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

[Unit757 1,561]

I dispute selectively linking pictures that have nothing to do with reality. So most T34 in the entire war had a 2000km average? 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.

Just keep digging that hole. 

Meanwhile, in the real world. 
 

[Radom 4,245]

Unit757 sure trolls hard.

[Waldkriecher 1,534]

Just keep digging that hole. 

Meanwhile, in the real world. 
 

 

Show me where I stated unrealistic things about Axis tanks, I double dare you!

 

 

This is such a hard case of projection.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Shermington

[Wenin 2,654]

You should ask for balance, someone who thinks realism is important surely doesn't want post war ammo and unrealistic tank characteristics?
 
Show me another thread were you posted something in favor of Axis tanks (and not just removel of headlights which you probably are against).

What now, balance or realism?
And which unrealistic tank characteristics?^^

http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/142364-panzer-iii-ausf-l-mit-waffe-0725/page-3#entry2943386
^-^

[Unit757 1,561]

Unit757 sure trolls hard.

Only when its warranted ;)

 

Show me where I stated unrealistic things about Axis tanks, I double dare you!

 

 

This is such a hard case of projection.

And suddenly this has gone from you disputing a source from Jentz, to me apparently claiming you do demand unrealistic things for Axis vehicles?  What? 

[HELL1986 1,216]

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

 

Having problems being good in a T-44? Hm... maybe this is not the right game for you. Have you tried "hello kitty online"?

[App4that@psn 1,988]

Having problems being good in a T-44? Hm... maybe this is not the right game for you. Have you tried "hello kitty online"?

Yeah, totally Japanese biased though. So I came here.

[garnett101st 256]

KV2 can zoom across terrain and move it's cannon where ever (when it could only do so on flat terrain), yet the Tigers cannon gets blocked by head lights that would normally taken off in combat, oh and the transmission fires baby! 

Stronk tanks have no disadvantages! Not one disadvantage I can think of at this moment, maybe other than pen but that doesn't matter when you have your natural advantage of superior speed and mobility, and makes it even more useful when your enemy doesn't have his natural advantages of more crew members, better optics, ect.

 

Oh wait! Lets not forget the artificial weight limit imposed that effects German TD's more so than the Russian ones! 

[Radom 4,245]

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? "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-2-34First Appearance: 1939Country: USSRThe V-2-34 is a version of the V-2 adjusted for the usage in the famous T-34 tank."

You are correct the V-2-34 engine was the production one

[IsaakRiv94 5,260]

Quick! Get the archive awareness guy to prove that T-34's were far superior than german tonks!!

[Azumazi 2,848]

Actually, you guys are right, and wrong.

 

That chart isn't for repairs, it's for "Overhaul" on the engine. Meaning it could go up to 2000-2500km before it needed an overhaul of the engine. Which is on par with the M4 Sherman. That doesn't mean it didn't need regular maintenance and basic repairs every 500km.

 

As already mentioned, it did have fuel filter issues early war along with a few other problems but overall it was pretty reliable.

[Shanzival 210]

Quick! Get the archive awareness guy to prove that T-34's were far superior than german tonks!!

I turn your attention to a little contest that happened between 1941 and 1945. The results were rather definitive.

[Cruella_Mortemo 4,710]

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. 

 

 

Let's pull this down to base logical form shall we. The IS4, T-54, Panther II and KT102mm should not be in the game.

 

Remove those, and suddenly balancing becomes rather easy. So the real question is, why could I have told them as soon as I saw the IS4 and T54 on the prelim tech trees, did Gaijin lack the forethought to see how big of a mistake it was to proceed forward with blueprint v the superior tanks that lead to winning the war and paving the way of the modern tank (low profile, fast moving, heavy hitting).

 

What make this most annoying, is that Gaijin made the same mistake in Aviation. 262s v MiG15s and Sabres. Really? So they either didn't learn, or something else is at play which will never be confirmed.

 

But to go ahead and leave Tier V shafted, fine. But to compress the tiers so that Tier IV Germany almost now becomes equally as bad as Tier V...one has to seriously question what kind of executive decisions are being made here, based on what information proceeding forward to the future. Facing IS4's and T-54's in my Panther F...do they even play the game any longer or just base all decisions blindly on a statistical system, when statistics never take into account variables or discrepances. Point and case, the 162, 163 and 262 being moved from their spread in low-mid 6.0s of aviation, to a 7.6 facing Sabres in 1.41 (since reverted two patches later). The 162 is slower than most props of equal tiering on high Tier IV. Yet they still insist on going through and using this method blindly?

 

Ok, well maybe they've improved right? Manually adjusted it. So then why did the T-50, a consistent and widely regarded under-tiered Tier I Russian tank, only move up .3, when statistics out-rightly proved it was deserving of a minimum .6. Manual adjustment error? That in itself is questionable when you consider if the manual adjustment is supposed to be the ultimate decider overriding for fairness and balance. If there is no manual adjustment, then how could the cluster up in Tier IV to V be considered normal for an automated system...yet the T50 had such a minor increase.

 

Discrepancies, usually falling into the favour of Russia. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure as time goes on things will be normalised, it took about a year for Russia's aviation to be adjusted to reality, even now though, I still consider their MGs and Cannons the most effective and accurate in the game.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Banicks

[Evisicator 14]

 

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?

 

 

 

 

This argument is completely over used and is almost completely false. 

Most Panters and Tigers did not actually break down while in combat. Their breakdowns are what actually kept them out of combat altogether.

Since this is about the combat effectiveness of a tank in battle, the tanks aren't just going to magically fail to work. 

 

If a Tiger or Panther showed up on the battlefield it wasn't just going to break down for no apparent reason.

Maybe you should do a little more research on the topic.

 

Also as far as Tungsten for ammo, they had plenty late in the war. They just repurposed things to make sure they had enough for their guns.

[Fliegel 1,660]

I turn your attention to a little contest that happened between 1941 and 1945. The results were rather definitive.

Not telling us much about tanks quality, really. Edited August 19, 2014 by Fliegel

[Waldkriecher 1,534]

 

 

What now, balance or realism?
And which unrealistic tank characteristics?^^

 

I prefer balance, that's why the ISU needs to go down to at least lower era 4 and the SU122 high era 3. That's why we need limited ammo types depending on vehicle and on history, as much as I hate the T44 for its DM, it wouldn't work with standard AP and HE. The Ferdinand will do just fine with limited ammo. But I've never seen you argue for balance, all you do is selectively post "sources" that favour your pov. Btw, I am still waiting for that source on all Panther variants breaking down before reaching the battlefield. Which would have to include why they broke down, was it due to "bad" engineering or due to no spare parts, lack of fuel or lack of maintenance?

 

IS series reverse speed and agility (apart of the IS3 which feels somewhat realistic forwards), KV2 is way toooo agile, generally the SU and T series also reach their topspeeds very easily on all terrain, the Tanks may have been able to handle that but I doubt the crew would have, completely broken DMs and unrealistic armor characteristics (which are also a DM issue to be fair)

 

I was actually talking about important balance issues, the ackknowledgement that era 4 and 5 is in Sovjets favour. Buggy Axis armor etc.

 

 

 

And suddenly this has gone from you disputing a source from Jentz, to me apparently claiming you do demand unrealistic things for Axis vehicles?  What? 

 

Not so strong on logic eh? You claimed I am a wehraboo and linked that worthless image. So what is it, either I claim unhistorical characteristics of Axis tanks or I don't. If I don't I can hardly be a "wehraboo".

 

 

Actually, you guys are right, and wrong.

 

That chart isn't for repairs, it's for "Overhaul" on the engine. Meaning it could go up to 2000-2500km before it needed an overhaul of the engine. Which is on par with the M4 Sherman. That doesn't mean it didn't need regular maintenance and basic repairs every 500km.

 

As already mentioned, it did have fuel filter issues early war along with a few other problems but overall it was pretty reliable.

 

Which makes much more sense, thanks.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Shermington

[Skanvak_Drakken 17]

What now, balance or realism?

 

For the record I prefer realism and historical accuraccy over balance. Balance is useless in my experience (you need to have a match but not balance at individual level, asymetric balance is better). The better is interest and interest come from experencing the historical experience.

 

Otherwise, when we have historical and technical debat, I begin to want to see the background of the people speaking.

[KorEEnium 2,533]

Lol T-34's could drive 2000-2500km in1944/1945? Because in the earlier days of the war most T-34's broke down driving less than 200km. Also that 2000km can be achieved if you drive it till it brakes down, then you repair it and drive some more till you reach that 2000-2500km.

 

For example german Panthers had problems with final drive and more than half of all panthers that were lost because of mechanical problems were because of final drive failure. As the Panther entered production in 1943 it is not really surprising that they had bunch of mechanical problems. But in late 1944 some JagdPanthers were fitted with new reinforced final drives and they drowe 400-500km without a single mechanical failure. Considering that JagdPanther could only drive average of 35km before that with the original final drive then 400-500km is quite a nice improvement which means that the Panthers that could of gotten that new final drive could of driven 2000-3000km aswell. So if germans had one more year then there is no doubt that Panthers could of been mechanically quite reliable.

[Abgeschossene 10,084]

 

 

 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?

 

 

Ironically, it was said that ammo loads will be realistic.

 

However, the irony is this, Tiger H1, had APCR. Yet it does not. Now, the Tiger E did not have APCR due to shortages, but I bet the E will be in Panzer Grau color and APCR, something totally unhistorical.

[Abgeschossene 10,084]

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

 

It's not the only chart, there are 2 more, both for Soviets. 

[Sagro 3,365]

I turn your attention to a little contest that happened between 1941 and 1945. The results were rather definitive.

 

the good old idiotic argument of " germany lost therefor their tanks were worse " great to see such flawless logic and highly intelligent arguments on the soviet side of this discussion allways a joy discussing with such geniuses ...

 

 

[attachment=94255:Untitled-1.jpg]

 

 

those are quotes roughly 1 year old and clearly state the devs perspective on things or at least what the devs want the players to think .... its pretty clear that they didnt hold their promises and changed their views 180°  as the latest answer was " historical accuracy and matchmaking is impossible"

 

i for once love the irony ...

Edited August 19, 2014 by Sagro

[tacomaco 1,003]

Ah,  OP is new here. He doesn't know Gajin devs don't care about player opinions or that ww2 facts are just an inconvenience for the Match Maker. Even if the MM would be accurate and Tiger would fight against T-34 it wouldn't matter because any shot that's hitting the Tiger in the front destroys the gun. I don't think in all my games the Tiger gun survived a second non-pen shot ...ever.

 

When I had some good games it was because nobody shot at me

Edited August 19, 2014 by tacomaco

[Unit757 1,561]

 

Not so strong on logic eh? You claimed I am a wehraboo and linked that worthless image. So what is it, either I claim unhistorical characteristics of Axis tanks or I don't. If I don't I can hardly be a "wehraboo".

 

 

 

I called you a Wehraboo, yes.  But I did not specify exactly why, now did I?  If you want an example, take a look at your earliest posts in this thread.  You have a meltdown because someone doesn't say nice things about German tanks.  THAT is why.  Not because of unrealistic claims, because frankly there are a good number of claims or requests for German vehicles that I DO support.  Hell, if I didn't like German vehicles, I never would have taken the time to gather up the stuff required to bug report the Panthers ammo being crap. 

 

the good old idiotic argument of " germany lost therefor their tanks were worse " great to see such flawless logic and highly intelligent arguments on the soviet side of this discussion allways a joy discussing with such geniuses ...

 

 

Untitled-1.jpg

 

 

those are quotes roughly 1 year old and clearly state the devs perspective on things or at least what the devs want the players to think .... its pretty clear that they didnt hold their promises and changed their views 180°  as the latest answer was " historical accuracy and matchmaking is impossible"

 

i for once love the irony ...

 

You thought KV-1's had to stop to change gears.  You have absolutely no weight in this conversation.  Go splurge in another thread please. 

[Wenin 2,654]

This argument is completely over used and is almost completely false. 
Most Panters and Tigers did not actually break down while in combat. Their breakdowns are what actually kept them out of combat altogether.
Since this is about the combat effectiveness of a tank in battle, the tanks aren't just going to magically fail to work. 
 
If a Tiger or Panther showed up on the battlefield it wasn't just going to break down for no apparent reason.
Maybe you should do a little more research on the topic.
 
Also as far as Tungsten for ammo, they had plenty late in the war. They just repurposed things to make sure they had enough for their guns.

Who said for no reason? And I could quote p.e. Schneider on that topic, p.e. multiple Tiger tanks having transmission failures in combat. (and if no tank reaches the battlefield surely they can't break down on the battlefield... Would be a fun idea, every let's say 5th Panther player get's randomly removed right at the start of the game, because his tank failed to reach combat zone)
At the end of 1943, tungsten out of anything bigger then 75mm KwK L/43 shells was withdrawn to the tungsten reserve for making tools.
 

IS series reverse speed and agility

The IS-Series, which can't effectively turn because they immediately stop?

And what is wrong with the reserve speed?

Edited August 19, 2014 by Wenin

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

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

 

....

 

 

Evaluation Of The T-34 And Kv Tanks By Engineers Of The Aberdeen Proving Grounds,                                                                   Submitted By Firms, Officers And Members Of Military Commissions Responsible For Testing Tanks

The tanks were given to the U.S. by the Soviets at the end of 1942 for familiarization.

 

The condition of the tanks

The T-34 medium tank after driving 343 km, became completely disabled and that could not be fixed. The reason: owing to the extremely poor air filter system on the diesel, a large quantity of dirt got into the engine and a breakdown occurred, as a result of which the pistons and cylinders were damaged to such a degree that they were impossible to fix. The tank was withdrawn from tests and was to be shelled by the KV and American 3" gun of the M-10 tank [M10 "Wolverine" SP antitank gun]. After that, it would be sent to Aberdeen, where it would be analyzed and kept as an exhibit.

The heavy tank KV-1 is still functional. Tests were continued, although it had many mechanical defects.

 

http://english.battlefield.ru/evaluation-of-the-t-34-and-kv-dp1.html

 

 

The Soviet Economy and the Red Army, 1930-1945

 

 

Edited August 19, 2014 by Trommelfeuer