Germans are too "strong" in Moscow

Mp 40 in Stalingrad:
Screenshot_13

In real life:

t-34 in game :

t-34 in real life:
Screenshot_18

Federov Avtomat in game:

Federov Avtomat in real life:
Screenshot_20

and the last one mkb in game:

mkb in real life:
Screenshot_22

So basically, the MP 40 received an unnecessary nerf, even though it was already a mediocre weapon in terms of performance compared to the Soviet PPD/PPSH, which had an almost double rate of fire.

Then we have the T-34 in Moscow and Stalingrad that overperform by a wide margin. They have 100mm of hull armor, even though it’s supposed to be 45mm! Additionally, the angled armor in this game is broken as well. So you can add another +100mm to this.

The German top-tier Pz 4 F2 can be taken down by almost every Soviet tank, while the Russian T-50 and T-34 can only be destroyed by the Pz 4 F2. The Pz 3 isn’t good enough, even though in reality, it was the main opponent of these tanks. You can read more about it here: The T-34 in WWII: the Legend vs. the Performance | Operation Barbarrosa

Russians have been crying about historical inaccuracy in the game, particularly regarding the MKB 42. There are multiple posts claiming that this weapon is overpowered and suggesting that it should have a higher battle rating (BR), which is quite amusing.

Firstly, the MKB 42 has a ridiculously low rate of fire at 500 compared to the Federov’s 600. Secondly, it only deals a laughable 8 damage (while the Federov has 10.5), which is almost the same as the PP. Seriously, guys? This is supposed to be a prototype of the best assault rifle of World War II? ww1 weapon (fedorov) perform better than WW 2 top tier weapon, Yeah, right.
Definitely not Russian bias.

Personally, I’m not a fan of this weapon in the game. In close quarters, the Kiraly is far superior. In medium to long distances of 100-200 meters, the MKB 42 only inflicts 5-6 damage, and let’s not forget that its dispersion isn’t good either.

So, in short, the PPD, PPSH, PPT, and others are better than the MKB in close range, while the Federov and simple bolt-action rifles outshine it in medium to long range combat.

Can you guys fix this ?
@1942786 @yangeneral @_TheLucky

13 Likes

Why are you comparing not upgraded stuff?

3 Likes

Screenshot_26
Screenshot_25
Because its the same thing

2 Likes

Thats gonna be fun.

2 Likes




4 Likes

t34 was a piece of crap that got destroyed by 37mm canons with ease

1 Like

True expert lol

5 Likes

Because rl reflects quality.
This game doesnt even reflect actual weapon stats and its an Gajin game.

1 Like

Well. It kinda was.

5 Likes

Well, in that case you could say it about literally every wwii tank.

Except it has the worst loss ratio of all main medium tank in WW2

6 Likes

I fully support you let them fix this, especially the rate of fire of the mp-40 and mp-38

1 Like

Yeah, it surely just doesn’t reflects great Russian tacticians.

We are talking about a tank where tanker crew needed tools to shift the suspension and did not had a commander or a radio until 1943/44. Its not just Russian “tactics”.

1 Like

Completely irrelevant nitpicking

3 Likes

the problem with soviet tanks was the absolute garbage casting that they used for the tanks which made them dissasemble with each shock

Imagine if they added a chance for tanks like T 34 to spawn with prodution defects. Who needs proper sights and radio/minimap when you can have stalinium instead. XD

2 Likes

T-34 performed so badly. So over rated.

Was as expensive as a panzer IV with way worse battle performance.

5 Likes

Because you dont really care. The radio and lack of commander and suspension issues together with poor quality control were one of the main reasons why they performed awful in combat.

1 Like
1 Like