ostheer medium tanks

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

Loupblance...
i cant understand u any more 
Panzer III as main tank of an Ostheer could work. Till 1943 Panzer III was the main tank of german Panzer-Divisionen. A trained Pz III crew was able to fight against a T-34 tank. On paper T-34 is better than Pz III but there some point which sap the datas of the T-34 ( e.g. T-34 tanks are nearly blind when command copula and driver door were closed ).
Pz III showed in Italy and in Normandy that it could deal with Sherman tanks, too.
So out of historical view i would say a Pz III is acceptable.

But remember CoH is a computer game which cant simulate the hole reality. So when a real Pz III could destroy a T-34 or a Sherman why should a Ostheer Pz III cant do this? Okay. Perhaps not in a ingame 1on1 situation but perhaps 2 or 3 PzIII could deal with armour like T-34 or Sherman or Cromwell.

And in combination with StuG III there is an other scenario possible; Pz III as main tank fight against enemy's armour. StuG III with a long barreled 7,5cm gun positions behind a group of Pz III as main tank hunter. Enemy's fire could concentrate on Pz III and StuG III could shot down tank by tank

Everything is possible! CoH is a game 

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

 Small detail. Earlier on, the PzIII was AT.
 The StuG and the PanzerIV were the anti infantry tanks.
 Then roles were switched around.

Thats exactly what I want ingame. maybe stugIII short barreled and pzIII L42 appearing nearly at same time, maybe with a research from amroured command, and that first stugIII deals with infantry and pzIII with light vehicles/tanks, up to T70/T90 or M8 and Stuart. Then, to raise firepower and effectivity, stugIII goes for killing tanks with the long barreled gun and pzIII is not that important anymore, except of killing infantry with the short barelled gun of ausf. N, so L24. So its historical correct and everyone has what he wants. But will pzIII and stugIII be the heaviest tanks buildable? or will there be a tiger or another tank already existing?

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

Well. Ostheer will need a second, a stronger tank.
With Panzer III or StuG III u cant deal with russians JS-II 

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

@Lord Rommel
That's why I asked 
Are there any plans by the devs to include a bigger tank?

[Ryousan]

Mmm I Vote for Battlegroup Call Ins!

Buildable Tigers sound OP and we have enough Panther for a lifetime

[Loupblanc]

 @Lord Rommel :
 My idea was, essentially,
 PzIIIL42 as StuGIV
 PzIIIL60 as PzIV / PzIIIL24(75) as FlakPanzer
 StuGIIIF as Panther. Equivalencies/Roles, I said.
 (Small note: Notice FlakPanzer doesn't have skirts)
 If you take away StuGIIIF, then you need to buff PzIII to
 Panther level. Which is what Aouch wants.

 * 2-3 PzIII killing T34/Sherman with numerical superiority.
 Explain to me how 5700 tanks overwhelm 75,000 tanks with
 their numerical superiority?
 
 * PzIII/StuGIIIF combos. Yes. EXACTLY what I want.
 * Sure, StuGIIIF can deal with IS2, with First Strike/
 Ambush. It would definitively give it a reason for being.
 No, I don't propose to make it uber Just give it enough
 flaws to justify giving it nice Pros. Also, I'd make it a
 weaker Marder/StuGIV kinda combo. Similar to SU85/100.
 Keeping it in the AT role would justify keeping PzIII around.
 
 ** Lord Rommel : Oh, I know T34 is better on paper,
 but Poor training (most crews couldn't even read), and
 horrible turret ergonomics (PzIII - 3 people in turret,
 T34 (early) 2 people in turret) - PzIII crew had experience,
 T34 crew usually didn't (till late in war). But they still
 had HUGE HUGE advantage in production. Somewhere,
 that ought to show somewhere.

  Of course PzIII can work as OstHeer MBT, but please
 give it a different flavor than PzIV.

 I suggested giving it 8 pop/Tank (To keep numbers down)
 Fatal Sidegrades (They gain something with a flaw)
 (L60 can't IF and L24 can't AT)
 Tungsten shots (expensive but balances things) to
 balance having LOWER HEALTH THAN PzIV.
 Skirts upgrade is nice too.
 The Stuart was an example. But I was actually thinking
 around StuGIV health.
 PzIII being able to have infantry follow/cover is nice, too.
 
 StuGIII being needed for consistant tank fighting keeps
 PzIII from overwhelming the map with sheer superiority.

 You heavily risk giving OstHeer a Russian 'feel'
 (Tons of Units, but better units, with Vet). Doesn't balance.

 @Ryousan :
 Oh, I agree with Battlegroup call-ins. I wanted the Soviets
 to have a PE_Dual Panther similar call-in (with 2 T34, with
 2 squads)(Upgradeable from 1 T34 + 1 squad). I also agree
 that we have enough Panthers for a lifetime, as well.
 And yea, buildable Tigers sounds very op.

 @Maxiking6 :
 Bigger tank. Well Elefant, for starts.
 Nashorn, as well (Marder4 kinda).

 Lord Rommel :
 Have StuGIIIF deal with Russian JS-2.
 Give Germans a 'feel'.

[Aouch]

I think I'll have to agree with Lord Rommel forever. 
Everytime he says something, it's just right.

Panzer III as main tank of an Ostheer could work. Till 1943 Panzer III was the main tank of german Panzer-Divisionen. A trained Pz III crew was able to fight against a T-34 tank. On paper T-34 is better than Pz III but there some point which sap the datas of the T-34 ( e.g. T-34 tanks are nearly blind when command copula and driver door were closed ).
Pz III showed in Italy and in Normandy that it could deal with Sherman tanks, too.
So out of historical view i would say a Pz III is acceptable.

Exactly. But that's a fact some people here don't want to hear. 

But remember CoH is a computer game which cant simulate the hole reality. So when a real Pz III could destroy a T-34 or a Sherman why should a Ostheer Pz III cant do this? Okay. Perhaps not in a ingame 1on1 situation but perhaps 2 or 3 PzIII could deal with armour like T-34 or Sherman or Cromwell.

And in combination with StuG III there is an other scenario possible; Pz III as main tank fight against enemy's armour. StuG III with a long barreled 7,5cm gun positions behind a group of Pz III as main tank hunter. Enemy's fire could concentrate on Pz III and StuG III could shot down tank by tank

That's actually exactly the situation I would like to see in CoH. 

Well. Ostheer will need a second, a stronger tank.
With Panzer III or StuG III u cant deal with russians JS-II

Another point here, which is just right.
Whenever Loupblanc comes with his "Remove all tanks and make Pz3 kill IS-2, because it has to be so, otherwise a Pz3 won't function"-argument, he seems to completely forget that Pz3 and Stug3 will perhaps be not the only tanks of the Ostheer. 
(Sorry, but that's true. I know I can be an asshole sometimes...)

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 06:41:09 PM

If you take away StuGIIIF, then you need to buff PzIII to
 Panther level. Which is what Aouch wants.

I'll try and say it a last time:
I want Pz3 J (L/42) as gap-filler between Stuart and Sherman.
Give them the British-slow-movement-con to prevent early rush and enforce "move as group"-tactic.
Pz3 J¹ as counter for Sherman75 and T-34/76. Sure, Panther can also deal with those, but Pz3 can't deal with /85. So sorry, I don't get your argument. 

* 2-3 PzIII killing T34/Sherman with numerical superiority.
 Explain to me how 5700 tanks overwhelm 75,000 tanks with
 their numerical superiority?
 
 * PzIII/StuGIIIF combos. Yes. EXACTLY what I want.

Soviets hadn't many T-34 in 1942. That's when the Pz3 was on the battlefield. T-34 were produced till 1945. Pz3 weren't.
So you can't compare numbers. (Same for Sherman BTW!)
Also, Germans had different tank-tactics than Allies. Pz3 were used as armored spearhead, while Allies normally supported their infantry with tanks, therefore Pz3 could take out enemy tanks because they were actually more. (In that situation).
Later, Stug3/Pz3 combo like Lord Rommel suggested is the way to go. (I still think we've some ideas in common, Loup )

Lord Rommel :
 Have StuGIIIF deal with Russian JS-2.
 Give Germans a 'feel'.

Same here. Stug3 shouldn't deal with IS-2 alone, like Pz3 shouldn't deal with T-34 alone. 

[Loupblanc]

 @Aouch : Sigh. Boot licking Lord Rommel's posts
 saying something is right because he said it...

 Lord Rommel's comments CONTRADICT one another :p
 - You can't have StuGIIIF as a REWARD unit (which you
 agreed to), (It won't be able to upgrade)(And it means
 PzIII has to take over it's AT role).
 - If PanzerIII and StuGIIIF appear in same force, then
 it's not a reward unit :p
 - I know PzIIIL60 can kill T34/Sherman. But how do you
 represent the PzIV replaced the PzIII as a MBT?
 - What won't work is you want PzIII to be MORE numerous
 than T34/Sherman *AND* to kill them 1-on-1. That 'feel'
 should be Russian/American tanks.

 You are giving PzIII the 'Spam'/Better production of
 Americans/Russians *WITH* German better quality.

 Can't you see how that makes no sense?

 I never said a PzIII couldn't destroy a T34/Sherman.
 What I mean is that while a PzIII can destroy a T34/
 Sherman, it'll have trouble when it's facing 3-4 T34
 /Shermans. Which is where the Uber Tiger tanks come in.

 If you want an alternative to Tiger/Panther, then
 StuGIIIF comes in.
 
 Makes for more interesting play.
 And StuGIII *IS MOST NUMEROUS GERMAN TANK OF WAR*
 
 --------------
 * Remove conversions from Germans, give conversions to
 America (75 to 76mm) makes no sense. Not historical.
 * Making StuGIII a reward unit is like making T34/Sherman
 a Reward Unit.
 * Last I checked, I didn't know PzIII had numerical
 superiority against StuGIII. Especially late-war (Battle
 of France, maybe)(Never after)
 * T34/Sherman was enough of an issue for PzIII that
 they SWITCHED to the PzIV/StuGIIIF for AT duty. How
 do you propose to demonstrate that?
 
 --
 * Other tanks will be Marder4 (Nashorn) a Tiger-Level
 AT tank (Weak armor, Flak88 Range). Should be doctrinal.
 (And Capped). And move like a Hummel.
 * And Elefant (also doctrinal)
 --
 * Maybe Panther and Tigers, too.
 (But then why not put PanzerIV?) = You've got Wehr 1.5

[Aouch]

Sorry, Loup. I didn't know that reward-units couldn't be upgraded. Maybe I played too much CoH with PE's Stubby since I can't have this lovely little French Hotchkiss tank.

About the production-numbers: Read my post above yours.

Historical is also a thing I'll say the last time: Lord Rommel being an historian himself does actually say:

Everything is possible! CoH is a game

In the end I don't mind what the DEVs add in which way. I just want an Ostheer which is fun to play, has a new gameplay-fealing, new units and doesn't rely solely on Stugs.

[Loupblanc]

 @Aouch :
 You specifically said you wanted PzIIIL60+tungsten
 to kill T34/85 and Sherman76. 1-on-1 AND have numerical
 superiority.
 - You can't have PzIII num superiority AND have StuGIII
 (Then you'd have 6 to 1)
 - Lord Rommel said he didn't want PzIII and StugIII together.
 Then he said they could fight together. You can't agree to
 both and still make sense.
 -------
 - As for PzIII/German armored spearheads.
 Well, allies used tank armies too for armored spearheads.
 COH is 1944-1945. Not 1941-1942. Also, the basic idea
 is REGIONAL superiority. Which is a basic German Tenet.
 And one I completely agree with. But you can't make a
 game where the Germans 'are always at their best'.
 
 That came at a cost : Of no German tanks elsewehre.
 (Which is what StuG were for, actually. They were
 part of Artillery corps)(!!!!) to offer tanks when 'tank
 armies' were not present. (StuG are SPG, not Tanks).
 
 So, essentially, you are saying that you want OstHeer
 to always be 'the armored spearhead' (At their best,
 all the time). Doesn't work.

 Although I will say this :
 FINE. Make it a doctrinal tree, then. That way, if you
 really want to be 'The Armored regional superiority'
 OstHeer, you should give up something for it (aka :
 a Doctrinal Tree). Your OstHeer idea has no flaws.
 It's all : My idea is very good. I got 16 Queens. And
 other has 16 pawns. This will be fun

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 06:56:58 PM

Sorry, Loup. I didn't know that reward-units couldn't be upgraded. Maybe I played too much CoH with PE's Stubby since I can't have this lovely little French Hotchkiss tank.

About the production-numbers: Read my post above yours.

Historical is also a thing I'll say the last time: Lord Rommel being an historian himself does actually say:

Everything is possible! CoH is a game

In the end I don't mind what the DEVs add in which way. I just want an Ostheer which is fun to play, has a new gameplay-fealing, new units and doesn't rely solely on Stugs.

 - I really thought Reward Units can't have upgrades...
 Then you said it : Hotchkiss tank - which has 2 upgrades :
 Stuka and long barrel upgrade. Insert foot in mouth.
 I'm the one giving the apology here.
 - I never asked for OstHeer to rely solely on StuGs.
 I like the PzIII, and like having it included in OstHeer.
 I just don't think it should be equal of PzIV/T34/Sherman.
 (Or even as numerous, ack!)

Post Merge: September 15, 2010, 07:00:17 PM
 Bad example, here, but you'll get my point, I hope.
 It's like saying America has best Karateka fighters because
 they have Chuck Norris.

 So then allow America faction to have 'buildable'/'trainable'
 Chuck Norris with no cap. They're all chuck Norris. And USA
 should have better melee units because they Chuck Norris.
 And, no, Chuck Norris can't be killed, then neither should his
 clones be killable. They are THAT bad-ass.

 Would you find playing AGAINST chuck-Norris america
 fun in the least? But why? I'd think it's nice and fun for
 me to play Chuck-Norris america against yours
 (with no historical basis, either - hey, it's just a game).

[Ryousan]

* Making StuGIII a reward unit is like making T34/Sherman
 a Reward Unit.

Loup as far as I know 88s were used extensevely, still are Doctrine Specific   

- What won't work is you want PzIII to be MORE numerous
 than T34/Sherman *AND* to kill them 1-on-1. That 'feel'
 should be Russian/American tanks.

If Coh was a campaign scale game  that would a good argument, but CoH is Battle Scale. The soviets over streched their advance in some ocassions which allowed the Panzer Divisions to overwelm them with more tanks, Im mistaken?

But putting that aside, I think what Lord Rommel proposed was to best the allied tanks with coordination rather than with numbers.

If you want an alternative to Tiger/Panther, then
 StuGIIIF comes in.

Loup, what fails in that proposal is that StugIII doesnt win in 1 on 1 against an ISU-152  even with Ambush, First Strike, Marder Lockdown or whatever. Is kinda like wanting a hetzer to overpower a Pershing.


In that sense I have to agree with Auch, PzIII could be the equivalent of StugIV, StugIII-PzIV, and a Uber-Tank. That without losing flavor

[Loupblanc]

* Making StuGIII a reward unit is like making T34/Sherman
 a Reward Unit.

Loup as far as I know 88s were used extensevely, still are Doctrine Specific   
 ** Then Sherman/T34 should be doctrine specific

- What won't work is you want PzIII to be MORE numerous
 than T34/Sherman *AND* to kill them 1-on-1. That 'feel'
 should be Russian/American tanks.

If Coh was a campaign scale game  that would a good argument, but CoH is Battle Scale. The soviets over streched their advance in some ocassions which allowed the Panzer Divisions to overwelm them with more tanks, Im mistaken?

 ** So if Chuck Norris can uni-punch someone dead,
 that should always be the case when Americans fight
 Germans, I'm mistaken?

But putting that aside, I think what Lord Rommel proposed was to best the allied tanks with coordination rather than with numbers.
 - Oh, I AM TOTALLY for that. Winning by superior
 micro than by spam.

If you want an alternative to Tiger/Panther, then
 StuGIIIF comes in.

Loup, what fails in that proposal is that StugIII doesnt win in 1 on 1 against an ISU-152  even with Ambush, First Strike, Marder Lockdown or whatever. Is kinda like wanting a hetzer to overpower a Pershing.

 - Actually, the counter to the ISU-152 (Doctrine unit)
 is the Elefant (doctrine unit). I win
 - Hetzer no cap. Pershing has cap. I win
 - PE-AT has JagPanther for Pershing. I win

In that sense I have to agree with Auch, PzIII could be the equivalent of StugIV, StugIII-PzIV, and a Uber-Tank. That without losing flavor

- Actually, I'm the one who said that

[Aouch]

EF doesn't take place in a specific period of time.
Therefore you can't compare the numbers of Pz3 which were built in the early war-time to the numbers of Shermans and T-34 which were produced all over the war-time.
Same for Stug3. Production-numbers raised significantly over the whole war-time, therefore it's unfair to compare those numbers.

- What won't work is you want PzIII to be MORE numerous
 than T34/Sherman *AND* to kill them 1-on-1. That 'feel'
 should be Russian/American tanks.

Brits also don't rely on "spamming" tanks, additionally their tanks are rather "weak". Still Commonwealth can win.
Therefore USSR/USA "spams", Brits don't.
WH and PE don't spam tanks, OH ? .

However, I rather meant it the way Ryousan put it:

But putting that aside, I think what Lord Rommel proposed was to best the allied tanks with coordination rather than with numbers.

Some more things:
At least to me it seems that Lord Rommel just give suggestions and don't "want something". Then I just said I like that idea, because I thought that could work for the OH.
What's so wrong with liking different concepts?

You specifically said you wanted PzIIIL60+tungsten
 to kill T34/85 and Sherman76. 1-on-1 AND have numerical
 superiority.
 - You can't have PzIII num superiority AND have StuGIII
 (Then you'd have 6 to 1)

I want L/60 with tungsten having a chance against T-34/85 and Sherm76. I don't want them to drive towards an enemy tank, fire a tungsten-round, enemy tank blows up and Pz3 drives by without taking damage.
Apparently, that's how you think I want it. However, that's not the case.
I also don't want them to be more common than other tanks.
 
My concept was to give them the British-movement-con you suggested, therefore they are forced to move in groups.
However, this doesn't mean that you have 15 tanks driving in groups of 3-4 all over the battlefield but instead you have only one group.
This Panzerrudel can't be everywhere, BUT where it is, it's usually numerical superior.
Therefore the rest of the frontline can't have tanksupport but instead has to rely on Stugs (like you said, Stugs were the tanks of the infantry!  Therefore the idea of Stugs being a mobile cover for inf), PaKs or improvised AT-tactics.

[Ryousan]

** Then Sherman/T34 should be doctrine specific

My Point being if they made the StugIII doctrine specific, or reward unit. no hard feelings about it.

** So if Chuck Norris can uni-punch someone dead,
 that should always be the case when Americans fight
 Germans, I'm mistaken?

Dont Understanding what you tried to say 

- Oh, I AM TOTALLY for that. Winning by superior
 micro than by spam.

Nice to see we can agree in some things 

- Actually, the counter to the ISU-152 (Doctrine unit)
 is the Elefant (doctrine unit). I win
 - Hetzer no cap. Pershing has cap. I win
 - PE-AT has JagPanther for Pershing. I win

-Let supose for a second that not all the Ostheer doctrines have Uber tanks. I win 

-Stug will have cap . I Win ?. Yet Hetzer bad example.

-Then what has Ostheer for Pershing? . Let call it a draw

- Actually, I'm the one who said that

Did you? I neeed new glasses 

[Loupblanc]

 @Ryousan :
 -
 If they make StuGIII doctrine specific, they have to
 make T34/Sherman/Panzer4 doctrine specific. If a tank
 ought to be Doctrine-specific, it'd be more PzIII than
 StuGIII, don't you see?
 -
 Re: Chuch Norris Spam.
 In game terms, if you change all the Zerglings to Uberlisks
 (Ultralisks) with a 4vs1 ratio advantage and 3vs1 quality
 advantage... it just doesn't add up.
 -
 German winning by quality, not spam.
 : Well, yea. But a PzIII that is superior to *AND*
 numerically superior to T34/Sherman doesn't add up.
 -
 Re: I win, I win, I win.
 Not really. If don't have Elefant, they have Nashorn.
 Ifnot they have FPAK88. Either way, there will be
 something uber for each OstHeer tree to deal with
 ISU152. Pesides, Multiple M10s and AT57+Tungsten
 can kill King Tigers. So it's not an issue. Just use
 StuGIII and Marders. Problem fixed.
- StuG will have a cap.
 : When T34/Sherman have a cap.
 When crocodile/PanzerFlak has a cap.
 - Hetzer only has a cap because AI is stupid.
 (Does it?)
 - Pershing is 1 doctrine unit of 1 doctrine tree.
 OstHeer has Elefant. Of 1 doctrine tree. It balances out.
 - Yes, I'm the one you suggested it.
 You can't take my own suggestion and turn it against me.
 It would say that my idea is bad because I said it.
 But if someone said sae thing, then it's good.
 It's like Aouch said : Whatever Lord Rommel says it's
 amazing best idea (Despite he offering conflicting ideas).