Why is the t34 nerfed?

[[3.SA]Koba]

It seemd like the T34 had the upperhand on the Pz4 in RO1. I figured it should - sloped armor and all but it seems like the Pz4 is much stronger than the T34 now.

Was this for balance issues or did new research from tripwire show that the Pz4 was indead a beast?

 

[Icey_Pain]

As if RO1 was such a good example of map balance, the one tiger was absolutely worthless on Koningsplatz versus the 2 clearly superior russian tanks.

 

[Kipper]

People tend to use the T-34 poorly. Tank combat in RO2 is much better than in RO1. Sloped armor is not stupidly exaggerated like it used to be so the T-34 isn't invulnerable at all ranges to vastly superior guns and optics. The T-34 is best used while on the move. No one seems to understand that. I consistently see players engaging in duels at close and medium ranges with the Panzer IV with the predictable results. Keep your tank on the move. Most players that use the Panzer IV are terrible at maneuvering and using terrain for defense so you can simply cause them to panic and miss their shots while you're moving towards them firing. Learn to do this and the T-34 is easily the better tank.

Also keep in mind that tank battles tend to happen at 100 - 200m range since no one plays the awful Gumrak.

The Tiger was also not anywhere near useless on Koenigsplatz. If used correctly the Tiger had no issues holding its own against the IS-2 and the T-34/85.

 

[C_Gibby]

The T34 does seem a bit inferior, but it really just needs people in the whole team to get the hang of it and try a different strategy to the Germans. T34s can one-shot Pz4 a lot of times, and Pz4s can one-shot T34s, it's just seemingly easier. That's the thing with the Russian equipment in RO2, every bit takes a bit more "skill" to use than axis equipment, and you have to win by using somewhat different tactics. That's what I see, anyway. As someone once said, Russians are made with crusty old veterans in mind, and I feel that he's right.

As if RO1 was such a good example of map balance, the one tiger was absolutely worthless on Koningsplatz versus the 2 clearly superior russian tanks.

:IS2::IS2:

 

[Mormegil]

Don't forget, the Panzer IV in RO1 was either the F1 or F2. Both of which had 50mm frontal armor, compared to the Ausf G's 80mm.

Also, in RO1, most of the T-34's being used were the T-34/85 - with a much stronger cannon than the 76.2mm we have in RO2.

 

[nebsif]

Meh, only AT rifles are bugged/OP vs T-34.. easier to kill crewmen with one than a Pz4. Ive one shotted lots of panzers, also won 2vs1 fights a few times on Pavlovs.. and got 1 shot myself, but not as often as I ammo rack Pz4's.
Pz4 is only a match to T-34 in a front vs front slugfest, while T-34 has almost the same armor all around w/o uber weaknesses like the ammo rack between the tracks etc.

I saw SasQuatch play tankies and AT rifles just to figure out why the T-34 seems so wrong or rather why people complain its weak.
Figures a PTRS can chew most of the crewmen in like 1 clip firing at the front of a T-34 from about 200m, which is wrong and I believe it will be taken care of after the moar important issues are done with.

 

[Icey_Pain]

The Tiger was also not anywhere near useless on Koenigsplatz. If used correctly the Tiger had no issues holding its own against the IS-2 and the T-34/85.

True, except that the IS2 had a lot less effort achieving the same as the tiger, and the T34-85 made it no better.

 

[Falkenhorst]

It seemd like the T34 had the upperhand on the Pz4 in RO1. I figured it should - sloped armor and all but it seems like the Pz4 is much stronger than the T34 now.

Was this for balance issues or did new research from tripwire show that the Pz4 was indead a beast?

It only seems weak because the new armor system is actually more realistic. All of the little Russian tankers were so used to simply angling and 1 shotting the paper PzIV. While its shells bounced harmlessly off its mighty sloped armor. In reality that advantage ended with the PzIV G.

Head on the PzIV G is the better tank because it has a superior main gun, better optics, AP shells designed to penetrate sloped armor, 5 crewman, thicker armor designed to stop APBC shells and a much more efficient interior layout.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

It seemd like the T34 had the upperhand on the Pz4 in RO1. I figured it should - sloped armor and all but it seems like the Pz4 is much stronger than the T34 now.

First, RO I was not realistic. Second, the T34's sloped armor was irl thinly inadequate vs high velocity 75mm APCBC rounds. Third, the Pz4F2 had a vastly more powerful weapon than the T34/76. Also, look here:

Don't forget, the Panzer IV in RO1 was either the F1 or F2. Both of which had 50mm frontal armor, compared to the Ausf G's 80mm.

The Panzer4 in RO II has 50mm not 80mm. Click here and here:

​

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=897121&postcount=20​

Seeing that the front armor of the Panzer4 in game does not display either of these two properties above it pretty much confirms 50mm and not 80mm.​

 

[The Beast (nl)]

As if RO1 was such a good example of map balance, the one tiger was absolutely worthless on Koningsplatz versus the 2 clearly superior russian tanks.

No, that is absolutely not true.

You have to get the right crew then nobody can hurt you
Many players used it incorrectly.

 

[Greenh0rn]

it seems eveone forget that slope armour is good cause it dubble the relative armour thicknes, BUT when a cannon can penetrate that amount of armour that dont mean anything more (eg is provide more armour whit less weight nothing more or less) and PZ4 f2 has got way superior firepower what T-34 cannot match whit its sloped armour. Even if it front to front battle pz 4 can (or atleast from real penetration values and combat reports) shoot out 1100-1200 m.

 

[Field Marshal Rommel]

No, that is absolutely not true. You have to get the right crew then nobody can hurt you Many players used it incorrectly.

Actually, the T34/85 was overpowered in RO I. First, it had the unrealistic exaggerated angling benefit. Second, its weapon was overpowered vs the Tiger I. In real life the 85mm weapon could only penetrate the Tiger I frontally at about 500 meters or less with a 0 degree shot. In RO I however the 85mm weapon can penetrate the Tiger I frontally at 2,000 meters. This is four times the real life distance. A horrible overpowered mess. Look here:



T34/85 vs Tiger I tank - YouTube

 

[theta123]

First, RO I was not realistic. Second, the T34's sloped armor was irl thinly inadequate vs high velocity 75mm APCBC rounds. Third, the Pz4F2 had a vastly more powerful weapon than the T34/76. Also, look here:

The Panzer4 in RO II has 50mm not 80mm. Click here and here:

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=897121&postcount=20​

Seeing that the front armor of the Panzer4 in game is neither invincible to 76mm hits or has any hint of added/bolted/welded armor on the model pretty much screams 50mm and not 80mm.​

This is true, but this does not matter in combat. A PZIV ausf F2 and T34 will both penetrate eachother at respectable combat distances.Stalingrad saw the Ausf F2 mostly, and very little ausf G actually. Infact i cant even recall ausf G's in stalingrad, can somebody provide a link of this?
Penetration does not equal killing power after penetrating the tank. A PZIV and T34 both did alot of damage after a penetration, because by the battle of stalingrad, both tanks had shells with explosive filler

While the T34 indeed has more vurnable ammo racks, the PZIV has one huge disadvantage aswel=Its gasoline engine. A PZIV had a 75% chance of catching fire after recieving a penetration, while the T34 only had 30-35% thanks to its diesel engine.

And everyone knows= Tanks get destroyed far more by engine fires then ammo racks detonating.
AP shells wherent reliable in doing this, but HEAT rounds where. Should we see a PZIV F1 with short 7.5cm and HEAT rounds, thats a totally diffrent question.

Overall, both the T34 and PZIV where infact, equal. Both crews experienced as fresh where issued on both sides. in Stalingrad, the best tank out there, was one wich could stay out of infantry ambushes and the one wich could spot the enemy first

 

[Verluste]

I cant one shot a P4 from the side when I aim on the weak spots (zero angle), but I can easily from the front. I find this quite odd. Anyone else having this issue?

 

[.KilrBe3]

I have 2 shot and even 1 shot T-34s on CommasirsHouse in a Panzer, something really is wrong with the t-34 atm.

was awesome though, i hate the tanks so buggy, but last night I gave it a shot, i owned. saved so many caps from going to the ruskies.

tl;dr, t34 sucks

 

[Krator]

From what I remember most tank fires were caused by ammo getting ignited anyways, so the gasoline engine disadvantage isn't that bad.

 

[Goralski]

German armor strenght was not in the tanks they used, it were much better trained crews, superior tactics and optics ( Car-Zeiss FTW )

 

[CaptHawkeye]

The T-34's rep largely came from it being able to swat the early German tanks away with ease. (Not to mention the valuable contributions of the KV-1.) The Panzer II and III, which made up the backbone of the Panzerwaffe during Barbarossa. Once the Germans started to bring in the up gunned the Mk 4, Stug, and Panther, the T-34/85 was developed to keep the tank competitive.

The T-34/85 was still however, just a medium tank. I don't know where people get off thinking it would beat the Tiger in a one on one.

 

[gimpy117]

I don't think its about the armor of the tanks, We all know at the ranges we have in game both tanks should be holed pretty easy, the main problem is...the T-34 seems to blow up very easy, where as the Panzer 4 seems to absorb bullets like crazy, and just keep running. I've put rounds directly into the engine compartment and it just trundles along. Furthermore...where's those ammo racks were told exist? I've looked at the reports, supposed to be one below the turret a little aft, I've put rounds right there...with no effect.

now the argument about the Germans having a version not present in Stalingrad is very possibly valid, or at least partially true...since at the beginning of the summer offensive only about 250 or so of the long barreled tanks were available. So essentially, Germans are fighting with the best they had in the panzer 4 family, where the soviets get...well a tank.

 

[RiccardoTheBeAst]

Don't forget, the Panzer IV in RO1 was either the F1 or F2. Both of which had 50mm frontal armor, compared to the Ausf G's 80mm.

Also, in RO1, most of the T-34's being used were the T-34/85 - with a much stronger cannon than the 76.2mm we have in RO2.

Current Pz IV G has 50mm front armor.......