Rebalancing of tanks needed!

[Nikitns]

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.

[Nikitns]

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.

[Evilsausage]

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.

[Nikitns]

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.

[Nikitns]

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.

[Nikitns]

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.

[KnightFandragon]

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.

[KnightFandragon]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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.

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.

[Crni vuk]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Nikitns

3. Make Su-100 more powerful.

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.

Originally Posted by Nikitns

Panthers should be cheaper and have much worse side armour.

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 ...

Originally Posted by Evilsausage

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.

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.

Originally Posted by KnightFandragon

Whats bad about he SU100? ive seen it tons and it seems to be pretty dang dangerous as is.

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.

[KnightFandragon]

Originally Posted by Crni vuk

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.

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.