both of those a lot, the J is just a nice beautiful tank)
M4A3

maybe a Brumbar, even this:


Ferdinand self propelled heavy AT gun

200mm armor
8.8 cm PaK 43/2 L/71
Weight 65 tonnes (140,000 lb)
Length 8.14 m (26.7 ft) with gun
Width 3.38 m (11.1 ft)
Height 2.97 m (9.7 ft)
Crew 6 (driver, radio-operator, commander, gunner, two loaders)
150 km (93 mi) road
90 km (56 mi) cross-country
30 kilometres per hour (19 mph)

Perked at 500 when the sides are balanced perfectly.

[JHerne]

I dunno if I'd mid-perk a Panther or not... Panther Ds had teething troubles, the Ausf A and G were far more reliable. My reasoning for the higher perk would be not only the 75mm KwK, but sloped armor and very good mobility. The Panther's gun, although not having the heavy impact of the 88mm, made up for it with a much higher velocity weapon. Anything under 3000 meters would be almost straight line shooting.

Ferdinand, KV-85, KV-1, KV-2 (a perfect noob gunnery target) would all be excellent choices. The III Ausf N would be interesting with a 75mm, but the J model...definitely not in the late war arena...

J

[Nemisis]

I would take a J out in the LW arena. The long barreled 50mm is actually not bad closer in, IMO it was more of a medium tank than a light.

I hadn't thought of the muzzle velocity on the panther, your right. Maybe something like 30 if we perk a tiger II at 45 or 50.

The Ferdinand poses an interesting problem, it would be almost impossible to kill from the front by anything but the Js2 and Tiger II, yet its low mobility (19 mph) and extremely high silloute make it easier to kill, as even a Panzer could catch it and kill it from the side (we can't turn in place. We need to have that amended as well). I don't think HTC will add it, would love to see it, and would totally blow 500 perks accumulated over 3 yrs (if I was that bad) just to drive it and score a single kill, but HTC won't add it, at least anytime in the near future.

We may get it in the version just before this message:

"Host: The HTC servers will be shutting down in 20 minutes, thanks for the memories."

[JHerne]

Another option we're forgetting altogether are M3 or 251-towed ATG guns. This is definitely where camo and concealment come into play to give a semblence of survivability, but perhaps balancing it out with a better rate of fire or a better sighting system. Obviously, there'd be a set-up time required based on the unit, a 37mm ATG takes less time to manhandle into position than an 88mm Pak 41/43 (Pak, not Flak). They'd be very vulnerable to aircraft strafing (much the way M3s are at present), and carry limited a limited number of rounds requiring vehicle supplies to re-ammo. It would be nice to finally be able to fit something into these barns and buildings as fire points....

Chances are it wouldn't be as popular as using tanks, but think about setting 3-4 Pak 40s up overlooking a GV base, pre-emptive before an air attack to bring the VHs down, or in one of those canyon choke points we typically find ourselves in. Course, this immediately sets the groundwork for artillery...

Just thinking with my crayons....

J

[Nemisis]

HTC appears to be focusing on A/C despite the fact that we have a much better plane line up than a GV one. We actually have some jap and italian planes, but not GV's.