When I saw the advertised JS-2 1944 and tiger ii B i was stoked, and very much disappointed when they werent included.
But, balance should always come first. And let’s face it, these two campaigns are extremely unbalanced when it comes to the armored support.
Normandy:
The Puma is fantastic, and far surpassed both the M5 and the M8 in all regards, yet falls laughably short of both shermans, and in my experience you face an unGODly amount of jumbos in the normandy campaign, with very few germans having anything BUT pumas. The M8 and Pz. III N are pretty much useless against tanks but dominate the infantry game… Or they would, if their successors werent of the same calibre with a far superior AT ability and armor. The progression is awful, i fail to see how a Pz. III N is an upgrade to a puma, as you give all your mobility for an amount of armor that still does pretty much nothing and you give up your AT abilities.
So i propose two things here:
First, re order the progression.
The M8 and III N should be the given vehicles as they are by far the worst apart from their anti-infantry ability. The puma and Stuart make good tier ii unlocks, though personally i’d say the M8A1 is a better choice to compete with a puma’s 5cm, then the sherman and J, then the jumbo and H.
Second, remove and add new tanks. If something like the jumbo exists, you cant very well match it against things that cant compete with it, and you need a clear and easily accessible counter to it. These things are just too heavily armored to be reliably defeated by a mere Det Pack, and in maps these small and rough, flanking is rarely an option, especially on the beaches and in the woods, IF you even have the time to do so, because only the puma is quick enough to do that. I’ll be taking into account the clear aversion to heavy tanks (even though jumbo was an assault tank which is a farts width under a heavy tank) and give some suggestions for replacements here. Since we have historical accuracy, i’ll be refraining from prototypes, test beds and non service entities like the T-57, T20, Panzer IV K and
The forums are filled with Berlin, so ill keep my notes brief on it, but lets face it, panther OP, D-5T OP, lets move on.
I’ll also be adding some options for SPGs here, as i think one of the clear imbalances is big armor, MG, big gun, no counters. One issue in berlin is that the 85M is hardly an upgrade to a T-34-85; you lose the turret for the same gun and 30mm more armor but still face the panther? SPGs would be nice as high risk AT weapons with only a commander MG/SMG (please add commanders using SMGs form cupolas) for protection, then tech up to a turret version or hey, always have a dedicated SPG squad for AT duty.
So, i think better choices would be:
Normandy:
Tier I (free unlocks): Stug IV/M10:
These options are better suited to the campaign than the stuart and puma, and have the ability to deal with the late tier IV unlocks while also being able to support their infantry effectively. I think the .50 on the M10 should stay, as long as the Stug gets a commander MG, obviously these can only be fired when the commander is exposed. As for armor, the stug had at most 80mm, while the M10 had a sloped plate of (iirc) 37mm, and with track armor (or a cannibalized plate from another M10, which happened many times with many tanks from the US) these should be rather equal, the m10 has a really slow turret so it may as well be a casemate.
Tier II: Pz. IV F2/M4A1:
Much better choices than the III N and M8, with firepower to deal with Tier IV, equal infantry killing power and being relatively well balanced to each other. I know the late model J should be used, but i dont see the 80mm of armor and non electric drives being equal to a sherman, even if its the weakest model.
Tier III: Panzer IV H/M4A2:
Rather than be a Tier IV, ive made the H a tier III as its pretty much the equal to a sherman. It lacks in infantry killing, but makes up for it with tank killing. The 80mm of flat armor makes for a nice balance to the 63mm of sloped sherman power, the mobility, agility and utility are all mostly equal; the clear factor hear is the skirts which (i have yet to test/see) may or may not make PIATs useless form the side. Still, i see this as a slight balance to the more mobile nature of the sherman.
Tier IV: Tiger H1/Jumbo 75:
Hear me out here. I KNOW the 88 is really really powerful, but this can be offset by a much longer reload, and with the inclusion of 75mm HVAP shells, the flat 100mm plate of a tiger can be easily punctured by the US armor. Keep in mind, the Jumbo also has 100mm of armor, but sloped, and has a 150mm mantlet to the tiger’s own 100mm mantlet. Plus, the tiger is slow, fat and easily overwhelmed with its mediocre rotation speed and aforemention much longer reload. The jumbo is an assault tank, which is literally already a heavy tank but america is special and calls it something else, and the Tiger is, artificially balanced by way of being slower with a longer reload than historically accurate, IS in fact an equal. Or, we could have the M26 and Panther G here, those are pretty equal too.
Berlin:
I wont waste time, this forum is filled with enough “nerf D-5T, buff panzer, nerf panther, buff T-34-85!” so ill keep this short; the SPGs being tier III unlocks is such a dumb choice, you sacrifice your turret and MG for, what? the same gun, equal or less mobility, and in the IV/70’s case, much weaker armor?
Frankly, whoever made that decision should be given a lesson in common sense.
Tier I: T-34-57 (1943)/Panzer IV H
What’s this, i say below not to include the IV/70 A as its a limited production, but i include the T-34-57, and the M1943 at that! Well yea, the T-34-57 program was cut in 1943 as the T-34-85 program was coming about, the first D-5Ts rolled out in the later months of 1943 after all. Still, some of these hit the field and while these tanks may SEEM a downgrade to the SPGs above, they have turrets, and machine guns. They are obviously still very much vulnerable to the later tanks, and while the Panzer IV may fair better in this regard, the 57 with its ability to maneuver and rapid fire those little needles which were actually quite close to the T-34-85’s own cannon in terms of raw penetration, it has clear advantages of its own; smaller HE but with a much faster firing rate, it will equal out. Besides, it has the same hull armor as the T-34-85, so its not like you’re losing all that much here. Chose the H over the J for obvious reasons.
Tier II: Su-85M/Panzer IV/70 V
The IV/70 (A) was a very limited production model as a stopgap to the IV/70 V. While i understand WHY they chose the A, again i encourage small artificial nerfs to balance. The SU-85M has a nice 75mm upper plate and an 85mm; so why not keep it nice to the IV/70 V’s 80mm upper plate and 7.5cm? the IV/70 V with its narrow tracks and very front heavy form can be less mobile to account for the slightly stronger armor profile over the 85M, which already has mobility. The firepower is near equal, again if the IV 70 V is better than just give it a longer reload than the 85M to compensate, easy as pie. Initially i put these as Tier I but given their firepower, losing the MGs for that firepower and the armor makes them worthy as an upgrade, especially given how the T-34-57 and Panzer IV H will fare against the Tier IV choices.
As for the Tiger E, well the short 88 was a bit inferior to a panther
Tier III: T-34-85/Tiger E:
I didn’t include the D-5T as nobody wants to grind two very visually similar and functionally identical vehicles and the D-5T was a jury rigged stopgap while they redesigned the turret, thats barely even a distinct model, and this is coming from the same army who never designated the unique cast T-34 turrets. As for the Tiger E well, the short 88 is inferior to the panther’s own 7.5cm, the 100mm of armor is flat and easily punctured by an 85 or a 57, and to top it off the Tiger is itself very slow and fat, making maneuvering across maps difficult. I’d honestly say the T-34 has the general advantage here; being faster, more mobile and with equal infantry killing power. While the Tiger has the AT advantage, it can still be ended by one clean shot through its own upper plate just as easily.
Tier IV: IS-1/Panther (Ausf. G):
Obviously i wanted to put the IS-2 1944 and Tiger II H here, but i respect balance. Its all fun and games until you’re the squad who gets nuked by a 122, or the lonely T-34 deleted by a long 88. So, I chose a middle ground: The IS-1 was halted because the russians believed if a medium tank could carry the gun, there was no need for the heavy tank, or something like that, vodka does weird things to you during war. But, while it wasnt the icon of the 1944, it is relatively balanced; the turret is nearly identical to the T-34-85 and the segmented hull has a flat driver port of 120mm, which can be sliced open by anything on this list, and its still got the 85. The obvious upgrade here is armor, but you become much bigger and slower as a result. Panther here because 80mm sloped is better than 100 flat, fite me. Kept the G because now its on par to what it faces, otherwise i’d have put the D/F against the T-34-85, with the balancing being D has an abysmally slow rotation and the F has a big learning curve with periscopic gun sight and schmalturm is a big weak spot.