@ Aouch :
- I agree that Pz3J/L60 should be in game. SHALL be in
game. If it is equivalent to Sherman 75, then it shouldn't
come earlier. Which kills the whole originality of the concept.
Plus you agreed that it was equivalent - WITH - the EXPENS
IVE tungsten shots. :
: I say Pz3J shouldn't be the native form. Should be
an upgrade. I also say you ought to PAY each time you
DARE to use tungsten shots to make it a surprise match
to a Sherman 75.
- Pz3 should come between Puma and StuG4. Then we
are in agreement on this one. I was thinking Pz2/Pz3
taking StuG4/Puma slots and StuG3 having Pz4 slot.
(Figuratively speaking). Not in it's can-kill-Sherman75
form, though. (J/N shouldn't be native)(Especially
not if Pz2 are running around)(Time frame, yknow)
- Pz3 having tank-zeal in groups. It encourages spam/
blobbing, which if anyone should have, then T34's would.
Pz3 had radios though, T34s didn't, usually. Fine, I'll let
this one slide, if they're nerfed further, and grouping
them is what makes them decent. Give me a minus, I'll
concede a plus. Balance, yknow.
(T34s should have this more, though)
- Tank speed. No Pz3 speeding all over. Hey, I agree.
I'll even put one in. Give 'em british infantry rules. So
that early Pz3 doesn't turn out unbalanced. I like this
very much
Have the tank-zeal equivalent improve
on this. I like it
(Slower in enemy territory when alone)
Every forever wants buffs, buffs, buffs. Nerfs give
character. Think about it. It's even an argument for
making Pz3 early. Thus, they don't win the game in the
first minutes of the game, too.
- I'm glad to see we agree about the StuG3's capabilities
That's always refreshing to hear
- Don't agree StuG3 should be an upgrade of the Pz3.
Pz4 were viable on their own. Pz3 eventually were not
viable. Then they were massively converted to something
else. Which turned out to be *THE MOST NUMEROUS*
German tank. It fit historically, and it fits the early Pz3.
... You just want an early super Greyhound that
kills tigers, with rare Sherman 75's... (I'm using an
analogy here). Who are more numerous than T34's and
Shermans, too... strenght doesn't fit, three pros don't
have character, and time frame doesn't fit. Plus Pz3
being more numerous than StuG3 doesn't fit either.
- PE Hotchkiss exists for the Stuka upgrade. Personally,
I think it's way too fast for it's real life counterpart.
Plus it's a 37mm for %#!(*'s sake. Hotchkiss should be
slower, and it's gun should fire slower (2 man crew,
remember?) and it's stuka ammo cost should be lower.
(Thank you EF for that one)(Completely agree!)
(I still think Soviets should have native dual T34 call-in
akin to PE's dual Panther call-in)(Native meaning by
default, not dependant on tree).
- Stug3 *IS* an upgrade of the Pz3. AND it should be
buildable as such on it's own. It's historical, and it fits.
It's WAY more numerous than Pz3. I agree that StuG3
shouldn't be available before Pz3, though. I know they
stopped Pz3 production before StuG3s, though. STuG3
are more effective AND they're cheaper.
It's like you're saying Pz4 shouldn't exist, or barely,
and that Pumas should be spammable and take out
Pershings. Yes, me and my analogies.
How would you say if they decided to remove all
Panthers, Tigers and Pz4 from German army?
StuG3 is the #1 most numerous WW2 german tank.
Accept it.
- Hmm, about costs and strenghts...
Pz3 historically came first, and was more expensive.
StuG3 was more numerous, cheaper and effective. It
also came later. The Pz3 also needs upgrades to bring
it up to par (J/N shouldn't be native), and tungsten
ammo is expensive. Hmmm. Ok, then permit continued
production of Pz3, but make StuG3 more attractive?
Required Tungsten shots should help people make that
decision. I'm thinking it as an expensive way to make
those still around worthwhile, but still prefer to go
StuG3. As... historically happenned.
On topic of Pz3 costs, it's coming out early is a part
of it's cost/balance. Later on, making it's price less
attractive once StuG3 is available.
I still think conversion of Pz3 to StuG3 should be an
option. It's historical. It's an upgrade. It fits.
Pz4 to StuG4 is a downgrade, so no point to it.
- IS2/ISU152 raping by hotchkiss... so wrong... so wrong.
But they're expensive little fuckers. Because COH_Reliq
likes weird units shouldn't mean we got to do same
It was brought about because PE needed an excuse to
have artillery (ie: Stuka). Yet not as good as Wehr
version, and yet different unit (which explains the
overblown cost)(Because PE's strenghts are supposed
to be elsewhere).
Mind you, they're quasi T4.
What I'm saying, is you can't make a unit earlier than,
more numerous than, and equivalent/better than T34's.
all in one.
StuG3 is more numerous than Pz3. It's historical.
Explain to me why you want super Greyhounds and to
quasi delete shermans? (Yes, me with my analogies).
Post Merge: September 09, 2010, 04:40:15 PM
I think PzII will have some special ability. However, in regards of combat-performance, it could be like Puma 2cm KwK, like the not upgunned Puma. Armor could be similiar.
- Pz2 : Ok we agree that Pz2 is/should be the Puma.
20mm+MG and no 50mm upgrade. Puma with no 50mm
upgrade capability is a con. Give it a different pro to
keep it around in end-game. Radio/Scout? Funkwagen
radar/Territory disruption? I like it.
So yes, late T2 till early T3 could be possible.
- Pz3 : Late T2/early T3. Ok, we agree.
While PzIII (depending on what version, maybe we'll see 5cm L/42 as factory-standard and upgun to either 7.5cm L/24 or 5cm L/60?) early till mid T3. (Everything seen as "normal" WH, since we don't even know how many buildings OH has.)
- Pz3 : Native is short 50mm or short 37mm (Pref short 50m)
Upgradeable to J long 50, or N short 75mm. Pz3 doesn't
carry 75mm in turret.
The Ausf. A to early Ausf. F were equipped with a 3.7 cm KwK 36 L/46.5 which proved adequate during the campaigns of 1939 and 1940 but the later Ausf. F to Ausf. J were upgraded with the 5 cm KwK 38 L/42 and the Ausf. J¹ to M with the longer 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 cannon in response to increasingly better armed and armoured opponents.
Ok for 50/L42 native, upgrade to J 50/60. AT upgrade.
The Panzer III remained in production as a close support vehicle. The Ausf. N model mounted a low-velocity 7.5 cm KwK 37 L/24 cannon - the same used by the early Panzer IV Ausf. A to Ausf. F models.
Ok. I was wrong. upgrade to N 75/24. AI upgrade.
: As for OH buildings. that's easy. HQ + 3 or 4 extras,
like all other factions (Xcept for British). OH is geared
for earlier game, so HQ+2 or HQ+3. Skip ultra late.
I would assume that Pz III is similiar to Vet0/Vet1 StuG IV, while StuG III could be a Pz IV/Geschützwagen-mixup.
- Here is where you are wrong. Although, no, we just
phrase it differently.
Vet0/1 StuG4 is helpless against infantry. While Pz4
can do all that a StuG can do, and more.
Pz3 should be a weaker, earlier Pz4 that you need to
upgrade to make it equivalent in one, but not both ways
(AT or AI) Pz4 can do both - at same time.
StuG3 is totally and absolutely anti-tank. With camo/
first strike capability. We agree here.
Pz3N was kept around for AI role. Historical. And also
because StuG3 sucks against infantry.
Pz3J shouldn't be equivalent to StuG3 AND be decent
against infantry (All those extra MGs, yknow). It should
rather be a way to keep the Pz3 you've already built
sorta competitive, but not quite. (And expensively so)
Making the StuG3 the better choice (No expensive
tungsten rounds as required obligation).
- And I agree we don't make the choices, the DEVs do.
Can only hope I can forward my arguments well enough
that they'll side with me, same as you.
I'm not so good at that. English isn't my main language,
and a penchant for balance, good playing, history and
uncompromised passion are my forte
I just can't phrase it right. :p
Post Merge: September 09, 2010, 04:47:06 PM
With the appearance of the T-34 and KV tanks, rearming the Panzer III with a longer, more powerful 50-millimetre (1.97 in) cannon was prioritised. The T-34 was generally invulnerable in frontal engagements with the Panzer III until the 50 mm KwK 39 L/60 gun was introduced on the Panzer III Ausf. J¹ in the spring of 1942. This could penetrate the T-34 frontally at ranges under 500 metres (1,600 ft).[3] Against the KV tanks it was a threat if armed with special high velocity tungsten rounds. In addition, to counter antitank rifles, in 1943 the Ausf. L version began the use of spaced armour skirts (schürzen) around the turret and on the hull sides. However, due to the introduction of the upgunned and uparmoured Panzer IV, the Panzer III was, after the Battle of Kursk, relegated to secondary roles, and it was replaced as the main German medium tank by the Panzer IV and the Panther.
By the end of the war the Pz.III had almost no frontline use and many exemplars had been returned to the factories for conversion into turretless assault guns StuG, which were in high demand due to the defensive warfare style adopted by the German Army by then.
:
- Pz3 earlier than T34.
- Short 50, not 37.
- Native Pz3 sucks against T34/76.
- Upgrade 50 long, short 75. EXPENSIVE Tungsten.
- Upgrade 50 long LOSES out against StuG3 as AT.
- Pz3 50 LONG were sent to be converted to StuG3.
- StuG3 ARE conversions AND built from scratch as such.
- StuG3 is most numerous tank in German army WW2.
- StuG3 killed 20,000 T34s. (Tank killer).
- T34 more numerous than StuG3.
- StuG3 more numerous than Pz3.
- You're not going to make Pz3 more numerous than T34.
