Rebalancing of tanks needed!

[Nikitns]

Originally Posted by Crni vuk

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Evilsausage]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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.

[Crni vuk]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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.

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

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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.

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.

[Nikitns]

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.

[Zeke Wolff]

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.

[KnightFandragon]

Originally Posted by Nikitns

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 150mm...

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

[Crni vuk]

Originally Posted by KnightFandragon

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.

[Nikitns]

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

[Crni vuk]

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

[Korsakov829]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.