Company of Heroes: Eastern Front

Author Topic: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90  (Read 16112 times)

Offline Saavedra

  • Guard
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2010, 10:09:24 PM »
I like the T-90. It is the closest thing Sovs have to a machinegun. And it is mobile, too...

Offline Shadowmetroid

  • Guard
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2010, 10:30:09 PM »
We should replace the T-70 and T-90 with the BA-64 and T-60!

If u do that, make the former reward units plz... Some things are too hard to let go of.  ;D

Offline Lazarus

  • Ingenery
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2010, 01:10:59 AM »
I think these light tanks are kinda out of character compared to  the rest of the mod. Alot of the mod seems to focuses on the early war period, for example no starting units because "the Russians were cough off guard" and half strength conscript squads needing to be upgraded to full rifles because of supply problems, etc etc.

I believe that both tanks should be replaced outright. The T-70 with say a T-26 (10,300 built between 1931-1945) or one of the BT series of tanks (8000+ built between 1932 -1945). These tanks, though older were produced in more numbers then the T-70, served longer then the T-70 and fit the same role.

As for the T-90, well its been said before that it never saw combat, and its only in game as an anti-aircraft vehicle. Which to be honest is kinda silly. From what I recall aircraft attacks were not too effective or really used that often by the German factions in game and well, the soviets didn't have an AA-tank in service. The axis air attacks are few and far between, I believe a stationary AA emplacement would be better suited in game. As for the T-90 the primary use of the tank in game is as a mobile pillbox. So in that case, I believe it should be replaced with one of the multitude of armored cars that the soviets fielded. Like an FAI armored car, or a BA-20 or even a BA-1.

Offline WartyX

  • Developer
  • Poster of the Soviet Union
  • *
  • Posts: 2172
  • Dave got trolled! Trololol!
    • View Profile
    • Eastern Front @ Twitter
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2010, 01:21:07 AM »
Quote
and its only in game as an anti-aircraft vehicle. Which to be honest is kinda silly.

I'm assuming you never bought the American M3 Halftrack upgrade?

Offline Lazarus

  • Ingenery
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2010, 01:31:00 AM »
Your right to assume that, I never have. In fact, I'm bold enough to say I have never had to use any antiaircraft weapons against German air strikes in the entire time I have owned and played this game.

The only faction I have ever had to worry about air-strike wise was the Airborn with there damn strafing runs. And in that case, yes, I have spammed German AA.


Though, you took my statement out of context. I described how the T-90 was put in game as an anti-aircraft vehicle, and put there because the soviets "needed" one, but in reality is just used as a mobile pillbox. Which again, should be replaced by an armored car.

Offline Voop_Bakon

  • Commissar
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2010, 02:45:00 AM »
How was that out of context? Your message was that having it there simply for the AA was silly, which it is not.

I enjoy the t-90 and would not want it replaced by an armored car. Perhaps a reward unit, but until then, your stuck with the t-90 unless you make your own mod

nbeerbower

  • Guest
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2010, 03:42:33 AM »
Woah calm down! I'm fine with the T-70 and T-90, in fact I use the T-90 sometimes. I just would prefer to see something else there.

Offline guynumber7

  • Guard
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2010, 04:28:07 AM »
IMO T70 should be replaced with BA10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BA-10



Same gun as T70, 2 MG's. Fast but not as much armor. Dont replace T70 with BA64 cause BA64 had no cannon, only MG.

and im all for with T90 replaced with T60.

Or maybe BT7. BT7 was also fast with 45mm gun. and BT7A upgrade with upgrades it with 76mm howister, making it fast support artillery  ;D


T26 is too old imo..although it was used quite a bit.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2010, 04:31:13 AM by guynumber7 »

Offline Lazarus

  • Ingenery
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2010, 05:32:12 AM »
The BT series and the T-26 went into service a year apart...

Offline Artillerist

  • Guard
  • ***
  • Posts: 185
  • Smert' vragu, pizdets raschoty
    • View Profile
Re: Mistake with light tanks T-70 and T-90
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2010, 08:06:46 AM »
Almost all BT-2/3/5/7 were lost in 41, as for T-26's, so take it amay from them.

Early BA's (like BA-10) were stopped in producing already in summer 41, because of uselessness in war conditions.

The only "scout armed car" was widely used in 42-45 is BA-64 (Sd.Kz.222 analogue in game).
The main light tanks was widely built and used - T-60 and T-70 ("Puma", Hotchkiss, T-17, Stewart analogue in game).
-------------------
94th Guards Infantry Division, 100th Separated Anti-Tank Artillery Divizion.