That would make absolutely sense but they won’t do it. Their solution for the moment is simple:
Keep the bug with the airplanes so that you can drop a highload of bombs against Russian tanks.
And watch your team crumble away while spawning in your plane.
But hey, maybe if we keep harrassing them, they’ll eventually give in.
Totally agree here.
It takes much more skill to successfully drop bombs on tanks then shelling as a tanker.
And while you’re in a tank, you’re (or at least can be) much more in touch with the battlefield and can support your team more actively than in a plane. So you can directly focus on what’s stopping your brainless teammates and allow them to do something.
While in a plane you spawn, drop bombs, and maybe kill a single tank or infantry squad, meanwhile your team just gets destroyed, cause 90% of moscow axis players are worse than bots.
So I just end up not using planes much, as I can do much more in a tank or even with a regualr infantry squad. Cause usually by the time I can drop bombs and rearm my 110, i can do around twice or 3x as much with an infantry squad.
-
Pz3J with long 50mm is a good idea BUT there only were 40 Pz3J with the long 50mm which were delivered in 1941…so maybe it would be a better idea to give the PzGr40 with the Wolfram Core to the normal Pz3J - in limited numbers of course! Also the 50mm gun didnt shoot HEAT shells…
-
Stug3A why should they add that piece of shit? only good reason would be because of the HEAT shell but who would actually use it then, since it has no MGs it would stand no chance against infantery
-
Adding the Pz3J with long 50mm AND ADDITIONAL TRACK ARMOR would really be necessary on the battle of Stalingrad
-
Giving HEAT to the Pz4F1 is a good idea
Source? I’ve only been able to find that they began to be fitted by december 1941.
Besides, the allies get the T50, which only had 69 built, none of them seeing service near Moscow.
That’s not the point. The big deal here is not even the gun, it’s the turret drive. The current 3J has a manual turret drive which makes the turret incredibly slow and the tank basically unusable. The 3J1 featured an automatic turret drive which would give it the same turret rotation as the panzer 4s. And where did i say anything about 50mm HEAT? Are you reading my comment or something else? Do you speak english or what? Cause I never mentioned such a thing.
Tf do you mean? It would have a fast firing gun with great HE and would actually stand a chance against late game soviet tanks. It’s exactly what early game moscow axis needs. Also, HEAT would be unnecessary.
Stalingrad is a mistake and never should have been added, therefore I don’t care about it.
Wikipedia; and yes, the T50 was like a prototype but otherwise they would have to add the T34 which wouldbe even more OP
Ok yes thats true, the turrettraverse speed is terrible
and the thing with the HEAT, i misread your comment before and i forgot to delete that part sryyyyy
show me how the 75mm HE is supposed to kill a T50 or T28 XDDDDD…of course t28 would be possible but quite difficult…HEAT would be very necessary and no hull MG = no chance againt infantery
Well, then germany would get the flak 88.
Also, we already have other fantasy equipment like Mkb, So I don’t see the problem with a Panzer 3J1.
Against infantry you retard…
And AP can kill them. I do it all the time with my 4E. T28 just shoot the sides or turret and T50 just shoot the mantlet. It’s simply an issue of skill.
HE against infatry…
Again, I am left wondering if you have a working brain…
Same ammo as panzer 4. AP and HE. AP for anti tank and would be useful agianst heavier russian tanks that early game 37mms have no hope against.
And HE would be it’s anti-infantry weapon. And since it has no mg, it could have boosted reload.
What’s the bug?
Speaking of tanks balance in Mosocow, I’d love it if T-50 didn’t have a single pixel where it can be hurt and if every time it looked at you didn’t mean your death.
Stug III is iconic and the most common vehicle of the war, would be cool as a early level vehicle but without any real counterpart from the Soviet side.
pz3B->pz3E
pz3E (former spot, now empty) ->Stug3A
Therefore it’s counterpart would be the bt. Which seems fair. Alternatively the 57mm danger tractor could be added as a counterpart, but I don’t see a need for that.
The Bf110 spawning as a fighter while being classed as CAS.
I would love to see Stug III, but turret with 20-K and no turret with short 75mm might be a bit too unfair.
Was thinking maybe we’d see 75mm Stug III F/G vs 76,2 mm SU-76 in Stalingrad/Kursk to have some balance of turretless designs.
Well, neither of those are historically accurate to Moscow, Stalingrad (as already said) is a mistake i don’t care about and kursk would also be pointless.
Nah, I’d say it’s completely fair. The short 75mm is a great gun.
Key battle/campaign of the war for me so personally I want it as good as possible. And there were a lot of StuGs there.
Probably the most desired battle for me now, however balancing Tigers, Panthers and Ferdinands would be tough.
Idk about you but I’d be pissed when BT-7 would flank me and wreck my sides while I’d have to turn the whole vehicle with this game’s super bouncy and clumsly physics just to have my gun aim approximately in the direction of the BT-7.
dude wtf
this is what you said… AGAINST TANKS…and the point of even adding stronger guns is to be able to face the russian tanks and NO THE 75MM SHELL FIRED OUT OF THE SHORT 75MM GUN CANNOT KILL THE T50 -not reliably from the side, not from the front(it can penetrate the mantlet in some areas but killing it with such a shot is extremely difficult…only from the backside is can really kill the T50 but when does that happen???
anyways if the ADD the STUG then only when it gets at least an MG on the top and only if it gets HEAT…u can try it out with the STUG on normandy…its terrible since it has no MG and u can have the Best HE on the world, NO MG = GETTING KILLED BY INFANTERY VERY FAST
And why do you want it? Maps would basically be the same, guns would all be the same, same factions as well.
And if you want vehicles, warthunder is a much better game for those.
And there’s plenty of better games for more realistic combat if you want to actually play through the battles and feel their historical significance.
Then position yourself in a way to not get flanked.
On the contrary, I’d say the stug is better becasue the 75mm pens everywhere and is an instant OHK on the bt.
It is.
That sentence is divided by ‘and’. The first part of it is a reply to oyur point about Stug vs Infantry and the second to your concerns of stug vs russian tank. I realise that I probably shouldn’t have relied on you understanding that I would give the stug both AP and HE, since it is the basic ammo for other tanks that use it’s gun and not only HE, and probably sohuld’ve clarified it so you would understand.
It’s called your own skill issue.
Areas you can pen:
1)Mantlet. At close range you can pen near the mgs. It’s a bit buggy and might require 2-3 hits to count, but is an instant OHK.
2)Cupola. Not an OHK, but guaranteed to at least take out it’s turret.
3) Side turret and lower side hull. Instant OHK and pennable at flat or almost flat angles.
4) Rear turret.
Get the Panzer 4E and practice. I’ve gotten from the point of also thinking I can’t kill the T50 to the point when I can take out a Lee and T50 with a single crewmeber left. Practice leads to skill and skill leads to results.
I don’t belive stugs had that. Some late variants had mgs in the mantlets, but that’s it.
Not necessary.
Is there a stug? I don’t think there is. At most a premium and I’m not buying a ported warthunder model of a tank I already have there.
Learn to postion. Good position means infantry has no chance.
I just enjoy iconic Eastern Front battles, that’s it. Obviously I wouldn’t enjoy a whole new copypaste campaign but that’s a whole different topic. I strongly believe in a different system with “Fronts” and iconic battles added within the same progression system with certain limits for certain time periods.
I’m not a big fan of either walking simulators like HLL or War Thunder’s fantasy battles/conquest gameplay, and I don’t know any other games where I can actually drive a T-34 or run with a PPSh-41 across Moscow outskirts, Stalingrad and Kursk without any BS.
Yet that’s realistically what you’re gonna get if you ask for those campaigns.
That could be cool, but would need a lot of thought, testing and fine tuning. That would require work and money, none of which gaijin is willing to put into this game anymore.
The fact that they still haven’t fixed the enfield and G41 reloads supports that.
It’s basically the same as Enlisted. I’d argue it’s even less arcady.
RO2 has been suggested to me a few times. And I’m pretty sure you can find more. The eastern front is a very popular topic after all.
I have tried it but I can’t take battles between Tiges and post-war T-55s somewhere in Sweden seriously, when their enemies are Japanese and American. Or the A-B-C conquest gamemode, which is plain boring.
But more than anything I just like combined arms games: infantry, tanks, planes, boats.
I haven’t tried it so far, it’s also over 10 years old and I don’t think there’s combined arms there.
Surprisingly, it isn’t. It’s always Normandy, Normandy, sometimes Pacific and North Africa.
BFV completely ignored it and there was a lot of BS there, CoD WW2 and Vanguard were just the epitome of BS and mostly ignored it, Post Scriptum ignored it, HLL added it after a couple years but it still feels like a walking simulator to me, and before that… I think the last time I was allowed to drive a T-34 and run with PPSh-41 at Kursk was BF1942 in like 2002, and battle of Moscow - never in ~20 years of gaming.
And I’d argue Enlisted also has a crap ton of BS. With the gameplay being simply rush with smg I just can’t take it as anything more than an arcady shooter.
Probably should then. It’s been reccomended to me as the best game for the eastern front by quite a few people.