• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal medal

Community Reputation

1,755 Outstanding

About KH_Alan

  • Rank
    Air marshal

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
  • Interests
    House Music, Games, Software, Graphic Design, Aikido

Recent Profile Visitors

3,302 profile views
  1. There is example 3 posts above. Not only it wasnt 3:1 in Allies favor it was the opposite so this deson't go into favor of overall 10:1 ratio.
  2. I don't what you did but you did it. Excellent ping and no PL at all. I had great time. Thanks for the battle.
  3. You misunderstood me. One battle odds cannot represent whole battlefield. At that battle odds were 10:1 but on 4 other battles odds were lets say 3:1. So in average 4.4:1.
  4. Not really. That it is. But even historical battles are not very historical unfortunately.
  5. I was talking in general. One battle doesn't make a rule. If we ever have that battle and if its going to be historical than odd should be historical.
  6. Yes I know. Odds were not historically 10:1 on the battlefield.
  7. Odd were not even that much. Max 5:1 if not less.
  8. They were produced in total numbers 30:1 but odds were not like that on the battlefield.
  9. But isn't "Objekt 253" what we have in the game not "Objekt 252" whats in the picture?
  10. What I could find is this: Which would mean that after IS-4 (which was produced after 1945) they continued development on IS-6, IS-7 & IS-10. Also there is this page from the book about tanks which states that other tanks (IS-4 and up) were made after WWII:
  11. You are both right and not in the same time because exceptions are not making a rule. So if at some point Japanese used Ha-Go agains IS-2 because they haven't got anything else it doesn't make it a rule. Also since Japanese tanks are usually combined with Germans so that would mean more Tigers and Panthers. If we would have historical theaters (like it is with air battles): RU vs GER Eastern front, US/UK Western and North African front, japan vs RU far Eastern front, then what you say could happen.
  12. Strangely in SB is other way around. Played 9 battles with Panther A and won 8.
  13. That is also not entirely true. Example is Rhine event. There should be some class limitation otherwise its no fun for either side to play. Either you seal club with Germans or you die miserably on Allied team. Not to mention its quite visible by queue numbers.
  14. I posted there were some modifications like Type 5 which was produced in 1944 but it is still 1936 tank design. By your logic it is the same if British decided to build modified British Mark I tank from WWI in lets say 1941 and what that tank would be historically matched against Pz II/III. No it wouldn't, it would still be the same WWI tank with some modifications. It faced them historically because Japanese military doctrine was quite different than Russian. They leaned more to infantry than armor landwise but they leaned more to their navy as Japan is an island. IS-6 wasn't produced during WWII (at least not the one which could actually move) so it would probably be only IS-3 spam which isn't that bad.
  15. Hardly a historical matchup as Ha-Go is 1936 tank (there were some modifications but its still pre war tank design) while IS-2 is 1943 tank. Also you cannot balance Centurion Mk3/10 with stabilized gun against Panther F/TIIP/TIIH and yet it is so in the game.
  16. It sure is. US 90 mm barely can pen Panthers UFP at point blank and it should do it up to 1000 m (according to US tests). APCR is also quite unreliable against Panthers UFP unless very close or Panther is on downslope. M82 cannot pen even when Panther is on slight downslope.
  17. But that mechanic itself has no sense whatsoever. I really cannot see why they implemented it (I simply don't buy that hacker/cheater story).
  18. There should be some class limitation in those kinds of events otherwise they don't have any sense. I mean what can M4A3 do if he meets Tiger II frontally in the same street. Even Tiger I can be difficult opponent if its angled.
  19. .30 cal is 7.62x33. I posted that 7.92x57 can pen its side. But its side also can be penned by 7.62x51 or 7.62x57 AP rounds.
  20. Frontally maybe not. Even though 14,5 KPVT AP round has 32 mm RHA penetration on 500 m@90°. They are for sure not immune from the side. BMP 1/2 can be penned from the side by MG42 7,92 mm. I have witnessed when I was in the army. It could be added but it would be powercreep especially if its positioned too low on BR ladder.
  21. Well we were talking about the game. And it would be if you put it against PzIIIs or reserve tanks because BRDMs 14,5 mm heavy MG can pen Bradley, LAV, BMP1/2/3. So yes it would be powercreep. So yes its still by definition powercreep if you pit vehicles from WWII and post war.
  22. Do we have that in the game? No. Also strangely enough Russian tech tree have only 1 6.7 tank and thats premium T-34 100. All other nations have quite few 6.7 tanks. If you exclude Panther II & Tiger II 10,5 cm which are prototypes and in game only to balance Russian T5 when there were no other nations German post war tanks start at 8.0. Other nations on much lower BRs.
  23. Just check BR 6.7/7.0 and see how many WWII tanks is there. Even lower there are post war tanks.
  24. You're right it is. For a long time people are asking for its 2nd spawn back but Gaijin wont budge for unknown reason.
  25. Well post war tanks against WWII tanks are definition of powercreep.
  26. Which is less than 3:1, but even with 1:1,5 for Russians Germans did have air supremacy. In general planes had very little impact on tanks. Even on Kursk as target rich environment planes efficiency against ground targets was up to 5%. On Western front reports are usually around 5% some go up to 8% which is still much less than in the game. Biggest impact on vehicles and their usage in general was made by infantry which is not present in WT.
  27. If we are speaking historicaly than planes were not that dispared as vehicles were and Germans did have air supremacy on Eastern front. Also there were no Typhoons on Kursk. And historically speaking planes had very little impact on tanks. Soft targets more but tanks very low. German team loosing on Kursk is very rare occurance.
  28. In town (CQB) yes on open map like Kursk/Mozdok 3:1 ratio wouldn't matter for Tigers.
  29. US Army did classify it as heavy tank during WWII. It was reclassified as medium after the war when heavier tanks like M103 were built. Panthers were always classified as mediums. Weight has nothing to do with tank class. M26 should get 2nd spawn but then it should be reclassified as medium otherwise all heavy tanks should get same treatment.
  30. Here is info about new Combined EC test whoever is interested: And yes, finally big Sinai map in RB too.
  31. I will definately try to be there. As usual both sides suits me wherever player is needed to balance teams.
  32. Yes, especially when you see 50t tank jumping up and down going accross frozen plowed field. In reality it would either get stuck permanently or cut right through it if ground is hard enough. Physics is a strange thing in WT.
  33. Now there isn't but thats why I said it needs more terrain around the village itself so cap point might be spaced out but one would also need to control terrain around the cap to sucessfully cap it. Example might be village on Kursk. It can be focus point if you put cap there but there is lots of terrain around it to allow multiple approaches so you need to control terrain in order to cap it.
  34. Map definately has potential but again main focus is CQB. It should have more terrain around it and keep the village as focus point. That way it would allow much more manouvering space either for light tanks to flank or at least to increase gameplay diversity. Otherwise it gets pretty linear rather quick.
  35. Speaking of big maps whoever wants really big theater keep an eye on SB event thread for something like this: Its still in testing phase and with some issues (most likely due to low number of custom battle servers) but this is probably what most people expected from WT.
  36. Some people are just trigger happy. Shoot first and apologize (or not) later. Personally I rather not shoot if I am not sure about my target and get killed than kill friendly and ususally afterwards enemy killes me because I revealed my position by shooting.
  37. Last few battles of large El Alamein myself and 1 or 2 others were ones that went into desert part. All others when N into canyons. Probably thats the reason they shrunk that map. Here is my map list sorted from the best downwards: SB Mozdok (all game modes), Kursk (Battle mode), SB Sinai (Battle mode), SB Poland (Break mode), SB El Alamein, SB Tunisia, SB Eeastern Europe (Battle mode), RB Poland (Domination mode), RB Mozdok (Domination mode), RB Eastern Europe (Domination mode). As you can see most of bigger maps which offer much better tactical approach (not just shooting style) are in SB.
  38. And you are completely ignoring fact what I posted. They were considering 1 (one) torsion bar suspension system and yet didn't use it because they needed tanks fast and haven't got the time to fully develop it. Panther used 2 (two) torsion bar suspension system which no other nation had made nor had in development. If you have any sources that backs your claim please share it.
  39. I am always up to that all vehicles characteristics should be made as close to real life as possible, good & bad. In this specific case I couldn't find any source which points to L35 HESH penetration values that we have now in the game. All info I found are around 150 mm.
  40. No. Check post again. I said none had torsion bar suspension like Panthers and after war they looked up to it. And no again. T-44 was in development after T-34 85 which was developed as tank to counter Panther and Tiger. Same goes for M26 developed to counter Panther and Tiger. Both were developed after Panther actually. And if you really want to talk about design flaws check T-34 76 which has no turret basket nor dedicated commander and in game it doesn't suffer any RoF penalties for that or T-34 too hard armor which was much more prone to spalling even when shell bounced. Or its very bad Christie suspension which is clearly not disadvantage in game when going off road like it was in reality.
  41. Interesting is how almost every flight model change for planes has attached its data source on update page but none of the ground vehicle changes especially new penetration values has.
  42. Best solution would be random CA map. Sometimes you get planes sometimes you don't as it was in reality. Planes weren't always present at every tank battle as much as ground vehicles weren't always present at every air assault.
  43. No. T-34M development was discontinued when war broke out not in 43. As for its torsion suspension it is much different than Panthers because Panthers had 2 torsion bars thus interleaved wheels. Its overengeneering but still the best technology provided in those times. T20E3 was canceled because other reasons not torsion suspension. On T23E3 US realized torsion suspension lowers ground pressure for 20% in regards to HVSS. So one can only imagine how much smoother (and more complex to build) is torsion suspension with 2 bars. This chart shows how smooth Panthers supspension was: Design would be called flawed only if it didn't produce results what it was designed for. Panthers suspension certainly produced good results but it had some other technical issues for example its main drive was too weak for its mass. Now that you can call flawed design but it also wasn't completely flawed by lack of knowledge it was flawed deliberately because lack of time.
  44. It's not a flaw it's called "overengineering". Interleaved roadwheels were issue when you needed to fix/replace track/wheel. As for smooth ride and after WWII production lots of tanks looked up to Panthers torsion bar suspension and made their own version of it. AFIK T-72, Leopard 1&2, M1A1 and some others use torsion bar suspension. Not like Panthers, modified version but principle is still the same.
  45. Ne da ti se čini nego je, a tako i treba biti. KwK 42 L/70 (iliti dugi 75 mm) je bolji od KwK 36 L/56 (iliti kratki 88 mm) što se tiče probojnosti i položenije putanje. KwK 36 je bolji jedino što se tiče efekta nakon proboja jer ima jače eksplozivno punjenje. Najveće mane Panthera D su užasna brzina unazad i brzina okretanja kupole (može se malo kompenzirati okretanjem cijelog tenka ali ne uvijek). Čekaj dok dođeš do Panthera A onda ćeš tek uživati. Ja sam si grafiku namjestio da izgleda kao da gledaš snimku iz WWII. Naravno da sam time malo u lošijoj poziciji jer je vidljivost realnija, ali navikao sam se i jednostavno mi se sviđa tako.