The Truth Behind Russian VS Tank Difference At the Start of The War

[Guest]

Before anyone talks about tank performance in this game I think it's important for War Thunder to make it obvious to all players just what their priority is. Is it playability over historical accuracy, or game balance over realism. How ever you cut it, they should have a clearly defined statement letting all players know how they are cutting the pie on this important issue. 

 

The frustration of players is increase when they come at this game thinking oh I will get a historical only to find out that it's more based on game balance. The same if their expectation is the other way around and expect a game that is too historical and not balanced at all. 

 

By making this widely known the expectation of players is going to be greatly enhanced, or at least, the disappointment factor will be reduced. 

 

Here are elements of German Vs. Russian Tanks that are overlooked in the game but had a great deal of effect on the battlefield. 

 

Optics: This is often much overlooked. The optical targeting system in German tanks were vastly superior early in the war. This allowed less powerfully armed German tanks often out shoot Russian tanks. This would be easy to simulate in the game by altering green and red zones and allowing this to be bought off by improvement in aim score for crew. 

 

In the game as it is all Optics are the same. 

 

Lack of Radio: This was severely impairing early on in the war. This allowed German tanks to coordinate information and during battle.  Again this could be done within the parameters of the game without adding or changing much. 

 

Larger Crew: It's very simple. With more people tanks were easier to operate and manage in battle. Most German tanks had 5 man Crews. At firs the Russians scoffed at this idea sticking with their 4 man crew but soon learned better. This could be like the radio represented by better vision and better repairs in battle. Not requiring much change in the game.  Once again the game assumes this is all the same value in play. 1 crew man, 10 crewman no difference. 

 

Sloped Armor: Of all the issues in War thunder the ability of Sloped armor to deflect shots defy's logic.  Due to ballistic arcs and different elevations sloped armor was often no good at all. This is not well reflected within the game that makes the deflection value of armor always relevant.  

 

II. The power of sloped armor was not in deflection but in it's longer cross sectional area. This made thinner armor equal to thicker armor. Because deflection in this game is used more to simulate sloped armor far too many shots are deflected. 

 

III. Sloped armor was murder on the crew. Sloped  armor steals space from inside the tank making it difficult to operate. Thus that reloading while moving in tanks like the t-34 was very difficult. Even cross country travel could be brutal. Reduced room meant gas and fumes from the engine and gun would often overcome the crews after prolonged battle. 

 

Second Generation Tanks: 

By the second generation of German tanks the Tiger and the Panther tanks the pendulum swung in the direction for the Germans for firepower and armor. 

 

By the battle of Kursk one of the first battle for Tiger and Panthers the T-34 was so outclassed that most of them were simply buried and used as pill boxes. (Read Panzer Commander by Von Luck) The tike could kill at 1000 Meters while the T-34 had to get well within 300 meters before having an effect. This lead to huge number of Russian tank casualties.  You will never see this in war thunder as it is. This could be for game balance but there should be some nod made towards the historical accuracy. 

 

One Fault with War Thunder

The 88 cannon is far too underpowered in this game. The Tiger I should be killing like the tiger II, The 88 was lethal from one end of the war to the other. No tanker ever brushed off an 88 position as inconsequential. They do not need to be turned up in power, just turn down the deflection and I think this will more accurately represent the killing power of the 88. High velocity weapons should deflect less then slower cannons. 

 

II. Worse of all is the side and engine great shot. I have kept track of my 88 tank hits to the rear of other tanks.  Let's put it this way Iraq showed that the new RPG's can take out any AFV from a rear shot. 88's hit much harder then any RPG. Rear kills and shots to the top grill are no where near enough lethal. You do not have to make the 88 that much more deadly just allow it to kill from the rear like it should. How my shot deflects of the rear of a t-34 as often as it does is a mystery of game mechanics. 

 

 

[App4that@psn 1,988]

The optics are not the same, get in a T-34-57 mod 43 and then a Panzer IV F2. Major difference, the same can be said for some others.

 

I get kill assists with my boosted radio operator if I highlight a target that someone kills. I also see an increase in spotting.

 

Square off with someone while driving a T-34, you're dead. Now in the same tank against the same enemy, give yourself a slight angle. Much better chance of surviving the shot. If you don't want to try it in battle go into a test drive and hit a T-34 square, then at an angle.

 

A larger crew would be nice.

 

If you attack a T-34 with a Tiger without fear and the knowledge of where they keep the goods, the T-34 dies just fine from an 88 shell.

 

I think the idea that the 88 is underpowered is a bit of a case of over reliance on the shell to do the work. Nothing in my Russian line up is impervious to a sudden and terminal case of ammorackitus.

[Wenin 2,654]

:Ds <-> :facepalm:

 

Do we integrate too randomly breaking down Tiger/Panther tanks if you try to move, remove PzGr 40 from german tanks because of tungsten shortage, cut down the number of Tiger/Panther tanks so that only 1-2 guys on the team can drive them etc?

 

Sloped Armor: Of all the issues in War thunder the ability of Sloped armor to deflect shots defy's logic.  Due to ballistic arcs and different elevations sloped armor was often no good at all. This is not well reflected within the game that makes the deflection value of armor always relevant.

II. The power of sloped armor was not in deflection but in it's longer cross sectional area. This made thinner armor equal to thicker armor. Because deflection in this game is used more to simulate sloped armor far too many shots are deflected.

That's entirely wrong. German 37mm and 50mm rounds reportedly often bounced from the Armour of T-34 tanks. Same applies to other tanks and great angles.

 

Optics: This is often much overlooked. The optical targeting system in German tanks were vastly superior early in the war. This allowed less powerfully armed German tanks often out shoot Russian tanks. This would be easy to simulate in the game by altering green and red zones and allowing this to be bought off by improvement in aim score for crew.

Well... source? Reason? Both were comparable in FoV and Magnification (~2,5x and 26° FoV). (And I want to see how you shoot out a T-34 in a Pz II *g*)

 

III. Sloped armor was murder on the crew. Sloped  armor steals space from inside the tank making it difficult to operate. Thus that reloading while moving in tanks like the t-34 was very difficult. Even cross country travel could be brutal. Reduced room meant gas and fumes from the engine and gun would often overcome the crews after prolonged battle.

T-34 were roomier then Pz IV, which were due to the Turret basket (in the Pz IV) rather low in the Fighting Compartment (still Pz IV), severely cramping the crews space (again Pz IV). Edit to clarify Pz IV

Fumes have more to do with Venting and it was a problem with basically all tanks of WW2 and was afaik more or less fixed with fume extraxtors like of the T-54A.

 

By the battle of Kursk one of the first battle for Tiger and Panthers the T-34 was so outclassed that most of them were simply buried and used as pill boxes. (Read Panzer Commander by Von Luck)

I've my doubts about the impact of the Tiger and the Panther, since most Panther tanks broke down before they reached the front and Tigers were so few...

And is that one of the typical "My Tiger should only fight T-34 from 1942 and 1941, but T-34 shouldn't fight my early Pz. III and IV because it's unfair and should only fight Tiger"?

 

One Fault with War Thunder

The 88 cannon is far too underpowered in this game. The Tiger I should be killing like the tiger II, The 88 was lethal from one end of the war to the other. No tanker ever brushed off an 88 position as inconsequential. They do not need to be turned up in power, just turn down the deflection and I think this will more accurately represent the killing power of the 88. High velocity weapons should deflect less then slower cannons.

I don't think Gaijin changes game parameters because "you feel" it should be like this.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Wenin

[Radom 4,245]

Issue is that all maps with exception of Kursk and maybe Carpathian (to smaller degree) are the only German long range gun friendly maps. Agree with the balance vs historical but that can be easily fixed if gun performance could be adjusted in SB. You want realistic, then great lets make SB the true hostorical mode. Its hard to please everyone though.

[RohmMohc 11,494]

 

remove PzGr 40 from german tanks

ya mean like in the Panther D, the Tiger H1, the IV/70?

 

Do we integrate too randomly breaking down Tiger/Panther

And the T-34s too :) they also weren'T that reliable... it just didn't matter if 40 of 100 were out of service for a time...

Edited August 18, 2014 by RohmMohc

[Wenin 2,654]

And the T-34s too :) they also weren'T that reliable... it just didn't matter if 40 of 100 were out of service for a time...

I call 2000km before they need a bigger repair rather reliable =)

ya mean like in the Panther D, the Tiger H1, the IV/70?

Since 75mm L/70 APCR was never really used... Edit: And I guess the Tiger H1 doesn't get's it because the later one then should get it progressionwise, although this is historical wrong. Edited August 19, 2014 by Wenin

[Radom 4,245]

Wenin, T-34 did not have a turret baket

[Wenin 2,654]

Wenin, T-34 did not have a turret baket

Where did I said that?

[RohmMohc 11,494]

 

Since 75mm L/70 APCR was never really used...

ya mean in the same way as the ISU-152s HEAT Round was never really used in WW2, against Jagdtigers?...

[Radom 4,245]

I call 2000km before they need a repair rather reliable =)

Since 75mm L/70 APCR was never really used...

Thats incorrect, T-34 engines required rebuild after 30-40 hour run time. Thats not enough to cover 2000km even if hou left factory and just kept on driving nonstop for 30-40 hr.

[Radom 4,245]

T-34 were roomier then Pz IV, which were due to the Turret basket (in the Pz IV) rather low in the Fighting Compartment (still Pz IV), severely cramping the crew.

Did I misunderstood you? Do you mean T-34 had a basket or that T-34 was roomier do to lock of basket? Edited August 18, 2014 by Radom

[Unit757 1,561]

Great, another history channel historian here to tell us how WWII tank combat really was.

 

 

Also,

 

Thats incorrect, T-34 engines required rebuild after 30-40 hour run time. Thats not enough to cover 2000km even if hou left factory and just kept on driving nonstop for 30-40 hr.

40 hours at the T-34's max speed is enough to cover ~2100KM.  Try again. 

 

 

Did I misunderstood you? Do you mean T-34 had a basket or that T-34 was roomier do to lock of basket?

Yes, although it was very clear in her post, you somehow found a way to completely misunderstand what was said. 

[Wenin 2,654]

ya mean in the same way as the ISU-152s HEAT Round was never really used in WW2, against Jagdtigers?...

What has the use against a specific tank to do with that?^^ (the same way Panter Ausf. F, II, Tiger II with KwK 46 and T-54 didn't fought in world war 2^^)

 

Thats incorrect, T-34 engines required rebuild after 30-40 hour run time. Thats not enough to cover 2000km even if hou left factory and just kept on driving nonstop for 30-40 hr.

"For most of the war the V-2 engine had a lifespan of around 100 hours" (until 1943, then it increased up to 300hrs)

 

Did I misunderstood you? Do you mean T-34 had a basket or that T-34 was roomier do to lock of basket?

The Panzerkampfwagen IV has a turret basket. The T-34 not. The Panzerkampfwagen IV's fighting compartment height is lower then that of the T-34.

[Radom 4,245]

Unit757, what do you think was the average crosscountry speed of T-34? It was 25km/h so even at 40 hr drive time 25x40=1000

[App4that@psn 1,988]

On the subject of the much talked about 88mm German cannon, I will share an anicdote of my second outing in my fancy much ground for T-44.

 

Saw another T-44, a few light hits exchanged and it decided to bug out for some reason and I gave him 85mm of ammoration H. While taking the zone saw a Tiger 2 and gave it a peck on the cheek, my death was instantaneous.

 

Spawned and rushed the zone, Tiger 2 still in place. sliding down hill lined up shot. my death was instantaneous.

 

Spawned in my SU-100 and rushed the zone. my death was instantaneous.

 

What did I learn? Don't feed the Tigers...

[Waldkriecher 1,534]

:Ds <-> :facepalm:

 

Do we integrate too randomly breaking down Tiger/Panther tanks if you try to move, remove PzGr 40 from german tanks because of tungsten shortage, cut down the number of Tiger/Panther tanks so that only 1-2 guys on the team can drive them etc?

 

That's entirely wrong. German 37mm and 50mm rounds reportedly often bounced from the Armour of T-34 tanks. Same applies to other tanks and great angles.

 

Well... source? Reason? Both were comparable in FoV and Magnification (~2,5x and 26° FoV). (And I want to see how you shoot out a T-34 in a Pz II *g*)

 

T-34 were roomier then Pz IV, which were due to the Turret basket (in the Pz IV) rather low in the Fighting Compartment (still Pz IV), severely cramping the crews space (again Pz IV). Edit to clarify Pz IV

Fumes have more to do with Venting and it was a problem with basically all tanks of WW2 and was afaik more or less fixed with fume extraxtors like of the T-54A.

 

I've my doubts about the impact of the Tiger and the Panther, since most Panther tanks broke down before they reached the front and Tigers were so few...

And is that one of the typical "My Tiger should only fight T-34 from 1942 and 1941, but T-34 shouldn't fight my early Pz. III and IV because it's unfair and should only fight Tiger"?

 

I don't think Gaijin changes game parameters because "you feel" it should be like this.

 

 

You never stop do you? Such a biased person, you NEVER post ANYTHING in favor of axis tanks. And a lot of "facts" pulled right out of your behind.

 

Can I get a source for the 2000h average for the T34? Were those 2000 hours on train carts?

Can I have a detailed source about "most" Panther breaking down before getting to the battlefield? And I am talking about ALL variants.

 

But keep spewing your nonsense about stronk reliable sovjet tanks. They had a lot of issues as well depending on model and variant.

 

Btw. can we nerf the KV2 to complete useless as it was in RL? Can we nerf the reverse speeds of IS tanks too? Can we remove post war ammo as well? I never see you posting that.........I wonder why comrade.

 

PS; You and people like you are responsible for the state WT is now, blind Sovjet fanboism with a hint of behindkissing to GJ.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Shermington

[ThePfeil 1,697]

On the subject of the much talked about 88mm German cannon, I will share an anicdote of my second outing in my fancy much ground for T-44.

 

Saw another T-44, a few light hits exchanged and it decided to bug out for some reason and I gave him 85mm of ammoration H. While taking the zone saw a Tiger 2 and gave it a peck on the cheek, my death was instantaneous.

 

Spawned and rushed the zone, Tiger 2 still in place. sliding down hill lined up shot. my death was instantaneous.

 

Spawned in my SU-100 and rushed the zone. my death was instantaneous.

 

What did I learn? Don't feed the Tigers...

Should have learned: Don't expect realistic ballistics and DMs in Arcade (just like with planes) ;)s

 

On the topic/discussion: Pz IV also had 5 crew members, while T-34 had only 4 (disadvantage since the commander also had to work as gunner) and the engine on the T-34 was pretty reliable, the transmission had severe issues in the early years.

[Unit757 1,561]

Unit757, what do you think was the average crosscountry speed of T-34? It was 25km/h so even at 40 hr drive time 25x40=1000

 

I liked how you pulled a random number out of your xxx to dispute something.  Also, lets get a reliable source on your hilarious claims.  History channel doesnt count. 

 

 

You never stop do you? Such a biased person, you NEVER post ANYTHING in favor of axis tanks. And a lot of "facts" pulled right out of your behind.

 

Can I get a source for the 2000h average for the T34? Were those 2000 hours on train carts?

Can I have a detailed source about "most" Panther breaking down before getting to the battlefield? And I am talking about ALL variants.

 

But keep spewing your nonsense about stronk reliable sovjet tanks. They had a lot of issues as well depending on model and variant.

 

Btw. can we nerf the KV2 to complete useless as it was in RL? Can we nerf the reverse speeds of IS tanks too? Can we remove post war ammo as well? I never see you posting that.........I wonder why comrade.

 

PS; You and people like you are responsible for the state WT is now, blind Sovjet fanboism with questioning.

 

Maybe that's because unlike you, she, like many, don't live in the fantasy world were German tanks were godlike? 

 

Also, can I have a detailed reliable source on your reading credentials?  How does 2000KM suddenly become 2000 hours? 

You are probably one of the worst wehraboos on this forum.  Thank god the devs are smart enough not to listen to you. 


Im really liking how your blaming other players for the state of a beta though. 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Unit757

[Radom 4,245]

What has the use against a specific tank to do with that?^^ (the same way Panter Ausf. F, II, Tiger II with KwK 46 and T-54 didn't fought in world war 2^^)
 

"For most of the war the V-2 engine had a lifespan of around 100 hours" (until 1943, then it increased up to 300hrs)
 

The Panzerkampfwagen IV has a turret basket. The T-34 not. The Panzerkampfwagen IV's fighting compartment height is lower then that of the T-34.

Not arguing the "official" engine endurance numbers which were often misrepresented. True the average V-2 (V-2-34 was the post 1943 model) engine lifespan was around 100hr but one crucial point is often neglected and that is the relative poor fuel quality and that the fuel filters were often removed and not replaced with new ones once they became clogged. This cut the engine life by more thsn 50%. Afcourse one can argue that this was not happening in every case but it did happen often enough that new basket spiral type "washable" filters were implemented.

[Wenin 2,654]

Can I get a source for the 2000h average for the T34? Were those 2000 hours on train carts?
Can I have a detailed source about "most" Panther breaking down before getting to the battlefield? And I am talking about ALL variants.
 
Btw. can we nerf the KV2 to complete useless as it was in RL? Can we nerf the reverse speeds of IS tanks too? Can we remove post war ammo as well? I never see you posting that.........I wonder why comrade.

Jentz, Panther Tank the Quest for Combat Supremacy page 132.
Unreasoned cries for nerf are surely not the way to go. Sourced Bugreports to adjust performance is the better way.
Do a bug report if you have reliable sources which contradict ingame stats.
We also have APCR ammo for the germans and unlimited special shells for all.
And why should I post this senseless in topics without any relevance to them?

 

True the average V-2 (V-2-34 was the post 1943 model)

"The designation V-2 was used for the BD-2 starting in 1937. The last two years before actual serial production started, have been used for debugging the design. Several smaller series were produced and finally in December 1939 the engine received a go for mass production. Only factory producing the engine was placed in Kharkov, which became a serious issue when the war broke out.
After the V-2 was accepted for service use, mass production was started and speeded up very quickly. At the same time, several versions of the V-2 were designed and taken into production one by one.
The original V-2 was used for one vehicle only, the BT-7M.

V-2-34
First Appearance: 1939
Country: USSR

The V-2-34 is a version of the V-2 adjusted for the usage in the famous T-34 tank." Edited August 19, 2014 by Wenin

[HELL1986 1,216]

You have some things right there, but not all.

 

- GE stated the matter of attrition and maintanance will not me simulated (Panthers breaking down, Yak-9 K damaged by recoil, ...)

 

- War Thunder is "historical"? Come on... really? Nothing close to historical or being a simulation. Maybe they should let you know that, but where do they advertise that?

 

- Different optics are announced in the CBT:GF QNA.

 

- You are right with the points about radio and crew. They chose not to implement the differences.

  (not implementing something may be fair, because it is not implemented for every tank,

  but by choosing what to implement and what not to implement you affect balance when your choices hide the weaknesses of a given tank or nation)

 

- Sloped armor? The whole damage and armor system is ****. Hits into the roof or the floor of a tank mostly result in a *hit*.

  Shots bounce at angles of more than 20° and good penetrating hits result into *hit*, because nothing essential was directly behind it.

  What about shell deformation, shrapnell effeckt, shockwaves, explosive and concussive force? The effeckt of sloped armor is totally exaggerated and the disadvanteges simply overlooked.

  (sloped armor costs space and is at a big disadvantage when it comes to explosions and shrapnell)

 

- The problem is not the gun or its ammo, but the damage models, armor models and damage simulation.

  There is no chance that a T-34 can take an 88 hit to the side and take no damage (*hit*). That maybe happened 1:1000000 yet in the game it happens all the time.

  Or that the tracks eat a shell and the tank is not damaged. That's WOT crap that should not be in WT. (Heat shells are an exception here)

[Waldkriecher 1,534]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mIu4aFZb_FA/UavRdzOUWhI/AAAAAAAAA3c/9AIvtKtGlm8/s1600/reliability-1.jpg

Jentz, Panther Tank the Quest for Combat Supremacy page 132.

Why should I cry for nerfs like a little child?

Do a bug report if you have reliable sources which contradict ingame stats.

We also have APCR ammo for the germans and unlimited special shells for all.

And why should I post this senseless in topics without any relevance to them?

 

Hahaha lol.........thanks for that worthless kiddie "source". I am looking for an article with a lot of sources comrade, of all the variants and years. 2000km without ANY repairs is hard to believe btw, especially for a WW2 tank. Strange that you already admitted that the early models were utter floral when it comes to reliability.

 

You should ask for balance, someone who thinks realism is important surely doesn't want post war ammo and unrealistic tank characteristics? Oh yes you do, as long as they benefit glorious sovjet tanks.

 

Show me another thread were you posted something in favor of Axis tanks (and not just removel of headlights which you probably are against). You are deeply biased without questioning the development of this game. 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Shermington

[Unit757 1,561]

In this thread, Shermington disputes a source from Jentz.




Seriously, get out.  If your going to go as low as to dispute a source from Jentz simply because it disagrees with your twisted world youve created for yourself, you have no place taking part in this, or any discussion about WWII. 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Unit757

[Waldkriecher 1,534]

In this thread, Shermington disputes a source from Jentz.




Seriously, get out.  If your going to go as low as to dispute a source from Jentz simply because it disagrees with your twisted world youve created for yourself, you have no place taking part in this, or any discussion about WWII. 

 

 

 

 

I dispute selectively linking pictures that have nothing to do with reality. So most T34 in the entire war had a 2000km average without ANY repairs? BULLSHIT.

 

Unlike you I actually live in reality and you will be hard pressed to find where I stated unrealistic expactations of Axis tanks. Go ahead and link some, I dare you.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Shermington

[App4that@psn 1,988]

That chart is awesome LOL. Oh, third time out with the T-44. Gave several German tanks a sensual massage, my death was instantaneous.