Rebalancing of tanks needed!
 

1. Make heavy tanks more expensive and encourage use of medium/light tanks (T-34, Panzer 4 maybe even panther). Panzer divisions weren't made up of King tigers and the occasional Panther.

2. Make ERA specific battles. I have heard this ALLOT ALLOT ALLOT! JESUS this pisses me off. Make era specific, where you could choose 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 ET CETRA. So, for example, in 1940 Infantry would be very powerful, and Panzer-3 would be considered a strong tank.

Sure it might take some work importing single-player guns and tanks into multi but I think it would be worth it.

3. Make Su-100 more powerful.

4. Make the following tanks EXTREMELY expensive: IS-3, T-29, Sturmtiger, pretty much all Japanese heavy tanks that were not put into mass-production.

ALSO VERY IMPORTANT: Nerf the ******* calliope US tank. Its so OP i want 2 cry. It was useless IRL and this is why it was produced in pretty much insignificant numbers.

Nah your just playing shit games with high income. If you play with 350 income you will rarely see a King tiger.
Unless you don't put pressure on em, which allow em to get super heavies.

I agree that Su-100 could need a boost.

Is-3s, Sturmtigers and T-29s already cost alot. And are most of the time not worth it. In a normal game.
As for the Japanese tanks? You expect em to fight the enemies entirely with Ha-gos and Chi-hes?

Also the US Calliope is the weakest rocket artillery in the game. Its great for dealing with infantry, dont get me wrong and it got great armor.
But it can't really kill anything else then Infantry. It can even have trouble taking out AT-guns etc..

Also the Calliope only got 150 in range. Which makes it pretty easy to counter.

I hate 600 games. I play 350, and usually it ends in panzer4/jagdpanther/ maybe even king tiger semi-spam. at the very least tanks like KV-85, pershing and Panther gets used, ALLOT. In reality, vast majority of the tanks should be Panzer 4's, T-34's (t-34/85 should be cheaper but i also think the 85mm gun is 2 weak...) and Shermans (the elite versions should be kind of like the panther is compared 2 the panzer 4's).

Panthers should be cheaper and have much worse side armour.

Calliope is so OP it is unbelievable. And ya, it can completely and utterly CLEANSE TWO areas of infantry. That is the problem.

BUT STILL, MY MAIN REQUST IS DEFIENTLY ERAS. I WANT TO PLAY 1941, 1942 1943 ET CETRA.

calliope is best rocket artillery. It has 50 or so rockets (no need 2 reload), and after spending them you got a M1A2 sherman. Obviously Sherman is utter shit vs tanks, but it works very well as an artillery unit.

I suggest at the very least to decrease its range and increase the cost, to show that it was very very rare IRL.

also Japanese have that extremely good medium tank with sloped armour and uber gun. I think dropping the other heavy tanks would be wrong, but at least limiting them to 1 per team or something, considering they were only on the drawing board.

Only encountered Calliopes one time and I must say it was pretty craptastic.....Ther was 2 and they fired like 10 volleys at mine and my dad's tanks and didnt even detrack them my infantry I think even didnt all get totally anniihliated. It killed my tank AA gunner or so but it didnt have catastrophic results like I thought it would. So unless the Calliope got better in 1.17.5 then they are fine the way they are..they fire alot of rockets, make alot of noise but dont amount to shiiiii...wait we cant use swear words can we? lolz. As for Heavy tanks, yeah they do need to do something to bring the mediums and lights back into it. It is amazingly boring when the only thing fielded are King Tigers, Pershings, IS3s.....its like MOW is taking place in the 1950s when those big tanks woulda been more used. The Era thing is a good idea, there is a mod that sorta incorporates that into it....its pretty cool. But srsly....it would make the game alot more fun if the Pzr III, M4 Sherman, Pzr IV were actually useful. Also, wtf is up w/ the front bumper of the Pzr6B grey King Tiger and Tiger I? It would be really nice to see the front bumper problem fixed on those tanks.....guarenteed penetration on the front ofthose tanks? Whats bad about he SU100? ive seen it tons and it seems to be pretty dang dangerous as is.

The Chi-To is the only Japanese tank I see thats worth the plywood its made from. The others have pitiful guns, and the armor is made from plywood and reinforced cardboard so anything kills them....Atleast I must say for the Japanese tanks...they are more accurate then Germans. I lined them all up in the editor and the Chi To was the only one that had decent armor of75 and atleast at like 30 or less range the Kil number was like 128. It seems comparable to the Pzr IV H. The Chi Ri for a heavy tank is only aight, never really played the Japanese but I no joke bumped into the Vickers MG on the Crete mission in SP and my Chi Ri blew its engine......sooo yeah.....true story.

Yes. I would support this as well. It would also allow for battles with a bit more logic in mind and also battles where you see certain units in large numbers while other units never or in very few limited numbers. By 1944 for example the panzer IV H should be a quite common sight, while the T34/85 very expensive. On the other side by 1941 the Panzer III should be common and the T34/76 as well while in 1942 any panzer IV G expensive.

Maybe to make it a bit more simple one could jost go with Late, mid and early as designation for the units. Where in early engagements you would see more the T34 with 76mm and in mid war the 85mm and also more tanks like the KV85, IS1 and the IS2 beeing extremly expensive for example.

This is something I can only agree with. The SU100 is such a weak gun that its not funny anymore. Logicaly, it should have NO issues to take out a Panther or Tiger 1 from its front as it was a gun designed with such tanks in mind. Yet you see here many times richochets and hits without any effect or you have to get so close to them that you can hug them to do damage. On the other side the Su100 is quite expensive and lacks any considerable protection on its front so either the Tiger 1 or Panther have not much issues taking it out even on large distance. At least I never fear the Su100 which is different to the Jagdpanther which gives me a headache sometimes if deployed well.

The ISU152 should get a good boost in damage as well. You see to often Panthers and Tiger 1 get shoot without effect either ... and even the mighty Tiger II should NOT just simply shrug shoots of even to the front like its nothing. It should while not penetrate the armor have a fair chance to take out its infantry inside. Or do some more damage then just the tracks. There have been enough cases where Kingtigers suffered damage from lighter guns (see Ardenes offensive, Kampfgruppe Peiper) with damage to the electrical firing mechanism for example. This was not that uncommon.

I can as well only agree. But in general, all tanks should actualy get weaker armor in game. Particularly when you use medium/heavy guns to attack their flank. Already the "smallest" angle can prove sometimes to be a serious issue ... and the panther at least really didnt had any noteworthy side protection.

If all enemy armor would get weaker side armor, this would help actualy the sides which do not have such good armor present like the japanese since flanking manouvers would be emidiately more succesfull and not become sometimes a "game of luck" how I call it where a perfectly well placed shoot to the side is doing nothing at all ...

The issue with the calliope is that its quite easy to obtain and keep compared to the Katyusha and axis rocket lunchers AND it has a adequate self defence capability with its gun and machineguns. While realisticaly the artillery for example can take out the rockets lunchers quite easily since neither the Katyusha or other Rocket artillery have any considerable armor protection even a hit close to it will take it out and destroy it. To get the calliope with artillery is much more difficult. It would be here eventualy nice to consider a destruction of the rockets from a nearby hit by artillery and thus leave you with a simple Sherman without rockets. I mean if some 150mm gun hits very close it should do some signifcant damage to the rockets which have a quite high profile.

But I dont see that as a serious issue when you consider the superiority in armor and guns for both the Axis and Soviets.

That its to expensive for the potential use. Before I spend points for the SU100 I would send 2-3 Su85 (as support) or simply go for a IS2.

When you have the luck to eventualy do a flanking manouver or get very close to the enemy the SU100 can be extremly dangerous. But unlike the Jagdpanther it cant take much of a fight since most medium / heavy guns can take it out and since MoW is degrading somewhat the penetration on distance heavily the SU100 is loosing a lot of importance on long range.

The time you can get a Su100 its almost not worth to get it anymore cause thats almost the time you see heavy tanks that cant be clearly penetrated anymore.

I am not asking for a super SU, but its hard to believe that the 100mm had better characteristics compared to the 122mm when you see how bad it performs already against panthers and tigers.

Exactly, id just take the IS2....sure it has like 15 rounds but the advantages over the SU100 is it has better manuverablilty in that it has a turret, so a detrack, which is waaaaaayyyy to easy to obtain, doesnt totally take it out of the fight till its fixed and it has AA Machineguns for Infantry attacks. IDK what the 100's armor is but the IS2 Late has good armor. I dont play at all w/ Assault guns but I dont see the reason for buying them over tanks. THey have the same guns, most dont have AA Mgs and thier armor isnt that much better.

Something that id think needs to be fixed is how easy it is to detrack stuff. 50cal MGs fire 5 rounds and detrack both tracks...thats retarded. One HE round from basically anything can knock it off. 20mm's do it w/ ease. Tracks werent really that weak now were they? I mean they are built to support a 60+ ton tank so id imagine they are thick enough to be completely impervious to 50cals and give 20mms a major headache.

it doesnt happen that frequently though. Never loost my tracks cause of 50cals or soviet Dshks. 20mm guns, thats a different story. But the trick is you have to get quite close to have a clear shoot at it. And the vehicle is most of the time loost afterwards.

He shells particularly of biger size should definetly damage the tracks. At the moment I even think they dont do enough damage, considering the powerfull nature of 150mm and biger calibers they should have a fair chance to harm the crew inside a tank cause of shock !

It was many times a used tactic by allied troops to take out the tracks of the enemy armor particularly with heavy vehicles and simply flank the imobilized tank or even simply leave the target to the air force or shell it to death with artillery. Many German vehicles probably meet their fate not by enemy anti tank guns but by planes and artillery.

I am glad that you can take of tracks from vehicles. Otherwise taking out heavy axis armor would be a almost impossible task. Particularly weapons like the Sturmtiger or Jagdtiger.

Historically the Soviet 100mm gun could kill pretty much everything, including King Tigers from the front. It was a dedicated AT gun.

122mm was a gun built 2 fire HE charges.

I dont want de-tracking to be impossible just harder to bedone by smaller caliber weapons like 50cals 20mms. It should be able to be done by direct hits from large calibers like 75's and up. That makes more sense, but now you can hit a tank w/ a few 50 rounds and it falls off.

I want eras. Seriously.

And yeah, in 1941 a Panzer 4 should be VERY expensive, while in 1944 Panzer 4's should be cheap and Panther being decently priced.

In 1944 T-34/85's should be cheap, while T34/76's shouldn't be able 2 be built.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE BEST WAY/DIGITALMINDSOFT!!

Make this change.

also nerf the ******* calliope. I hate it so bad!! Except when Im using it but that is rarely.....


also Su-100 should have a better armour penetration stats, and so should the Zis-2. Zis-2 is a toy gun compared 2 what it was IRL. This thing shat on Panzer 4's, and that is why the Soviet high command stopped production of them in 1941 - they were 2 expensive and useless at firing HE, because a Zis-3 could fire both HE and being able 2 take out Panzer 4's. It was not until Panthers started showing up that the Soviets resumed production of Zis-2!

also the D-10S gun of the ISU-100 had stronger penentration (185mm at 1000m) than the German Kwk 88 43 gun of the tiger 2 (160mm at 1000m)!!!!

This is ridiculous and LAME....

T34/85s atleast in squad leader, and that is a pretty much realisitic board game has the T34/85 not even available till mid 44', the KIng Tiger isnt available till like August 44. The T34 should be available, the KV1 shouldnt be but yeah. Im sure if we all come up w/ ideas maybe they will incorporate them eh? would be wicked awesome to see a Era patch haha. The Pzr III would be a friggin beast in 41', 42 ish. The T34/Sherman would stand better against it though.

Though in 1944 the T34/76 was still one of the most common if not THE common vehicle in the soviet army. The T34/85 was produced in large numbers trough the war but it did actualy not simply replaced the T34/76 but more served next to it one might get the idea the soviet army jumped on the new design as soon it was going in to production but even during almost the whole year of 1944 the soviets had to rely very much on the t34 with its short 76mm gun which makes the Su 85 a important adition to the soviet army wich saw service already in 1943 already. The 85mm gun was quite late used with the T34 and the first units which got equiped with them have been elite units usualy like the tank guards or what their name was no clue. So as said it should not just simply replace it even when it was available in large numbers.

Would be nice to know about this statistic.

The 100mm which was a version from a naval gun had for a soviet gun quite good capabilities particularly against panthers and the tiger 1 even on large distances.

But I doubt it was powerfull enough to penetrate the front from a Tiger II. As both the turret and hul have been quite thick. Around 150mm angled for the hull and 180mm for the turret. I have no clue how acurate the page is but Battlefield.ru gives for the Su100 125mm penetration on 500m shooting a 60° angled plate, 155mm on 90° using the BR-412 APBC (Armor pearcing balistic cap).

Remember the Germans used with ther famous 88mm Kwk (Kampfwagen kanone) many times not just simple armor pearcing (AP) but as well APCBC (armor pearcing capped balistic cap), or even rare APCR (Armor pearcing composit rigid). So the Tiger II should if using the APCRC outclass the Su100 with its APBC definetly. Even the standart APCBC-HE Panzergranate 39/43 for the PAK43 seems to penetrate more then 180mm of armor already on 500m and even more then 200mm with the rare APCR Panzergranate 40/43

The only gun that might have outclassed it (but thats not certain!) is the gun of the Superpershing which was a modified long version of the 90mm gun and late war designs like the british 105mm using APDS and APFSDS (modern shells)

3AD's "Super Pershing" vs. Germany's "King Tiger"

But one should always remember that this is the internet afterall. So any informations should not be considered as simple fact.

One source says:
That the Su-100s gun was almost equal to the Tiger IIs 8.8 cm KwK 43 gun.
180mm penetration at 1000 meters which means it would had been able to take out a king tiger frontally.

However another source says that it could only achive 150 mm penetration at 1000 meters. And only 162 mm Penetartion at 500 meters.

So its hard to know what source is true.
But either way the Su-100 could need a cost reduction, since germany get JP 4s with slightly better armor for only 50 points.

And if they buff the gun to almost the same values of a high velocity 88. It might get a higher cost then it has now. Since then it would be almost as deadly as a Jagdpanther.

Lol, the Super Pershing, I only saw that thing in a mod I downloaded and couldnt help but laugh at it...as if the M26 Pershing isnt already bad ass enough. Then on top of that there was a Sherman Ane or something, it was friggin god....its gun outperformed a modern day Sabot round for penetration and the tank itself was armored well and coulda raced in the Indy 500 and won 1st place.../random post

OK, sure, there may have been a few late T-34/76 models on the front in 1945, but the majority of the tanks were already T-34/85. 50k T-34/85 were produced out of 80k T-34's.

Fine though you have a point so there should be a late T-34 model available as a counter 2 the Panzer 3, and then the T-34/85 which should be as cheap as a German Panzer 4.

With APHE round it achieved a penetration of 180mm steel at 1000m. I don't know if the armour was angled nor the quality of the armour.

German 8.8 cm KwK 43 achieved penetration of 160mm steel @60 at 1000m using the APCBC round..

It is safe 2 say that these weapons were comparable. Also King Tiger frontal armour was 100mm IRL, not ******* 180mm (that was the turret only).

Su-100 should have far higher penetration stats than it has now.

Yes but in MoW the King tigers AP round counts as a APCR round. Since the max penetration of the KT is 233 at 10m.
So the King tiger would still have higher penetration then the SU-100.

Also that fact that the SU-100 got 180mm penetration at 1000m, its not guarenteed its true. It might but not guarenteed.
Yes Wiki says so but, that doesnt prove anything.
I have come across other penetration values for the SU-100 that are lower. Maybe thats why the SU-100s gun is what it is in MoW.

But you have gotten it all wrong about the King tigers armor. Yes it only got 180mm on its turret. But the frontal armor is still 150mm, not to mention its sloped.
If the King Tiger only had 100mm frontal armor and had the weight of almost 70 tones it would had been kinda useless.

Do you count the T34 numbers as whole or only numbers from WW2.

Many times I can read the production numbers of all T34 together (including the 76mm AND 85mm version) not to be more then aprox 50 000 units in WW2 with eventualy 18 or 19 000 produced T34-85 all not acurate numbers of course. Dont forget they still produced many units right after the war and the 85mm saw service in many soviet controled nations and it also saw some action in the Korean war and some even have been seen in the yugoslavian wars during the 90s!

I have no doubts that there have been many 85mm versions around. 80k units seems a bit much even for the Soviets if you consider that they eventualy produced around 1200 units per month eventualy and the War in Europe was over by April 1945

Doubtfull. Very doubtfull. Soviet guns have not been known for their quality in penetration. Hence why they usualy used simply biger guns compared to German vehicles like 100, 122 and 152mm even. It was cheaper to simply increase the size of the caliber then making high quality AP shells which was feared to slow down production numbers of shells and guns. I know it was not the only reasons. The IS2 was seen for example as brake trough tank with anti tank guns, pill boxes and bunkers as main targets since those have been in 1944 much more common then German tanks.

So the AP, APCBC (which was the German standart AP shell) can not be really compared simply with the AP shells of soviet vehicles which many times did not contained so many rare materials like German shells. What the soviets needed was something that could be produced everywhere and easily.

I thrust Battlefield.ru more then wikipedia though. Not that I say any of them are reliable sources compared to books. But I have yet to found any good informations out there about soviet guns. It seems there are a lot more available about German US/British guns (including the 17pf for example).

Though 180mm penetration seems a bit high for the Su100. Eventualy against plates with 90° angle ?

The real issue I have is that the Su100 has already trouble sometimes to penetrate the Tiger 1 and Panther front armor which really should NOT be anything of a problem.

But it seems that penetration and damage is sometimes pretty strange anyway. Seen to many times Pumas taking direct hits from 76 and 85mm guns even doing NOTHING at all. And that on close distance ... other times you see your tank geting killed from half the map in its side. Other times nothing at all. I have no clue if its from lags, or what ever or if they even simulated somehow shells which failed in penetration. If yes then its a bit overdone though.

first of all, Germans in 1944-1945 had severe problems with rare materials, so I seriously doubt they had better ammo. So the rare rounds should NOT be used when comparing guns. Wikipedia says 185mm penetration at 1000m. I would assume that is @90 of straight steel, but it is of unknown quality. Then there is battlefield.ru saying 95 mm sloped at @60 at 1500m

Very well, it is not as good as King Tiger (but it shouldn't have 180mm frontal armour, but 150mm as that guy above said) but better than Panther and Tiger I.

The Germans did have better ammo than the Russians, but these improved rounds were rare. Only 2-5 rounds per tank, and these were only to be used against the heaviest Russian tanks. For less capable tanks, like the T34 (all versions) the normal antitank round were enough to knock them out at ranges farther out than the Russian tanks could fire back.

~Zeke.

The Germans had problems w/ the rare mat's to make the rare rounds to being with. Those rare rounds were rare period.

This kind of rounds have been rare for all nations. See the soviets did many times not even bothered to make APCR rounds for many of their guns as they tend to require not only experienced workers but also many complex machines. They have not seen fancy shells before the end of the war or even first after the war (like APDS which never have been used by the Soviets in WW2)

Its not like the Soviets have been dump or could not do them. They just had the fear it might slow down their production. One should not forget that the Soviets had to develope many things literaly in combat while Germany in the begining didnt suffered the same issues. Most of the comgat didnt happend on German ground and their cities and industrial areas didnt got overrun. It took the soviets much time to dissmantle their fascilities and organize their industry again deep in the Ural and further north again. But they managed this in record time. And one of the reasons was to concentrare not so much on rare and fancy equipment but rude, simple to manufacture and easy to maintain weapons.

But as said such shells have been rare for many. Not juts the Axis. HVAP rounds have been available in some numbers for the Sherman 75 and Sherman 76w. But never in large numbers. When they arrived in Europe at around 1944 the shermans had HVAP rounds ready for the Normandy invasion. But no Sherman had usualy more then 3 or 5 rounds of them ~ HVAP (High velocety armor pearcing) beeing the US APCR. With them even the 75mm could impose a threat to a Tiger I. But only under best conditions. The quality of US HVAP shells wasnt the best one and they many times would shatter on thick armor doing nothing. Better results could be achieved with the HEAT shells since those worked like shaped charges and could penetrate quite a lot of armor on every distance.

The Brits on the other side used APCR for their 2 pounder for example whiche gave it quite some power. Though only for the anti tank gun not for the cromwell which also had a 2pf. They did many different rounds for the 17pf some more others less succesfull. With the usual APCBC it had some power already (aprox 140mm penetration) but it could theoreticaly! even penetrate the turret of a Kingtiger with a APDS rounds from 400-500m. Issue was. The APDS was a terrible round. It many times failed in penetration, shattered on the armor or loost its stability in flight and accuracy was extremly poor you could basicaly hit nothing past 500m. Another issue was that once you fired a APDS you could not give acurate prediction about the next round loaded. But dont ask me why. I think it had something to do with the barrle and the APDS design. The APDS had many issues which only got solved after the war with the APFSDS which got fins to stabilize its flight. But at that point the brits already had their 84mm 20pf ready and later the extremly well done Royal Ordnance L7 105mm gun.

The APCR was a rare round in the German aresenal. But it was NOT uncommon. Most if not all tanks got them. At least fighting vehicles. From the Panther, to Tiger I, Tiger II and even Panzer IV and Panzer III (very limited). The only tanks which did not got them have ben tanks like the Jagdpanther, Maus and similar. They seen the APCR as unnecessary cause of the already formidable penetration quality of the APCBC rounds. So the Jagdtiger never had any APCR available.

In general the usual AP round of the Germans was better compared to the usual AP rounds the Russians and US had so was the standart for the Germans the APCBC while soviets many times used only APBC (T34-85, SU100 etc.) or APHE (IS2, ISU152 etc.). But that goes together with the fact that most armored vehicles in general have been better. In direct comparsion. The Panther and Tiger have been usualy superior to most common allied vehicles like the T34 and Sherman 76w and the Sherman 75 (one of the standart tanks in the US) was inferior to the Panzer IV. Only late war shermans could keep up a fight here with the 76mm gun. Armor qualities of the panther and in particular the Tiger 1 have been in general better compard to US and Soviet designs. The Pershing as late war design was not much better compared to the Panther and it used almost as much fuel like a Kingtiger. The IS2 was only slightly better compared to the Tiger 1, the Comet was also more or less equaly to the Tiger 1. But that is of course thinking about only direct 1 vs 1 scenarios. War as whole requires different qualities. It was in general easier to maintain and transport tanks like the T34 or IS2 compared to a Tiger 1 and not to mention the Tiger 2 which needed sepcial tracks for transport on train (the usual one are to wide). Also the axis lacked any air superiority which probably has cost them a lot of armor and initiative.

OOPS* I meant that Su-100 gun guaranteed penetration of 95mm sloped armour @60 (degrees) at 1500 meters.

well it would be definetly enough to crack the hul of the Tiger 1 and Panther on usual distances. Speaking of 1000m

I fear this tank. I only use about 4 light infantry squads, 2 light tanks, 1 MG and 1 Mortar, along with a APC all in one area rushing the enemy. I absolutely fear it, along with everyother rocket in the game. Never fought one before but it sounds absolutely devastating. It could take out all my infantry with 1 rocket barrage and knock out my light tanks with its cannon, but by the time I reach it and destroy it I would only have a squad left. Useless in real life, maybe, devasting in game.

I think the tanks are alright. If you want a evenly matched game play Germany vs Germany (not really fun though). Every army has their own tactics. For Germany, its hit and run with tanks and trucks. For Japan, Artillery barrage followed by tanks and infantry.

Japan is going to have lots of infantry, artillery, and light tanks. The tanks for Japan is fine. They aren't going to get bogged down in the rain as much as the American tanks and are good for hit and run also.

Lol, still not convinced the Calliope is broke. Saw it again today, it cut loose one full barrage on my dad's Pzr IV E and all it did was take out a track. Its just an even more powerful Anti-Infantry tank then the standard Sherman

Yeah the Calliope is fine. Its only really good vs inf and it has shorter range then all other rocket artilleries (only 150m).

I lost 8 infantry squads and a small tank against this thing!

Well then your where blobbing, so its your own fault.

I personally don't have a problem with the Calliope. Playing against it, I know my opponent used a lot of points to get it, and it just means it's time to make a push and take that mobile tin-can out. Playing as Americans, I skip around it, as it's too costly by other things I can get out by that time.

I fear I have a lot to say on balance issues as well, for the most part on armor. It's starting to get boring to have Russians spawn 2 SMG sections, and then very shortly after followed up by a T-34. This is beginning to get asinine because you don't have any real means of AT that early(I've managed to disable T-34's countless of times by using a Puma up close, but nothing more than that; A mildly intelligent player knows well where to keep it out of reach of inf. AT), If you try to move up a Pak.40, it'll get he bombarded before your get it close enough by the larger number of infantry that can spot it(Because everyone knows the Pak.40 was just a 9MM gun in disguise), and mostly the same story if you try a Panzer III/IV(If you turtle to save up the points to get them). I don't mind the effectiveness of their guns, it's just it's nearly impossible to take the T-34's out early game as they waltz over you, spewing HE rounds as if it were Halloween candy. The Sherman/T34's armor is a little too strong, German 75MM guns have a lot of trouble taking them out in this game, which is pure bullshit. I keep needing to call in a Nashorn to get a lucky shot on it(the gun on this tank is too inaccurate, but boy does it make for a nice explosion when you're lucky enough), then it just gets plinked by a small 45MM and under armored car that's even further out behind that very Sherman/T-34 you just took out! Now you're out too many points - GG.

I dont buy the Calliope either as Americans, mostly b/c I play w/o Artillery but even with I dont buy it. Its Sluggers and 76Ws haha.

As for the Russians not dying and the Pak 40s being junk...my dad has played like 20+ games since 1.17.5 came out and has not been able to blow up anything (Mostly Russian Armor) with anything the Germans have. Also, his stuff gets 1 shotted by everything....no joke. Just last night we were in a Brothers of War mod game 3x3 match and he put 6 AT nades on the back (engine) of some Panther and it didnt do anything at all to it. Then He commenced to roll his T29 down the road, it got hit w/ 1 AT nade on the front Armor and it died. Also, early in that match he had a M18 and a 76W fire point blank into a Pzr III...50mm long barreled one and didnt do anything to it. His tanks commenced to die....Then in the regular 1.17.5 matches he fires 10-15+ panther, Tiger, King Tiger rounds into Russian armor it doenst die or disable, then the Russians fire and Boom, dead. A few days ago I played in a Tank only match like 8v8 or something and there was some Su152 sitting side to me on a hill, my Panther commenced to pop it like 4 times in the side from like 60m or so and it lived. That same panther got detracked on a hill and got into a slugging fest w/ like 4 Russian tanks for like 5 minutes from about 50-60 away and only managed to kill 1 of the Tanks then it died. I even rolled out King Kitty and it got 5 ft from my Deployment some got hit by some SU152 w/ one round and it blew up, turret went one way the tracks and wheels went another....its like dang, Russian Armor is pretty wicked now. The Germans just shoot further, thier guns suck worse now then before...even the King Tiger doesnt blow stuff up and i go mostly for side or close shots

Tank balancing? Why should the tanks even be balanced in a game that simulates war? The reason why people have always invented new weapons is to be better then their competitors. I don't think somebody would want a tank that is just as good as an enemy tank rather then a tank that is better then both. The side with the better and more guns usually wins. Otherwise, WWI would still be at a stalemate.

For myself, I don’t really appreciate the tank battles in MoW: too gamey/arcade for me. The MoW tanks just don’t have enough range for a more realistic tank action. In more realistic games, you would just love Tiger 1: massive range (about 2km), very good fire control and high penetration. Tiger 1 could take out many Shermans or T-34s before they could even get close to it. The MoW Tiger 1 is not even close to its might.

Therefore, in MoW, the task of tanks seems to limited to provide support for the infantry and that’s about it.



I wonder if DMS will make any improvement in that area in AS.

Thats the main reason tanks were created.

I fully agree to this point. But the truth of the matter is, Germany is exactly that innovator you're talking about. Granted they had lower numbers, but they were far better in terms of combat effectiveness. Here in this game, I feel they've implemented this factor(German tanks being more expensive, while allied tanks are cheaper - thus in larger numbers), but they've seriously failed to implement the fact that for their cost/lower numbers, they were far more effective.

It needs to be more realistic is all I'm asking for. Balance is pretty much okay, it's just the tank/AT armor, and armor penetration values of the guns that need a workaround.

Yes, you are right about their creation. But we need to look at their evolution for a bigger picture: see, for example, how they were used in the Battle of Kursk.


The MP tanks only battles could be improved a lot:

- by making them more historical (you choose the year in which you want to fight a battle);
- making them more realistic ( increasing and varying the range of fire: tiger 1 is a kitten in MoW coz it was robbed of it range and control fire);
- doing something with the fog of war( it is funny that I can see a small fence destroyed in the distance but I can’t see the huge tank that had knocked it down);
- by adding more tanks to command (one tank or two are not enough to plan your battle field strategy).


As to balancing, I played a game that didn’t have the problem, coz you could set the exact year in which you wanted to fight the battle. The fact that you can wait a few seconds more to get a new, shiny King Tiger is a bit gamey.

I am not sure how people get the idea German tanks or equipment are "weak". Try playing with the Brits or Japanese armor only battles against the US or even more important the Germans and tell me its "uneaven" for the Axis. It ends many times enough in Tiger II killing most armor while the Sturmtiger do the rest. With the japanese as enemy you dont even need any Sturmtiger. Russians and Axis are somewhat the best or at least can be mirrored better. Though the ISU152 makes a bad Sturmtiger ... but thats obvious since the gun is much smaller.

The Tiger 1 can be a great tank. If used correctly and with a bit thinking. In battles with 600 points for each side its of course less usefull but you cant expect that from it when you have IS3s, Su100 or M36 and Pershings around every courner. As simple as that. And I had enough times where the Tiger 1 still proved to be a hard target on biger ranges. Angling is the key here. Anyway. The Tiger 1 can be very good. But you cant just roll it in to battle expecting to blow everything away. A intelligent player will always try to counter enemy armor so he doesnt get overrun. Either by infantry (took out a lot of enemy armor with well placed anti tank infantry!) or of course own tanks. Just never forget the moment you can get a Tiger 1 or Panther even the enemy will eventualy have access to weapons which could counter them. Talking about the 17pf the brits BEST choice, I many times go for the 17pf used by the infantry cause its cheap and the best british gun! So if you get a Tiger or Panther the enemy is loosing a lot of points, if your gun gets killed its bad but you dont loose half of your spend points and its harder to get overrun early on! Dont forget either that MoW doesnt portray "realistic" engagements. For each Tiger 1 the soviets would use almost 400(!) armored vehicles which includes everything from the T60, to the BT and of course T34. The Tiger 1 was capabale of destroying eventualy 5 vehicles before it was destroyed though. Now do the math. But that happens cause the Tiger 1 was many times facing inferior armor like light/medium tanks which could not take it out except with suicide runs. Particularly in the west. If the normandy champaign would have seen for example a large use of 90mm guns from the begining and not just with the November/December of 1944 the loost numbers of allied tanks would have been probably much smaller the Soviets already in 1943 deployed with the SU85 guns that could "potentialy" deal with the Tiger 1 from the front at least from already 700-800m which was a huge difference to the 76mm guns of the T34 which could do nothing to the front the idea to get the 85mm gun as fast as possible to the front before better guns and designs arrived was coming exactly from the knowledge of the Tiger send to the Soviets from the Brits, by own Spies and of course experiences around Leningrad when they faced it the first time the Tiger saw action on August 29th of 1942 already and later again in Semptember/November which gave the Soviets a rough estimation of its arrival and enough time to at least consider some possible counter.


The First Captured Tiger from sPzAbt 502 on display at Gorky Park in Moscow.
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/images/cttig.jpg


Interesting are as well battle reports of the British attacks in the Caen region after the beach landing so the American units could break out. But it meant at some point the British forced had to somewhat face (aprox) 70% of the German armor ~ acording to Wiki. And here they made very positive experience with the 17pf in the Sherman Firefly which was luckily ready for the normandy landing some single tankers achieved to destroy for examples a couple of Panthers and Tigers succesfully on usual combat ranges. Particularly when used defensively.

So dont expect in MoW the Tiger 1 to be a unstopable killing machine as it wasnt one in real life either. It only became one cause A ) of its very well trained and experienced crew and B ) the time it saw service it most of the time was fighting inferior tanks like the T34/76, IS1, SU85 etc. Shermans and light tank destroyers M10 etc. In such battles its no surprise the Tiger 1 achieved many victories. Just as the KV1 did some 1 or 2 years before in 1941 when the Panzer III proved to be useless against its armor. So in MoW you play most of the time "theoretical" battles then "realistic" ones. The values of armor and guns reflect only somewhat rudimentary realistic numbers tweaked for gameplay though.

yes and now. If we are talking about certain tank designs like the Stug (early) or Panzer IV E. They have been designed as infantry support weapons. And thats a great role for them in game as well.

But weapons like the Tiger 1 and most particularly the Panther have been designed to counter enemy armor as primary targets. Infantry support was important as well every good design should be able to deal with both tanks AND infantry in some way but many designs have put a focus on some aspect. One big issue with the Firefly for example was the weak characteristics of the 17pf (76mm) HE shell compared to other guns like the 2QF and similar they had a slightly smaller caliber but the shell contained much more explosives. The brits didnt managed before the end of 44 to supply their troops with good 17pf HE shells. And even then they still have been much less powerfull compared to the 75mm weapons of the cromwell or shermans cause the casing of the 17pf shell had to be very thick to be used with the high velocity gun. Actualy every gun of WW2 had similar issues. High velocity means high preasure in the gun which means the shell needs thick walls to not burst in the barrel increasing the thickness means less room for explosives which make it of course less effective etc. etc. Of course a 88mm shell will suffer much less such issues to the 75mm of the panther or the 76mm of the firefly. But still.

So in general you could say WW2 has seen many different designed tanks (much more then today) with specialiced roles and some have been either more or less succesfull. Today many different ideas are combined in the MBT (main battle tank) like the Abrahamns, russian modern T series ~ T70,80,90 etc. and the Leopard 2 with the intention to both support the infantry and attack enemy armor efficiently. Almost all nations today follow more or less the same principle and thus have armor with very similar classifications. No more light, medium, heavy tanks. A modern tank has to combine the versatility and mobility of light/medium armor but the protection and most important the firepower of heavy designs. Thus the idea of a main purpose or main battle tank was born. The idea is not an new concept and the Brits, Soviets and Germans thought about such concepts ~ some even think the KV1s was the first "try" in such a direction but thats not sure. But it was not possible at that time to get a project working that could effectively combine the advantages of each classification without its dissadvantages heavy gun, great protection and good mobility. Particularly since the resources have been needed to counter already existing designs like to the T34 and KV1 tanks the Axis encountered in larger numbers by the end of 41 and start of spring 42.

You can't make MP historical. I've seen people play Soviet Union vs Soviet Union in North Africa, just plain wrong.

All that about the Tiger being good in game and how it was in RL. maybe in game it is decent but how do u explain it's shells bouncing off M4A1 Shermans and T34s. The Tiger should kill them easier then the 90s and 76s kill it. Yeah I realize this is a game and it needs play balance but the Tiger isnt play balanced its crap. If it was play balanced its gun would have the effectiveness of the M4A4VC Firefly of the British...as for now its worse then the M4A1 75M3 gun, or atleast not alot better. Although the penetration numbers on the description say its better, field testing proves its not. I played a Tank only battle not to long ago, my dad bounced no less than 5 rounds off my T34/76 M43 from reletivly close range, having no further effects past the broke turret which I think came from his Panzer IV H. The map was warehouse and that isnt a big map from DZ to DZ, so his Tiger bouncing like that off 47mm of armor on the T34 is pretty bad. Sure the T34 has its slope but it doesnt save it that well. Even in Singleplayer I lose atleast half my T34s I get on the Penal Unit mission to those Panzer IVs. For a Heavy Tank the Tiger is garb in MP when compared to others....its my last choice. The Panther is decent but its side is like melted butter. If MoW isnt ever going to give it it's real gun atleast give it it's real armor so Sherman M4s have a harder time killing it. Even the 85mm gun ofthe Russians is only 50% chance from the front in Squad Leader, that game is based almost entirely off realistic numbers and such.

Lolz, while were on the topic of tanks and thier guns in this game, let me ask this one thing.......why do your shots sometimes go through the tank like its a ghost or something? I am messing around in the editor w/ Fireflies vs Panthers. Ive given the Fireflies my modded 76mm Mk5 and it has like 185mm penetration max. I roll up beside this panther, kissing it with my tank barrel, fire and my round hits the ground on the other side of the tank with no effect. Same thing happened twice in the same editor battle. Then the same thing has happened over and over and over and over.....I cant put enough overs in there.....but yeah. I fire at a tank and my round hits the ground right behind the tank, or the ground underneath it while going through the thing entirely while missing it. That is prolly the #2 most annoying thing to me in this game. #1 is definitly gun vs armor penetration. my Mk5 has 185mm penetration, I was shooting the Panthers w/ like 120-145ish penetration with a green circle and the Panther side armor is I think 45, 52 at best, yet it takes me 2,3..4......5? shots to kill it seriously....like what the ........#3 Is why do tanks disappear even though your staring it right in the face? ive again and again gotten into tank matches, both in the editor and mainly online where both tanks are just shooting each other, not moving yet after every shot the tank will just disappear.....I understand the fog of war...atleast to some extent but seriously? Cloaking Devices and Transparent tank hulls? Just no, this is a WWII RTS, not some World of Warcraft or Everquest magic show......

Onto another topic that has nothing to do w/ tanks but with stealth....what does it do for infantry? Or does it just not work in the editor? Ive made a group of Canadian Marine troops and I gave them the perk "stealth". So, last night I was testing it to see what it did, in the editor, and i was crawling my Marines into bushes, walking up on them, then taking regular guys and walking up on them and both troops were seen at the same ranges. Also, used the same soldiers and tried crawling across a road to see if maybe stealth lowered the detection radius of men...conclusion...nope....Of course ive seen the Scouts in MP and they have Stealth...they are invisible for all practical purposes. I guess the effect doesnt work in the editor just as the Binoculars dont?

Distance. As simple as that. Obviously the how guns work in MoW is NOT realistic. Its just derived from reality. The Sherman and T34 could deflect the Tiger 1 shell. If the distance was big enough. But we are probably talking here about a distance where you could not even see or hit the tank in a real battle. The maximum you would engage in combat would be around 2000m. Usual ranges have been between 700 and 1500m succesfull hits by Tiger crews on 1500m have been quite common cause of the good balistics and gun. For example in Men of War the T34 sees a lot of richochets from the Panzer IV H as well even though when the T34 hull (75 and 85) could be penetrated by the Panzer IV H up to 2000m from pretty much any angle.

I am not defending Men of War. I find it sometimes quite frustrating as well. Particuiliarly when using heavy guns like the SU100, or ISU152 which should be a lot more powerfull. But on the other side. Its not like the Tiger 1 is useless in MoW. And people playing the game somehow maybe exepect to be Wittman, Carius or Panzer Mayer or something ... no clue.

cause its a game and not real life ? Game have bugs, errors, lags etc. etc. etc. :rolleyes:

Com on I understand most of your points and I do complain quite often my self as well. But dont complain cause of the sake of complaining. Men of War is a improvement over past games. And maybe we will see more in the future. If there will be new games.

"You can't make MP historical. I've seen people play Soviet Union vs Soviet Union in North Africa, just plain wrong."

It is just one of the examples of the lack of polish in MoW MP.



Best Way is responsible for that by allowing it. In other games, you choose the exact year and the historical theatres of war for the two fractions you want to play.


@ Crni vuk

Great post. Long but informative.

“So in general you could say WW2 has seen many different designed tanks (much more then today) with specialiced roles and some have been either more or less succesfull.”

I like that sentence a lot. The problem with MoW is that you can’t really appreciate some of the tanks coz many of them are getting outdated too soon during the SINGLE BATTLE, rather than during the WAR.

To be honest with all of you, I like the infantry only battles best. They are most tactical ones, whilst all weapons and tanks only matches remind me of technological race, rather than tactical game. Of course, WW2 saw huge technological race in the course of war, but jumping from early WW2 tanks to late tanks during the same battle is gamey. But you can make it more historical by setting some additional rules for the game, like buying only early WW2 tanks or only selected weapons.


I hope we see eras and hitorical battles in AS.

Thats cause many go for the big bang for the small money (points). meaning 600 point games. Seriously dont play them if its to stressfull or anyoing. I only sometimes play them when I dont want to care if I loose a expensive unit or not.

Just play more games with only 450 or even just 300 points available and you will see a lot more vehicles which are not becoming obsolete so fast and with a bit of skill can dominate the battlefield. In some games you will not ever see a super heavy tank even and just have maybe 1 Panther in front of you.

One game I remember we played 2vs2 with medium numbers and for almost the most game we would not even use more then infantry, anti tank guns and eventualy 1 Sherman 76w. I got some Tiger 1 and my gun was destroyed after killing 2 Panzer IV as well. So he loost probably more then 100 points and who knows how much with infantry trying to take out the gun but I have probably not even loost half of it. In the end we won cause we only had half of not less of the casualites our enemy had to suffer. He rarely used some infantry or guns. I noticed how anti tank guns can be quite a good thing sometimes! Its hard for tanks to spot them and they pack some punch once you have a chance to shoot the flank or weak parts. And if you loose them its not like the whole game is over.

Less points available can change a lot and actualy make the game much more tactical. Well more then 6 or 7 Queen-Tigers with 3-4 Sturmtigers as back up ...

Lolz, idc what money setting you put it to....ive buy a Panzer IV H early a few infantry squads and then wait for my King Tiger.....=D The Americans and Russians will always have those uber sluggers, 76ws...yeah.....

Buying just one tank and that saving for KT is not always a good choice. Specially if your panzer 4 H get fucked up.

Personaly i normaly always get highest score in my team without playing with King Tigers. Prefere to be able to get good control of the battlefield instead of saving up for a super heavy tank.
Also Jagdpanthers can normaly do the same job as the KT, Unless IS-3s, T-29s are out on the field.

Uh.. I prefer the T26. Best tank in the game.

I play in 2x2 or 3x3 and my team takes care of the infantry cover for me +D I buy a few stormtrooper squads and spread em out then just sit and watch the fight.......sometimes they are boring like that and others the opponenet makes 50 shermans and does a banzai, armor style....easy side shots. If I dont get a King Tiger I get Panthers, those have better armor then the Tiger so yeah =D Or 2 or 3 Pazner IV Hs . As for that JagdPanther...it has no traverse at all, the worst of any of the assault guns so I dont buy that thing ever. its an Elefant or a regular tank. So yeah in a 1x1 id prolly get my ass kicked badly but meh. Tanks, infantry cover and officers.....thats my army haha..what are scouts all about? who sees em?

Don't underestimate the power of the Jagdpanther. It may have no Turret and weak side armor.
But damn its fast, best gun ingame and reasonably good armor. Great counter vs Pershings, IS-2s etc..

Don't like the Elefant just because its so slow. You can't really race up to the enemy with it or get away from arty fire as you can with a JP.


Tho i have to admit. Sometimes the King Tiger can be a great choice. Its just that i rarely get to afford it, since i mostly play agressivly on 350 income setting.

Exactly thats it. The trick is not to have the best gear you can get but to use the one you have available correctly. You can do a lot of great things in the right moment if you know how to use the weapon you have available (or you chose). And controling the battlefield is the key to victory. Particularly when then enemy is storming your possition with superior forces. You know it really pays of when you see expensive tanks killed by a soldier armed with a rocket. They are cheap and when you loose them it means not much. But destroying that Tiger or IS2 will sure teach them some lessons. I noticed that some people dominate the battlefield almost only with infantry, others are good with anti tank guns. I find the situation with tanks easier to handle. But if you loose to much ofthem it can be very difficult. You will get overrun easily.

I dont doubt the Jagdpanthers armor or gun, its no doubt very good but the rate at which tanks in this game get detracked it make it my last choice b/c once its detracked its completly screwed...much like the Turtle for the UK. thier gun moves as far left and right as its tracks +D If Detracking was harder and more rare I might actually buy it. I do like the Jagdpanther for its looks, armor, gun...but that traverse bugs me alot.....that is my only real complaint w/ it. I play mostly defensive w/ a slow advance so speed isnt a big factor w/ me....even if I did attack I prefer something that has good fire arc and can absorb damage like no other. I usually play in 450-600 pt games w/ 120 population I guess its called...

Oh yeah, my dad dominates armor w/ his stormtroopers and panzerfaust......vicious w/ those guys. I also know the pain of losing tanks to infantry...atleast every few games I get a King Tiger TnT'd by some clown w/ a dynamite stick...its like "damn do I feel dumb". Also, losing big tanks to infantry actually cost us the game once...we were losing most the game, took the lead in the middle then like the last 30 seconds of the game some clown w/ a PanzerFaust crawls up and caps my T29 in the side to steal back the lead.......game over and we lost by only a few points..like 6 or so. That was a great game, fun times. I even, for the first time as the japanese not long ago managed to get my team the lead by taking out a Turtle w/ some seemingly bad ass japanese stormtroopers and several hundred grenades. Took 3 guys and a Chi Ri as bait into the back and just as I made my move got the turtle to turn aroundand blast at my Chi Ri while my men molotov'd, zooka'd and naded the hell outta the turtle. Then that Chi Ri took out a 2nd turtle and a 76W =D So, yeah, Infantry in this game are useful, yet another thing I like, even though I dont use them much its nice to know that tanks are no longer the one and only dominating god on the field, like CoH and almost every other RTS i know of. Makes for much more fun games

well I find the Jagdpanther much more usefull then the SU100. But thats no surprise I guess.

What makes the Jagdpanther and other tank destroyers with similar powerfull guns not so usefull though is the fact that you have to get very close to the heavy tanks to do any real damage.

That to....the damage degredation in this game is crazy fast. Ive been messing in the editor in my own mod changing penetration numbers and stuff and I had the King Tiger gun and my modded KWK44 on it to 350 for all ranges and at 200 range the penetration was a whole 98 or something, at 150 it was like 190. I wish there was a way to make it hold its 350 penetration for the whole 150m....or atleast not drop off half as fast as it does. Also, why, no matter the number can I still not 1 shot a Heavy Tank...I keep upping my penetration number just to see how high it has to go to 1 shot big stuff and I have a gun to 1500 penetration and 3500 dmg and its still not enough lolz. Figuring out penetration in this game....my MoW life goal :rolleyes:

Well i have heard the Penetrations will be changed in the expansions but to tell the truth i kinda like the penetration as it is.
Since the game doesnt have real life weapon ranges. They had to scale down the penetration accordingly to the range aswell. Like 10 meter = 100 meters etc..
Also do we really want King Tigers to become even better? Since people are already whining that they are OP.


Then again havent played Assault squad. The penetration changes might be better then it is now.

Since this game isnt realistic to real life then atleast make it play balanced where the Germans arent as inaccurate as a 2 yer old w/ a Mp40 and the Americans arent pintpoint accurate. Next I hate the fact that tanks have to kiss stuff to kill it,...increase penetration atleast a few meters.......next make the ligher stuff a little bit more appealing to use...as is now its just free points...atleast German stuff is, the 50 and DSHK just kill it.

I agree simply throwing in realistic numbers, penetrations and ranges for the vehicles will not make the game more fun as long the maps do not support the range acordingly. Thoug playing eventualy on maps with 20km distances might not be the best part well not yet who knows in a few years what will come. But for now it will be just more frustrating for anyone not playing Germans. Hands down they had the most powerfull anti tank guns in service which could without much issues destroy almost any vehicle even with long range.

But it is nice to hear that they eventualy plan to tweak it here a bit cause it always feels strange to have the SU 100 for example get pretty close to score a sucesfull hit on medium tanks already. Or same for the Jagdpanther and most important the Nashorn is almost completely useless that way. It will be almost always spoted before you can get a shoot and as soon you do shoot and miss or dont destroy the target with your first shoot its toast. Not very usefull for a tank hunter. Particuilarly situations where you can get a clear shoot to the side of the vehicle should show much more effect. Its already hard enough to get in the flank of the enemy. Why even punished further with it that you have to spend sometimes 3 or 4 shoots before you can bring the target down ... of course I am talking about a hit not a miss. To many times you see shoots do nothing even when they hit. And a T34 should realy have no issue to penetrate the Panthers side. Not even the 76 should have here already issues.

Thing is if we change the weapon ranges alot of other stuff has to be changed aswell. Like longer view distance for all the units and also all the maps need to become bigger.
A map like Workshop is already very smal and you can shoot through a large part of it.
Fields of Honor Mod Has a longer range on all the equipment, it was cool in a way but can't really say the gameplay got much better.
Be Greatfull MoW dosn't got CoH weapon ranges :)


But i have to agree about the 50 cals and DKSHs.
Had a game where a King tiger Assaulted my IS-3.
Knowing that the king tiger could't get killed frontaly it moved very close in for the kill on my detracked IS-3. So i starded firing my DKSH detracking both tracks and causing the KT to turn as it was moving, Showing its side to my IS-3.
Then i could just simply shoot the KT in the side. Hillarious stuff.

Anyway 50 cals and DKSHs maybe should have abit lower penetration at long ranges...and less effectivness vs Tracks.

realisticaly speaking those heavy machineguns should have almost zero chance of detracking vehicles. Well medium and heavy tanks at least.

Exactly, those heavy's should outrange the 30cals and should beable to punch through walls and cover with a decent amount of rounds but not so easily be able to destroy light armor and tracks. Its possible to Destroy a Panzer IV from the rear at close range w/ shots to its engine w/ a DHSK or 50..thats totally retard-o. The Axis light armor isnt used b/c a clown on a 50 can shred it in 2 rounds or less...true story. Also, the 50 and DSHK shouldnt beinfantry useable...its to big and kicks to much to fire like a Light MG such as the Mg42 or Browning 30cal. Maybe in Assault Squad or something make Armor Piercing 50 cal rounds as an ammo option in the vehicle inventory but give the thing like 1 box or so of it. Then make them so they take quite a few rounds to destroy light armor then we'd be making sense of a deadly 50cal like it is now. Also, in GSM FOH2....there are smoke shells for tanks...those totally need to be in a version of MoW.....those would basically complete the awesomeness of MoW, you could then do Armor/Infantry assaults w/ smoke shells as cover and advancing behind tanks. W/O the 50cal being an Anti Everything gun the Germans could do thier Blitzkreig w/ 251s and light stuff. Would add more excite ment to the game, as is right now this game is cool but its kinda like every other RTS, 2 lines of Defense just duking it out till one side wins, rarely is there any cool manuvers people do....M4 SHerman Charge doesnt count =P

Dont make ranges 20Km, just keep the ranges as is, 150m range is fine..what is lame is that 150m nothing can kill anything. Dont make the game realistic to where the Germans are one shotting everything, this game isnt realistic so playbalance it. Find a base number and make the Germans a touch bit better, the Americans meh and the Russian 76 short barrels a bit worse. The 85s and 90s were as good but still not as deadly at long ranges like the German guns. This game could be play balanced a bit better. As is now the US stuff is pin point accurate even on the move, the Germans even touch the gas pedal the hit circle gets as big as a house. Even the Japanese tanks are more accurate then Germans..true story. The Germans in this game shouldnt be the overpowering god army they were just a bit better, prolly like the US tank accuracy is now......make the US and UK about as accurate as the King Tiger is now, that thing is nice. Then make the Russians a bit worse then that. Every nation should be moving Jagdtiger accurate on the move. There wasnt computer operated Gyro stabilization and stuff so hitting on the move didnt happen that much cuz it was like just tossing a shell out the hatch, your gunna miss anywho....Also, when is the Tiger going to get a new front bumper? Its got that "penetrable by everything" front bumper like the Pzr VI B King Tiger.

"... US stuff is pin point accurate even on the move, the Germans even touch the gas pedal the hit circle gets as big as a house ..."

Stabilized Guns for Yanks' Tanks

Germans didnt used them ever in any of their vehicles except for rumors about the Panther II geting them. But its not even sure if there has been ever a runing prototype.

While those stabiliziations in WW2 have been not even close to what they are today ~ an abrahams has no issue to hit a target 2000meters away while driving full speed, they could give you some advantage while stoping and starting.

Though I havnt noticed much difference in accuracy between guns except for the super long range weapons like the 90mm or 88mm.

That stabilizer is neat =D

LOL what is this worthless crap? are you guys seriously DELUSIONAL? OR are you playing some mod? A t-34 gets splattered by a Panzer 4 from 100m at any range. Only way a T-34 can survive is 2 drive halfway up a hill into a semi-hull down position. That way its slope increases far more.


A tiger 1 tank can pretty much smash any Shermans (even Panzer 4 doesn't have a problem with those) from very far away. The sherman is a terrible tank with a high profile.

Panther DID have very thin armour at the flanks.

If Tiger wasn't angled, a T-34/85 shouldn't have any problems killing it from 1000m/front using decent ammunition.

Tiger did NOT face 400 Soviet armoured vehicles. Obviously vast majority of German armoured vehicles were APC's, medium tanks, armoured cars et cetra so they faced their soviet counterparts.


LOL, whining based on nothing. Sorry if I sound rude mate, but I have NEVER experienced this. A Panzer 4H eats T-34/76 for breakfast even from 100m+ range. A Tiger would be overkill. You would need a T-34/85 or even better KV-85 to take down a Tiger 1.

Sounds like you are using some mod or something.

Also the editor stats for armour and penetration are NOT the same for MP stats.

I prefer the elefant. It has much better armour than Jagdpanther and costs only a few points more. A Jagdpanther can be penetrated from front, Elefant is immune 2 that. Also Jagdpanthers are very weak against ISU-152's.

Lolz, all that I put there about the Tiger wasnt a mod....it was 1.17.5 MP on the Warehouse map in the base game. Also, just the other day I was shooting a T34/76 from like 70 and closer and was doing nothing but bouncing with 2 Pzr IV H's with straight on shots to its side and frontal armor untill I got to like 30 and closer then I got yellow numbers and it went through finally. If I was able to record battles and make videos for proof of some of this crap I sooo totally would. Then in a Tank only battle just the other day I took the Pzr IV G and was shooting a lone M4A1 Sherman from pretty much max distance and bouncing off its side with like 7-8 shots. Only when the guy got like 60 away with like 2 or 3 straight on front shots did I get him. Am i having all this trouble b/c people are using armor cheats and cheating in this game is more common then I think it is or what? Soo many people say the Tiger is good but when I see it used in MP or play with it in the editor it sucks. The Panther I know has melted butter for armor, not complaining about that, just stating what about it I dont like.

Exactly, the Elefant is the only TD I buy, if any.

I guess the Elefant can be a better when fighting in high income games. Since Jagdpanther has too low armor to battle IS-3s, T-29s effectivly.

However in most cases on normal income games i prefer Jagdpanther.
I have found slow tank destroyers to be way to easy to disable.
You can't use turretless units as damages sponges since they get easily detracked. And then renderd useless...
Whats so great about the JP is that its so fast. You can quickly go in for the kill and then move back again. Elefants are just too slow for that and they will just try to avoid it if they see it comming.

But i can agree on that the JP is easy target for artillery. Normaly avoid getting it if theres alot of arty spam going on...or if there are ISU-152s out.

i agree. i think jagdpanther is best (& sexiest :-P) tank ingame. when you use your jagdpanther carefully - no other tank have any change.

... but heavy arty or ISU-152 or HE from IS2/3 are deadly for jagdpanther.

1. Record videos with fraps.
2. Maybe you are just a bad shooter? you could be hitting the top part of the T-34's armour, and the T-34 could be in a semi hull down position (increasing its slope drastically). If it was a shot from 60m hitting directly at front, it did not happen.
3. M4A1 has decent side armour. I would expect it to bounce off a few shots from a Panzer 4G at 140m, especially if it hit the upper part of the side-armour. From front: you need 2 hit from 80-90 meters usually. Try to shoot against points where there is minimum amount of slope, and NEVER shoot at the upper part of the armour.


Sounds 2 me you are exaggerating. Sorry man, but no way in hell did a T-34/76 m40 take a head on centre on front armour Panzer4H shot, on flat ground from 60m. This may happen sometimes, but that would be extremely rare.

Jagdpanthers don't exactly have an impressive reverse-speed. I usually see people use it in the same way as the elefant or other heavy tanks, which is from far back sniping over-eager tanks.

Though yes, I see your point very well. A Jagdpanther is very flexible, and in my experience harder 2 immobilize than an elefant.

I still almost always buy Elefants though, as the maps usually aren't that big.

That T34/76 M43 was sitting in the middle of the road on Dunverde near that lake on the side of the map.....I was hitting the right side of its hull where the driver door is and then the center of its side....and side shot got it when I got close enough. The side shot Panzer was sitting on that shore by that lake on Dunverde and T34 was sitting right on the road like 40 or so from me, maybe I can recreate what it looked like in the editor haha. All i know is I wasnt that far away and my penetration was like red and yellow. Also. I was letting the AI do some of the shooting while I DC'd the other Panzer. As for the Sherman its side armor is just as crappy as the Panther....its like 40 something....thats not decent haha. I always go level with my tank so I am getting straight on hits to the tank. However, even w/ all my troubles in this game ive still wasted me many a tank=P I guess itsthe random number generator for penetration kicking my ass. One shot it goes through like a knife through melted butter and other times its 50shots and nothing.....

1. Editor has different stats the MP. I told u already.
2. T-34/76 has equal armour on its sides and from the front.
3. If the T-34 was angled against ur panzer this would proove why ur shots didn't do anything.

equal armor on the side like the front? That would be quite bad if I got you right here.

~ though I noticed the T34/85 hull is quite resistant to the Panzer IV H. To resistant as the T34/85 had literaly the same armor values compared to the T34/76. And those could be destroyed by the panzer IV H succesfully on all distances regardless the angle. Sadly in Men of War, I never have reasons to fear the Panzer IV as its gun isnt even close to the pentration it should have.

I know the editor stats are different from MP....Also, if just a mere angle of any kind puts the Panzer IV gun from god to worthless then that just shows the German guns need to be upped more so b/c no Angle on any German tank saves it from anything....ive tried it w/ my Panzer IV and King Tiger, Panther, Tiger.....all the Allieds need is the side to be visible and they can hit it and kill you regardless of angle. Ive done it to Panthers and Panzer IVs, Tigers I just simply hit the front lower bumper and it usually blows up like an Atomic bomb hit it. Also, that T34 wasnt angled hardly at all. I Know it has that 60 degree slope in its armor already and so I try for as stright on shots as I can get. My side shot that killed it was as straight on as you can get, I made sure of it, got nice and close and straight on....pow, dead haha. As for the armor is the armor i see in the .def files that different from MP? I see no where that it has that "from MP" not a mod" line for armor, its there for some guns penetration, fuel load and speed but not for armor. The T34's armor is on the hull "52/47/47/22ish. Turret: 47/47/47 ish, it shouldnt stand to a Panzer IVH and its KWK40 L48 gun at angle.....yet in MOW it does..very well. Only the T34/85's turret should stand even a slim chance of not being killed. The T34/85 in MP is the same hull armor as the T34 but its turret is like 90 on the front...so yeah. as for the Sherman...its armor is shit, it is in fact a worthless tank w/ a high silouhette so it really shouldnt be standing up to 7-8 side shots from the Pzr IV G at any distance. Its armor in game is like Turret: 64/37/37/25 Hull: 76/42/42/25 or something. So yeah, I had like 86 penetration at like the 110m I was against his side armor yet didnt go through. So I guess after all this im not convinced the Allies are balanced and I cant convince you the Germans suck eh? haha

The tanks shouldn't be balanced. If everything was balanced, perfectly matched, the war would still be at a stalemate. In the early stages of the war Germany was going against the Soviet KV-1s with Panzer IIs. Panzer IIs get bogged down due to thin tracks, and even though they hit the KV-1s they can not penetrate with what, a 37mm shell? A single KV-1 against 50 Panzer IIs will be able to take down 30-40 before running out of ammunition, while the Panzer IIs can only make a dent in the armor. There is no balance, nobody would want a tank equal to or worse then the enemy tanks. The Allied tanks were behind, and Germany did have better tanks before the Allies even landed in Normandy, way late in the war. Yeah the Allied tanks were good, against the Japaneese. Not so good against the Germans. In North Africa, the Allies were somewhat matched with the German tanks but not much better or worse.

they didnt attacked in 41 with the Panzer II alone. It saw some service but the main force was consisting of Panzer III and Panzer IV with short guns and they also had a few captured tzech tanks available which have been quite good. So letz not exagerate it.

Their main force consisted of 20mm and 37mm guns. Either way the KV-1 wins against Panzer II, III, and IV. Might be able to disable a KV-1 or get lucky with a shot to the rear. It has happened, 3 KV-1s totally destroyed a tank column in a ambush. Lt. Kolobanov, a KV-1 tank commander had 100+ hits on his hull but the 20mm and 37mm only dented his tank. I don't think Kolobanov would have liked a evenly matched fight, where the Panzer II could kill him. Everyone wants a technological advantage over the enemy. The Soviet Union had that advantage, easy to produce tanks that were the best for their time.

In Real Life noone wants a Play Balanced fight, but in a game there has to be and in every game the Germans are worse and the US/Russian stuff is unrealistically more powerful then the Germans. Even if the units stats arent stright up higher or better then hte Germans there are minor little things that make teh Allies better. In CoH the Germans have to follow some long ass expensive tree before they can get a Panzer IV G that you need 2 to be able to beat 1 M4 sherman, 3-5 to take on a M4 w/ the 76L upgrade. In MoW the Germans are less accurate, thier tanks crew slower, move slower, turrets traverse slower, which this is true for the Tiger and King Tiger and such but the Panzer IV/Panther, those kinda had turret motors did they not? The US guys are pin point accurate at all ranges in comparison to German guys, thier turrets can turn faster then their hull and can practically track a Jeep moving full speed, then commence to actually hit it while both vehicles are moving. maybe not the Short barrel guns but the 90 and 76 definitly, ive done the whole move and shoot thing over and over and over so I know thats how it goes. The Japanese imo are better then the Germans in this game. Sure they dont have King Kitty and IS3s but atleast they can hit something AND kill it from a good distance. The Chi To....that tank has a VERY good gun and decent armor, PLUS its a hellva lot more accurate then any German tank Ive used. Since 1.17.5 I got in some Japanese playing mood and played like 6 matches w/ them and I killed more Allied Tanks at longer ranges with less shots then I ever did with the Germans in all my games combined. I was quite amazed at how good that Chi To was. It even got hit quite a few times and didnt die as easily as the Panzy IV or even the Tiger I. I know were going ot go that Chi TO was never produced and was a 1944 tank but still, im not talking RL, im talking purely in game. The Japanese Infantry are not even that bad. THey lack in the AT Infantry dept. but they have some pretty good tanks. THe Chi Ri and Chi To are good the Chi Nu is decent, atleast equal to the Panzer IV G but with a better gun

1. Early T-34/76 was built as a versatile tank. Not only an anti tank weapon. It was also built for attacking, fighting in cities et cetra so having decent side and back armour would be pretty useful.
2. T-34/85 had significantly upgraded armour.
3. Panzer 4H is fine. Realistically the T-34/85 and Panzer 4H were pretty equal from what I've heard. While I would prefer a Panzer 4H over a T-34/85 (a bit better gun, cheaper) I never buy Panzer 4H. U could buy a much stronger Hetzer for the price of a Panzer 4H. Just like I rather buy Kv-85 than a T-34/85.

T-34's could be taken out from the front pretty easily by Panzer 4H's. I believe T-34/85 only has 60mm or so frontal armour, so the Panzer 4H should take 1 out at 80-90 meters.

lol wut? duno why u hate Germans and think their under powered. most people think the opposite. U just bad at playing them maybe??

Also always angle Tiger tank. It almost becomes invincible if angled.

Angeling a Panther is unwise, as it has very bad side armour.

issue with angling your tiger is that you expose your tracks and then your tiger is soon enough dead.

The Germans are not bad. They are just overkill. You end often enough in situations where you dont use the appropiate gear to counter the enemy armor like a Tiger I or Panther which have been excelent units but simply go for the "kill it all think later solution" that are the King, Jagd and Sturmtiger. And those are many times the vehicles you see. It doesnt mean that you dont see other vehicles. The panther is one of the most usefull vehicles if used correctly. Its just a bit ridiculous that you have trouble to penetrate sme tanks like the IS2 for example already from the side only cause the game decided now that youre shell is almost ineffective cause youre shooting from to far away ...

I prefer my game to be more realistic then balanced. The Germans have their big guns and land mines, and the Soviet Union had mass waves of infantry and fast tanks.

Totally agree.
Close Combat had eras and a HUGE variety of troop types; that game was in some respects much superior to MOW, although MOW is vastly superior in the eye candy department.
MOW has the illusion of a variety of troop types but when you sit down and look at what is available to the various factions, it really is all much the same for everyone, eg. tanks will come in small, bigger, big, and ginormous.
Pretty simplistic really.
And no eras.

go get GSM Mods, those have the semi Era thing going on and TONS more troops or the BoW 1.5 mod....they have loads more stuff to...atleast the Germans anywho, the Allied nations are pretty boring in any game, the US gets Shermans, the Russians get T34s and thats that haha

Then I think Men of War might be eventualy the wrong game for you. Without the intention to sound cocky or insult you. I thought about the game in a similar way and it meant a lot of frustration, at least in the begining. Till a friend told me I should not play realistic but witht the rules of the game. And now it works a lot easier and better. Men of war is a complex RTS with WW2 as theme. Its in no way a battlefield simulation. What ever if the intention was to give units realistic values or not but fact is that its a game first and anything else later. I personaly prefer realism over a lot of other things as well. But for a RTS you cant simply make evertyhing realistic. Not if you want to have some fun as well. Otherwise you would see Kingtigers destroy anything on ALL ranges with pin point accuracy (almost), sounds not all to fun does it ? Though now you would have to give the other side either a powerfull airforce and/or artillery units, making the Tiger II eventualy very vulnerable to mechanical problems meaning that only 5 % of them would see the battlefield in the end. Not that fun either ...

Its incredible hard to make a realistic game.

To limit those KingTigers in your example from marauding around at will you just give them that time limit before they are bought like many mods and even the base game has, just make it higher, then you put the max of 1 that you can buy and then make its cost VERY high. b/c realistically NO German armor was all that common, later war anyway. The few they did have were spread out all over europe but when they were fought they wrecked some serious havoc. So yeah, just make heavy German armor in the game expensive and take a while to get, but make it feared........soo many of the mods for this game have 1 or 2 features thats realistic-ish, if they all got togehter and really thought it over all the modders could really come up w/ a truly realistic mod..well as real as MOW will allow, and thats pretty close.

I have a different view of fun then most people. I charged a T29 with 3 tank crew squads, do the math and thats 32 tank crewmen.

There is only a chance of winning if the tank commander of a super heavy is a fool and allows somebody to stick TNT under the tank.

Obviously an IS2 shouldn't have much problems against a Panther.... 150m is equivalent of around 4000m or so IRL. I'm not sure.

This game is balanced very well. A T-34 vs Panzer 3 fight for example is decently realistic. Same with IS2 vs King Tiger. This game has combined realism and balance very well, imho.

I have never played Close Combat, but I have played a fantastic and hugely tactical turn-based game called Steel Panthers. The tank ranges in SP are much better represented and the game attempts to fight historical campaigns and has like 1000’s of historical battles. Contrary to MoW, which seems to be all about “technology race” (you see a Tiger = you buy a Pershing), you would have to apply different tactics and use 3 or more Shermans or T-34s or a tank assault squad to hunt a Tiger down. You could appreciate the might of the Tiger and the bravery of Sherman tank commanders more. If you wanted a Pershing you would have to play a battle set in 1945.

So for me, eras is a big yes.

IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey, has eras. If you set the MP game for planes only up to 1940, you wouldn't have the Me-262 as it was made past 1944. MoW needs something of the sort.

In this game, King tigers are ALWAYS targeted by both artillery and tanks. But instead of sending 3 tanks (where 2 of them would die) people simply wear down the King Tiger, before going in for the kill.

I think if we play 1943, Tiger 1 should cost as much as King Tiger, for example. This entire thing would take allot of work, but it would certainly be worth it!

By "in this game", you mean SP or MoW.

I expect it in Assault Squad, or a update for it later on at least. I don't think MoW will be patched, not for another year or two (more people working on Assault Squad and other projects, not enough to make a new MoW patch in just 4 months)