There arent any other soviet mediums that are not T-34.
If we want larger tanks, it would be the only option that would be balanced against the other tanks, thanks to its rather weak armor.
I still hesitate to call the T-28 a medium, even though it gets called one.
The Pz38(t) was also called a medium tank, fyi
The Panther was a medium according to the Germans, but a heavy to the Soviets.
Germans designated tanks differently depending on context; pretty sure Soviets used relative size. Like they called the SU-152 a heavy tank.
For Germany, when referring to a medium tank unit, every tank in said unit becomes a medium.
Within the unit itself there’s lights and heavies, and no such thing as a medium.
The best tank on the german side at the time was the Panzer IIIH, with a short 50mm gun and about 60mm of frontal hull armor.
Even with APCR, it would still be no match against a T-34 1941 or a KV-1 L-11.
Open top vehicles would be useless as well as it only takes one guy with a grenade/molotov/TNT or even small arms fire to disable the crew. Imagine a strafing run as well.
I think the best tank balance would come down to Pz IV C vs T-28A and Pz IV E vs T-28E.
And before you say ‘‘oh but the explosion pack is good against a KV-1’’, no it isn’t. As it stands it barely scratches the strongest part of a Pz IIC past 1m, now imagine the weakest part of a KV-1 being 30mm at the turret roof and 40mm on the engine deck. Even the bottom of the tank is very well armored.
2 Likes
I agree with the overall assessment, but explosive packs work on their own set of rules and seem to instakill any amount of armor so long as they’re on top of or under it.
1 Like
Im pretty sure they work like HE did in War Thunder a few years back, where fragments would cause damage by finding their way to less armored parts of the tank. This happens to a panzer II, for example, by finding its way through the 10mm area that connects the bottom of the tank and the lower glacis. That is further evidenced by the damage cam shown by plane bombs hitting far from tanks. This would mean that the damage a TNT would cause by being placed on top of the engine deck of a KV1 would be done by ‘‘pixel sniping’’ fragments through the turret ring. This would mean that, in order to be effective, TNT explosives should need to have their explosive content buffed even more (from 41mm onwards) in order to cause direct damage to components in tanks. And this would make it pretty much a small bomb against infantry.
I believe the only way to balance these russian tanks effectively would be to not even add them at all.
1 Like
I mean, what else would you call that thing?
So long as the damage and blast radius can stay separate I see no issue. Though I would rather have more elegant AT like mines.
2 Likes
I agree. Bundle grenades and RPG HEAT grenades should be a thing
1 Like
You probably know my view on mines already but please don’t replace active, skill-based At weapons with pure cheese
1 Like
I would just prefer real AT weapons to shotputting 20 lbs of dynamite.
My preferred scenario is to implement the TNT bundles like Post Scriptum does where they have to be planted directly on the ground.
Limit AT mines to just throwing a track on the tank that hits them so that nearby infantry can plant TNT on them.
I’ve been saying this since War Thunder too- suspension damage needs to be a thing. Even if all it does is transfer damage to the track, suspensions shouldn’t just absorb all damage with no consequence like they do now.
1 Like
Easy solution would be to add the 88 as a buildable for german engineers, and make it so that grenades and Explosives are invisible to tank crews.
1 Like
Devs will add them all.
(9) Enlisted - Axis and Allies Tanks (Alpha) - YouTube
Germans will probably get better planes and heavy MG’s and russia will get better tanks
1 Like
KV is slow and vulnerable to infantry. T-34’s turret can be penetrated by both short 50mm and 75mm HEAT from PZ-4
I agree. It would give russia some advantage over germans but not by too much so the game will get balanced
Uh no. It is as fast as any medium tank Germany could field.
And the T-34 can penetrate literally everything on the Pz3 or Pz4 while its hull will be largely invulnerable when angled.
And what happened last time you tried that? +20% damage for practically every gun, remember that time? It resulted in player loss on the German side, not for any player gain on the Soviet side. Only made things worse, not better.
What is acceleration
1 Like
The Germans would need Winterketten to lower their ground pressure enough to actually get equal acceleration compared to the KV-1 as it would otherwise accelerate faster than the German mediums with their thin tracks getting somewhat stuck in soft terrain.
I’m talking about how the vehicles actually perform between Enlisted and War Thunder, so we know what to expect rather than using theoreticals for if the devs took a different approach.
1 Like
Yeah, 30 km/h on road and roughly 15-20km/h on rough terrain, mud and snow. On Russia, terrain is very muddy and snowy.
Yes but germany will get better AT guns and remember how I agreed with Pvt_Decard to remove grenade warning indicators for tanks.
Germany will always have better players and we can’t change that. As i stated before, germans will already get better machine guns, better fighter aircraft and better AT guns. They already have much better SMG’s and I don’t think devs are planning to nerf them. Why not give russia better tanks. It’s so easy to kill a tank in this game, you won’t feel any powercreep. Germany will still get more wins but not as much as now