i had posted some data here before related to T-34s and KVs losses during the ‘‘Barbarossa invasion’’ that seems to agrree with that.
‘’ In the first two weeks of the invasion (Barbarossa), the Soviet Union suffered the loss of most of its T-34s and KVs, as well as the loss of most of the older tanks:
By 12 July 1941, the 4th MC had 45 new vehicles out of the original 414.[[19]]
By 27 June, the 6th MC had ceased to exist, having lost all 450 new tanks.[[20]]
By 7 July, the 8th MC had 43 tanks (both old and new) out of an original 899.[[18]]
By 7 July, the 15th MC had 66 tanks (both old and new) out of an original 749.[[18]]
On one hand, these corps had, within weeks, lost most of their T-34s and KVs, but on the other hand, German reports did not note such a massive elimination in combat.‘’
Source: ''German encounter of Soviet T-34 and KV tanks - Wikipedia ‘’
Also those losses were without the presence of Tiger I on the battle field . it participate the eastern front in 1942
I have posted some data about tiger i performance against T-34s too.
‘’ Soviet ground trial testing conducted in May 1943 determined that the 8.8 cm KwK 36 gun could pierce the T-34/76 frontal beam nose from 1500 m, and the front hull from 1500 m. A hit to the driver’s hatch would force it to collapse inwards and break apart.
According to the Wa Prüf 1 report, the Soviet T-34-85’s upper glacis and turret front armour would be defeated between 100 and 1,400 m (0.062 and 0.870 mi) at a side angle of 30 deg, while the T-34’s 85 mm gun was estimated to penetrate the front of a Tiger between 200 and 500 m (0.12 and 0.31 mi) at a side angle of 30 degrees to the incoming round.
source : ‘’ Tiger I - Wikipedia ‘’
How many of those losses were abandonment due breaking down and being abandoned, hit and abandoned without penetration, or driving somewhere they couldn’t be recovered from due driver incompetence and lack of recovery vehicles?
None of those very real world considerations are in WT.
Being “tracked” in combat is something that is in WT - but not subsequent abandonment that would happen even with well trained crews. And abandoned Soviet tanks in 1941 were invariably a loss to the army.
Talking about history, of course there were losses of T-34s due to lack of crew training or mechanical malfunctions etc. I think that we can all agree that the main advantage of T-34 was its mass production and not its performance which was good indeed.
Talking about the game, the problem is the unexplained “overperformance” in multiple occasions of most of russian tanks as i show with my examples in this topic or as easily someone can find on media .
To be more spesific once again, i dont mean that if a player take a russian tank will do a parade starting from team spawn all the way to the enemy spawn killing all the enemy tanks and surviving all enemy shots . (Despite that i have seen such battles with kv-220 squads before the BR upgrade…:)
My opinion is that the game favours the russian tanks by giving them ‘‘lucky’’ surviving leathal or no damage shots much more frequently than any other nation. Of course every tank in any nation has these kind of ‘‘lucky’’ surviving shots but not with such repetition.
The proof for what i am saying is that if we suppose that there is an equality of lucky surviving or no damage shots in all nations tanks, how can be explained the fact the vast majority of bias videos on media are for Russian tanks ?
For an example, i have seen lately 5 different videos all of russian tanks that got shot by a sturmmorser (which its shot is with no doubt lethal) and surviving with minor or no damages at all !!!
There should be videos with the same incident concerning other nation tanks but i have not seen anyone so far, i wonder why?
Big HE are pretty inconsistent as hell , sometime it kill sometime it doesnt just because you saw a russian tank tanking a big HE shell doesnt prove anything
Lucky survival shots are my nightmare.
Numerous times hit 90 deg angle at side of a Panther, Tiger, M4 (any version), when shell simply bounce or make no damage or even penetratiom, simply like it goes tru portsl in to another dimension.
i think, postgame analysis is just a more detailed video than the hit camera and shows how your shot was calculated during the batlle . The protection analysis shows what normaly should have happened with the shot.
as you can see i gave even more angle to my shot and still can pen it, but i agree with you its another gaijin spaghetti, pizza, canneloni code, it happen to every nation , bad luck , cherry picking moment…like the 3 other recent incidents that i have posted before with KVs
This is not the hit point you show on the hit simulation .
On your first screenshot is where you aimed but the panther was moving rather fast because on the hit camera of the second screenshot it is clear that you hit it behind your aiming point. Its easy to figure it out by the pattern of the camouflage painting which shows the exact hit point , look the screen shots. below…
Panther having 420mm of protection from the side, that’s hilarious.
That spot is also a pixel wide and tall, while other points just few pixels to the left or right where you’d also hit the same internal horizontal plate, would increase the armor from ~60mm to only ~100mm. This happens throughout the length of the plate, with only a few problematic pixels where the armor spikes from ~100mm to ~400mm for no apparent reason.
its simple geometry, for example a metal bar 100 cm long X 5 cm wide, if you try to penetrated it from tip to tip you deal with the 100 cm thickness and by the side with 5 cm, your shot tried to penetrate the thin horizontal plate above the track horizontaly… you should have aimed a little lower or upper… i will not say skill issues…i will say just bad luck
This would mean the same results could be observed across the full length of the plate, which isn’t the case.
You can pull your mouse from top to bottom and you’ll see that armor protection above the horizontal plate is ~60mm, directly on the plate itself is ~100mm and below it is ~40mm. Only a few spots are problematic, just like in all volumetric bugs.
