ostheer medium tanks

[Loupblanc]

 - Sigh. a 3 PzIII battlegroup call-in? Why not make it a 12x Tiger
 call-in battlegroup? If someone should have something like this, it
 ought to be the Russians.
 - Pz III/IV was not 'rarely used'. It was never used.
 - As for Nashorn, it's too powerful. It would be akin to a Tiger
 call-in and doctrinal and capped. I don't see it as a 'standard' unit.

[Cozmin95]

- Who said anything about a Panzer III Battlegroup call-in?
- Yeah i eventually found out Panzer III/IV was never used!
- And yes Nashorn is too strong to be a buildable unit but they still need another tank other than StuG III, Panzer III and Panzer II(Luchs or Ausf. C)
- Can you stop with your obsession for the Russian to get a battlegroup?The Soviet faction is done so move on and think about the Ostheer!

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

@Cozmin95
Noone wanted to change or discuss the soviet faction, and noone wanted them to get the tank-callins. I think Loup just wanted to say that the Germans are not about a huge tankarmy-callin -> quantity, but about fewer units and quality, who its reallife counterpart was.
Look, the soviet union had, in any situation in the war, more tanks than germany, but german crews were more skilled, every tank (if i remember right) had radio equipment, ans the sights were much better. also the german weapons where better ( in late-war).

[Loupblanc]

 Exactly as Maxiking6 said.
 Americans have a multi-tank callin (Infantry, call in battlegroup)
 (Infantry and M10s/Greyhounds).
 PE has a multi-tank calling (2x Panthers)
 Wehr... No.
 British... No.
 If someone really ought to have the American infantry doctrine
 battlegroup calling ability, it ought to be the soviets, seriously.

 Now you describe the OstHeer having a multiple-tank BG calling
 in ability? Seriously, I think not.

 It's like giving Protoss ability to call-in Zerg-style 30 Carriers
 all at once. Quality and quantity AND speed?
 For those who are acquainted with Starcraft.

 I like idea of a BUILDABLE core Tiger. Tigers were often seen on
 Eastern Front. Perhaps a weaker Tiger? Perhaps capped to 1 ?
 Starts with Vet0 at any rate.
 How about paired with earlier, weaker PzIII's? (Weaker than PzIV)
 I like Aouch's idea that grouped, they are stronger. The need to
 mass them to use 'em well is a nice con. Illustrates the fact that
 German commanders all had RADIOS and better group-training.

 As for the soviets, they had a major revision not long ago.
 It's never too late to change them again. I seriously think it would
 make them into a better faction.

  But my main beef here, is that OstHeer shouldn't have a soviet-
 like ability that the Soviets can't themselves use!. That's what I
 really say.

  Who is with me on buildable-capped-Tigers?
 Actually, eh. Wehr can mass Panthers. You could fudge Tiger
 stats a bit and make 'em OstHeer 'Panthers' with a 'Tiger' model.
 Of course, it would have to be tweaked
 
  But anything that makes OstHeer few but strong has my vote.
 Make 'em slightly weaker individually but stronger collectively than
 Wehr, and it could be a 'OstHeer core flavor'. I like this 'zeal for
 tanks' idea. Make 'em weaker individually, but being with other
 units in proximity gives them a nice buff.
 PzIII/StuGIII/Tigers? Could share this (And be considered similar
 to PanzerGrenadiers Ge43, STG44, Shrek, K98 all being 'same' for
 Zeal purposes)

 That way, we could have 'German 'Zug' like Lord Rommel asked for.
 
 Now, I'm not saying specifically 'Make Tigers weaker'. I'm saying
 buildable tigers could be part of the equation of weaker PzIII, if you
 cap them (tiger) and require Zeal as part of their 'ultimate' strenght.
 
  If the 'Tank army' is defeated, it's harder to bring them back up-
 strenght again. Historical.

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

 
  Who is with me on buildable-capped-Tigers?
 Actually, eh. Wehr can mass Panthers. You could fudge Tiger
 stats a bit and make 'em OstHeer 'Panthers' with a 'Tiger' model.
 Of course, it would have to be tweaked
 
 Now, I'm not saying specifically 'Make Tigers weaker'. I'm saying
 buildable tigers could be part of the equation of weaker PzIII, if you
 cap them (tiger) and require Zeal as part of their 'ultimate' strenght.

Me. And I totally agree with this because it balances gameplay AND is historical correct. Few, strong german units to shred soviet blobs.
I also like your idea of the group strengh. Its a nice gameplay feature.

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

About all this call-in ideas:
U want that Ostheer use quality instate of quantity.
But keep in mind that CoH represent army formations
up to a regiment - not a hole army! So; Wehrmacht preferred
quality but in small areas Wehrmacht had quantity like all other
armys

So keep the dimensions in mind 

[TheReaper]

I think Panthers and Tigers must be doctrinal units, without doctrine OH just have early Stug III that is upgradeable to time as a mobile AT gun, Panzer III is the main attack tank with later upgrades (armour skirts and tungsten AP round), and with vet system can help strengten youre strike force. It would be more tactical than the other Factions. Remember that Rommels Ghost division fought in the east and they proved wery well, thoug everybody joked Rommel's forces. I'd be more like a Panzer elite faction, light and mobile force but not with hardly micro manageing Marder 3, or Paper Halftracks. With Doctrinal Panther and Tiger, the player can play as a regular WE the more tactical options I think must be the other two doctrines. Lufwaffe and something else Kampfgeschwader 200 (that was a secret inteligent service) support or something else.

[Loupblanc]

About all this call-in ideas:
U want that Ostheer use quality instate of quantity.
But keep in mind that CoH represent army formations
up to a regiment - not a hole army! So; Wehrmacht preferred
quality but in small areas Wehrmacht had quantity like all other
armys

So keep the dimensions in mind 

---------
 Sigh. You miss my point completely.
 
 Fine. The German idea is "Local superiority' to have superiority.
 I know this. But why does it have to be the whole 6th Panzer
 elite army against a lonely T70 because T34's are now reward units?

 It doesn't work from a game play point of view.
 You want early, you want elite, you want powerful AND you want
 quantity. Essentially, you are saying that if a German plays chess,
 their board side ought to be all Queens (and 3 rows of it). Because,
 well, Germans are just that superior.
 
 1 zealot = 2 marines = 4 zerglings. Take your pick. You can't have
 4 zealots = 4 zerglings.

Post Merge: September 20, 2010, 03:42:56 AM

About all this call-in ideas:
U want that Ostheer use quality instate of quantity.
But keep in mind that CoH represent army formations
up to a regiment - not a hole army! So; Wehrmacht preferred
quality but in small areas Wehrmacht had quantity like all other
armys

So keep the dimensions in mind 

 ========
 Are you saying that because germans prefer local superiority,
 (As what their tenet, I won't take that away). Ever chess game
 where germans play should be 100% queens (3 rows of them)
 (That's 17 queens, 1 king), against 1 soviet pawn and king?

Post Merge: September 20, 2010, 03:44:44 AM
 --------
 He just said that OstHeer should have QUALITY *AND*
 Quantity. Can'T someone see a problem here?

 From a gameplay point of view?
Post Merge: September 20, 2010, 04:06:54 AM
 @TheReaper :
 
 Ah, but you heard LordRommel...
 Germans must win every fight. It's not about making a side
 interesting or even different. That's why no finnish, rumanian
 or anything. That's why Pacific Expansion will be about Tiger
 Armies racing atop the oceans sinking flying B17 formations :p
 Remember, pearl harbor was about Germans attacking.
 
  Didn't you hear? WW2 was about Germany against the World.
 No Italians, no Japanese, No Finnish, No Rumanians, no Bulgarians,
 no Croatians, no Spaniards, no nothing. Only JaegerTigers and
 Maus and LandCruzer1500 arriving in the enemy's HQ before
 he's finished making his 2nd Engineer.

 -----
 As for the StuGIII? Didn't exist.
 Might be a reward unit for the Elefant. (1 on 1). Maybe.
 PanzerIII can defeat Pershings 1 on 1. First shot, first blow.
 
 ------
 
 He's not about balance or gameplay.
 He's not about being innovative.
 He's about heavy tanks and Germans winning all the time.
 
 -------
 I heard Germany had 5000 Tigers in every fight, every squirmish,
 Every fist fight in bars. Why? Well, that's because Germans are
 like that. They should have local superiority in - every - fight.
 That's just how it happenned.
 --------
 Now that I'm done with my little rant for the moment.
 The ... shit, forgot the name. The tank 'group bonus thing'
 ZEAL. Thank you. is a good way to get both quality and quantity.
 PzIII/StuGIII groups, for example. Throw in Tigers (Or whatever)
 to the Zeal rule, and you can have it both ways.
 
 But there's a couple of Cons to consider :
 (It's all about spending ... points. Like creating a character.
 It needs flavor, it needs balance, it needs an historical slant).
 
 And it needs to be more than just 'Germany is Uber'.

 What cons would you consider?
 I'd offer individually weak German units (tanks). Radios,
 Group tactics, etc. They were geared to fight as a hard core.
 It's a little similar to the British uber blob, but with armor, and
 with being hard to make up for losses rapidly.
 
 This gives us possibility of buildable Tigers in numbers. No initial vet.
 But they'd have to be nerfed individually in a crippling manner.
 The 50% speed (50% attack speed?) when in enemy territory, and
 when not in a Zug? (Is that the term?) Germany Panzer squadron.
 Works for PzIII also.
 
 With sidegrades that are myopic (Crippling upgrade one way or the
 other), individually weak PzIII, you can keep the PzIII while making
 it replace the PzIV.

 The zeal rule also means no OstHeer Battlegroup call-ins, though.
 Because that goes against the 'Strong when grouped, but fucked
 as soon as they lose their bonus'. BG call-ins means instant
 formation bonus. And there HAS to be an inherent weakness.
 
 No weakness means no flavor.

 -----
 Sorry for the rant, but when someone says :
 Germany only has quality AND quantity in every single battle...
 I go nuts.

[GodlikeDennis]

Umm... lol?

He just said that Germans had strategic numerical superiority within a local region. He also said that CoH is a game where a single company engages in a skirmish with the enemy and, in such a small-scale conflict, the Blitzkrieg style local superiority wouldn't be seen down on the tactical level but on a grander, strategic scale (which this game doesn't represent).

Overreact much?

[Loupblanc]

 Eh, I'm not perfect, I know.
 
 He said German units had quality advantage over their opponents,
 as well as having quantity advantage over their opponents. The
 ratio of 3 PzIII over each T34 was mentionned.

 Which brings us USA-like early game advantage *AND* Wehr-like
 Late game advantage. Best of both worlds, anyone?

[Paciat]

He said German units had quality advantage over their opponents,
 as well as having quantity advantage over their opponents. The
 ratio of 3 PzIII over each T34 was mentionned.

Who compares T-34 to a PzIII? Its like comparing a Panther to a Sherman.
PzIII should be compared to BT-7 tanks, PzIV to T-26, Pz38(t) and PzII to T-26.

The truth is in 1941 Soviets had 23,106 tanks (more than rest of the world combined), of which about 12,782 were in the five Western Military Districts. Wehrmacht had about 5,200 tanks overall, of which 3,350 were committed to the invasion. About 1000 of Soviet T-34 and KV tanks had no German counterpart. ZiS-2 and ZiS-3 AT guns were better than any German PAK. Soviet 152mm guns (1938) were the best in their class. PPSH and SVT-40 were common. MiG-3, Jak-1 fighters, Il-2, PE-2 bombers were as good as Me-109e, Ju-87D and Ju-88a.

[Ryousan]

I like idea of a BUILDABLE core Tiger. Tigers were often seen on
 Eastern Front. Perhaps a weaker Tiger? Perhaps capped to 1 ?
 Starts with Vet0 at any rate.

How about a Single Tiger Call in? Which works pretty much as the PE Panther call in. Because make it buildable, to be capped to 1, just doesnt really make much sense.   

A  two Panzer IV Call-in could also work.

[Blackbishop]

He said German units had quality advantage over their opponents,
 as well as having quantity advantage over their opponents. The
 ratio of 3 PzIII over each T34 was mentionned.

Who compares T-34 to a PzIII? Its like comparing a Panther to a Sherman.
PzIII should be compared to BT-7 tanks, PzIV to T-26, Pz38(t) and PzII to T-26.

The truth is in 1941 Soviets had 23,106 tanks (more than rest of the world combined), of which about 12,782 were in the five Western Military Districts. Wehrmacht had about 5,200 tanks overall, of which 3,350 were committed to the invasion. About 1000 of Soviet T-34 and KV tanks had no German counterpart. ZiS-2 and ZiS-3 AT guns were better than any German PAK. Soviet 152mm guns (1938) were the best in their class. PPSH and SVT-40 were common. MiG-3, Jak-1 fighters, Il-2, PE-2 bombers were as good as Me-109e, Ju-87D and Ju-88a.

No one said anything about a ratio of 3 Pz.III to T-34, the idea that was presented was about a call in of "3 x Panzer III/IV". And that idea was already settled.

I think you're overreacting @Loupblanc, like will say in my country, you're making a storm in a glass of water.

[Loupblanc]

 - I prefer single Tiger call in. Maybe make it weaker, because it's
 not 'doctrine'. Similar to IS-2. I don't want to see multiple Panzer
 call-ins (Because it ought to go to Soviets). Might as well have a
 multiple Tiger call-in. (And I'd rather reserve that for StuGIII)
 (with the numbers built, they NEED their time in the light)
 - PzIII compared to BT-7 tank... ugh. Weak armor, and 45mm
 gun. Fast as hell, though. I'd say T-26, but... it's actually worse.
 - True, in 1941 Germany raped Soviet army who was 2-3 times
 larger. But as case in France and in Soviet Union, both have
 horrible military leadership, and a doctrine of (similar to)
 2 tanks per 100 men. The German Panzer army doctrine ripped
 through that (Shouldn'T say that, someone might get ideas) lol.
 They were caught napping.
 On that assumption, Japanese were WAY better than anything
 American at Pearl harbor. A pencil can kill a sleeping man, even
 if he has laser guided sniper rifle. Is pencil better than laser
 guided sniper rifle? No.
 
 German planes caught Russian planes on ground.
 A lot didn't have pilots.
 Most Soviet generals were dead and in jail. Leadership nil (Local).
 Then blitzkrieg set in, and they used FLAK88 in AT role to great
 effect (as in France)(I think that was Rommel's idea).
 (In Africa, too, mind you).

 COH is set in 1943-1945. Not 1940-1941. Very VERRRRY
 different war and setting.

 Anyone have axis and allies? (The board game)
 soviets can't attack on turn 1. Germans attack and decimate
 them. It could be other way around if Soviets could've attacked
 first, but they weren't ready.
 Same for japanese at Pearl Harbor. Always useful when you catch
 someone with their pants down

 SVT-40 and PPSH common in 1941? I think not.
 But I know some german soldiers way preferred PPSH to Mp40.
 SVT-40 is interesting, too. Ge43 had problem for years.
 That gas cartridge was unreliable.

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

@Loupblanc:
I want to remember that CoH isnt a game about the hole eastern front. When u start a battle u play a company or a regiment and not more. About this scale it is problem to say that german army used quality instate of quantity.
When u watch the hole german frontline u will see that germans were outnumbered by enemy's weapons but when u watch some specific points u will see that germans were able to outnumber the red army.
When regiment fight against regiment like in CoH your "quality over quantity concept" wont work in every detail!!

So out of my view it could be possible that Ostheer could produce a lot of Panzer III during the game. It could be that early T-34s are outnumbered by german Panzers because the size of CoH allow such a scenario.