T 34 too weak?

[Caveman]

After playing some russian scenarios, I think T 34 is too weak against Panzer III and IV. Ok, histoicaly it could have been the numbers than the specs making it so fearsome to the Germans... Maybe there could be additional "multiple front" or "horde" bonus for T34.

Surrounding bonus is far to weak against the big Tanks. I surrounded a Tiger I with 4 Infantry, one KV2 and one SU 152 - no real improvement in lose-win stats (Infantry would take 5 damage instead of 7 with no damage to Tiger). All I can do is let him shoot empty....

But I still love the game, great job!

[soldier]

I agree that the T 34 is quite weak in this game. The Pz III H & Js are statistically equal in most ways when the Russian tank actually had a number of well known advantages. Worse is that T 34's defense of 11 does not improve at all until the 85mm model, so this means that T 34 43 has virtually no improvement over the 1940 model. By the time Operation Blue has come around its already clearly outclassed by the newer and more experienced German models. Similarly the 85mm model suffers from that inability to hurt the big cats that all medium tanks have in this game. Overall T 34 is a strong tank in Panzer Corps and puts up a fair fight but lacks that toughness its so well known for and doesn't upgrade well in my opinion.

I used to play a lot of steel panthers and that game has a great model for armour penetration. Size of shot, velocity of mussel, distance of target, angle of target, thickness of armour and slope of armour are all taken into account and the early model PZ III and IV's just cannot penetrate unless they get dangerously close or come from behind. You get worried when T 34's are around.

but don't take it from me, listen to the guys who know

"It was the most excellent example of the offensive weapon of Second World War." - General Mellentin.

"Their T-34 was the best in the world." - Field marshal Kleist.

[Fritz]

I think its fine how the way it is. Still the IS-2 is too strong for my taste.

[Xerkis]

I agree too.

Back when playing PG whenever I saw a T-34 come in to view my heart would sink. I had that same instinctive reaction the first time I came across one in Panzer Coprs – but quickly came to the realization that, “hey these are easy to kill”

[texican]

I don't know how they get the 11 armor for the T34; they might just be using a measure of thickness, but the T34 had sloping which the Mk III's and IV's did not, and this makes a huge difference and a much higher effective armor rating. I'd think a T34, even early model, ought to be a 13 at least.

And, sorry, but I cannot see any Mk III or IV justifying over a 10 or 11 armor rating; those things were toast when they ran into T34's.

[doc99]

i also think the T-34 is under-rated as the 11 figure is a comparitive quantative or raw value that does not take into effect the qualatative value of sloped armor that may effectively raise the number to 12 or 13

[johndoe2]

I agree too.

Back when playing PG whenever I saw a T-34 come in to view my heart would sink. I had that same instinctive reaction the first time I came across one in Panzer Coprs – but quickly came to the realization that, “hey these are easy to kill”

I remember that well! You had to prepare yourself for the appearance of the T-34 - having overstrength Stuka R was imperative and you had to couple it with the 88 (which could be used aggressively)… The game was much more dynamic back then because of that.

[skarczew]

And, sorry, but I cannot see any Mk III or IV justifying over a 10 or 11 armor rating; those things were toast when they ran into T34's.

Surely, they exploded with envy from the mere sight of The Best Tank In The World (according to such respectful sources as Military Channel, at least).

Sloped armor is not everything in the world, guys - it gives both some advantages and disadvantages. Moreover, you can't compare the quality of German steel of that time with the Russian one.
The quality of USSR products in that time (especially beginning of the war) was quite disastrous. Try to do research about the loses during Barbarossa caused by the faults in the construction, very bad production, etc.

Maybe there could be additional "multiple front" or "horde" bonus for T34.

Should be. The power of T-34 was in its numbers. In m opinion T-34 "units" should have strength of 15.

Worse is that T 34's defense of 11 does not improve at all until the 85mm model, so this means that T 34 43 has virtually no improvement over the 1940 model.

Because there was no historical improvement? The only thing that was changed was the turret armor of new T-34/85, AFAIR. The hull armor did not undergo almost any changes for all the years.
Every big change would reflect on production. And anything that was detrimental to production speed was bad. "Quantity has a quality on its own!"

Russians themselves figured out in late 42 or early 43 that "the tank is outclassed by everything the enemy has". That was the impulse to create T-34/85, which was a decent match for German Pz IV H. Not for Panter or Tiger, though - but they were from "slightly" different class of tanks.

Still the IS-2 is too strong for my taste.

True. A real best that just loves to attack (and win) from river hexes.

I used to play a lot of steel panthers and that game has a great model for armour penetration. Size of shot, velocity of mussel, distance of target, angle of target, thickness of armour and slope of armour are all taken into account and the early model PZ III and IV's just cannot penetrate unless they get dangerously close or come from behind. You get worried when T 34's are around.

I have heard good things about this game, but does it take the "quality" into account as well?

Also, take in mind that lots of western publications glorify T-34 beyond limits, and flame Sherman to be the worst thing in the world. And imho Sherman was better tank than T-34.

If someone wants to read how great T-34 was, google "Evaluation of tanks T-34 and KV by workers of the Aberdeen testing grounds of the U.S.".

[MarsRobert]

Well, ahem, being the German player, I'm not complaining about this too, too, much. I mean, the scenarios are hard enough as it is.

Having said that, I agree that maybe the T-34's are perhaps a tad understrength in the early-to-mid East front scenarios. By contrast, I recall in John Tiller's great WW2 campaigns game that when playing as the Germans in Case Blue the T-34's could be a real horror show to deal with on occasion.

However, those big Soviet monster tanks in the latter scenarios are a nightmare!

[Razz1]

The only thing I see is to decrease the cost by 20 each unit.

Otherwise the T-34 series is balanced against the German tanks.

You could update the Ground defense by one to 10,11,12 but then you would have to increase the hard attack by one of the following PZ III J,L,M.

Plus if you do this the T-34 will be far superior to all German tanks until the PZ III J is developed, so I think that is a backwards change.

Right now the T-34 has a higher Initiative so they will fire first. It is higher than the other PZ 3 series along with a higher ground defense.

Statistics look good. Cost should be less so we see more T-34's, in fact 30 to 40 prestige less may be appropiate.

[alex0809]

I also think the T34 is too weak. Not in terms of game balance (so I think it's not so important), but compared to its strength in reality.

AFAIK, the T34 "on paper" was unbelievably superior to the German tanks in '41. Early Panzer III and IV tanks stood no chance, only with the long-barelled 50mm the Panzer III was a bit more potent again, and the Panzer IV was really really outclassed until the long-barelled 75mm was introduced.
That's not "glorifying the tank", that's a fact. After all, as soon as the T34 was discovered the Germans (I guess partially also because of the KV tanks), you could almost call it overreacted and immediately (re-)started development of their heavy tanks.
However, it had a lot of shortcomings too. First of all, when the T34 really was outclassing ANY German tank on the battlefield by far, it was only used in extremely low numbers so the Germans could (after all they had radio equipment which the Russians were lacking too) encircle the T34 and destroy it (there goes your T34 horde bonus ). And the Germans also had their StuKas.

Should be. The power of T-34 was in its numbers. In m opinion T-34 "units" should have strength of 15.

Not true. In '41 the T34's were scarce and they inflicted heavy casualties in direct tank to tank combat (it usually wasn't the German tanks that got em, it was Howitzers, FlaK's, air support etc)

Sloped armor is not everything in the world, guys - it gives both some advantages and disadvantages.

What are the disadvantages? The purpose of armor is protection, sloping armor increases protection. Or am I missing something?

Face it guys, the T34 was the best tank of World War 2, even if you leave the fact aside that is was produced in high numbers. Compared to other medium tanks it still was superb. (maybe the crew didn't feel so comfy inside, though). It was German tactics that won the tank battles, not their superior tanks (until later in the war).

[TheGrayMouser]

Dont forget though, the T-34 had issues besides "crew discomfort"

All versions prior to the T34/85 (not introduced until 1944) had only a 2 man turret, which meant the commander had to load /shoot the main weapon, as well as command the tank. Not a very good arrangment, and as you point out, the lack of radios would have made the T-34 relative value to the panzers similar to how things were in 1940 for the french ( French tanks: bigger, better armour, weopon, 2 man turret)

Visibility was a concern as well for the driver , so seeking good ground for cover could be an issue and the commander had to deal with the odd desighn of his hatch which opened fowrward , making leading his tank unbuttoned not as efficient as the panzers.

Not sure in what situations one of the above posters meant sloped armour had some disadvantages, except maybe in ergonimics etc. However, slope doesnt automatically give better protection in all circumastamces, larger diameter shells under certain velocities could punch thru sloped armour as if it wasnt sloped at all.

That being said, the stats of all T-34's were higher in the original PG (or at least PG Forever)

BTW, what is the deal with the Mark IVJ ?? Slightly higher stats that the H but the fuel jumps from like 50 or so up to 80! Typo? Seems odd as the tank used the same chassis.

[impar]

BTW, what is the deal with the Mark IVJ ?? Slightly higher stats that the H but the fuel jumps from like 50 or so up to 80! Typo? Seems odd as the tank used the same chassis.

I think that was the version made for easier production with less features, resulting in larger inner space and larger fuel tanks occupied the extra space.

[alex0809]

BTW, what is the deal with the Mark IVJ ?? Slightly higher stats that the H but the fuel jumps from like 50 or so up to 80! Typo? Seems odd as the tank used the same chassis.

The J was more or less identical do the H, but instead of the generator that was used to rotate the turret, an additional fuel tank was built in. Don't ask me why they did that, though (I'd think having to rotate the turret manually is a really really big disadvantage in combat - and why did they need a larger fuel tank, they didn't have any fuel left anyway)

[TheGrayMouser]

Ahh, thanks guys for that info on the J

Hmm, if they stripped it down youd think the combat stats would be less than the H

Oh well no biggie, by the time those tanks are available in game you are much better off getting panthers anyhow:)

[alex0809]

I thought the same actually. Imho initiative should be a bit lower - having to manually rotate the turret gotta be bad for offensive - on defensive as you are static its propably not so bad. But in the end its just an abstracted value of a game anyway and there are a lot of other unrealistic stats too.

[impar]

The J was more or less identical do the H, but instead of the generator that was used to rotate the turret, an additional fuel tank was built in. Don't ask me why they did that, though...

From German Tanks of World War II, by Dr. S. Hart and Dr. R. Hart, page 77.

[Sharkyzero]

You just gave me a book to read impar.

[aleader]

Face it guys, the T34 was the best tank of World War 2, even if you leave the fact aside that is was produced in high numbers. Compared to other medium tanks it still was superb. (maybe the crew didn't feel so comfy inside, though). It was German tactics that won the tank battles, not their superior tanks (until later in the war).

Taking fuel shortages out of the equation, I would take 10 Panthers over 10 T-34s any day...

[alex0809]

Taking fuel shortages out of the equation, I would take 10 Panthers over 10 T-34s any day...

Got me there...
I agree, I actually think the Panther is the best tank of World War 2. It's just debatable whether the Panther is really a "medium" tank. After all, it's as heavy as the IS2.
Maybe I shouldn't declare something "best of" so fast...