Whats going on with the T 34 85 ?

[Banzaikampai]

At first: Please dont flame about things like "Russian Bias" and stuff. I just want to discuss if the T 34 85 belongs to a higer BR or needs any nerf.

My idea is to give it BR 5.3/5.7 so that it will face more rank IV tanks, because of its 85mm gun nearly comparable to the 88mm of the german Tiger and its good combination of armor and speed. Especially in RB whole russian teams consist of T 34 85s making it very hard to win for USA/GB.

[Raynor]

T34-85 is a good mobility tank, good 85mm gun because it's true according to history? Before anyone show me the number of destroyed T34-85, remember there are ton of ways to kill a tank, not only tank fight.

TBH, this game is biased to both Germany and Russia, but late tiers are Germany.

[Azi]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

T34-85 is a good mobility tank, good 85mm gun because it's true according to history? Before anyone show me the number of destroyed T34-85, remember there are ton of ways to kill a tank, not only tank fight.

True and False same time: as people already pointed out many times, T-34-85 in theory would be among best tanks, but irl, they suffered from bad-production issues (even thou after the push-back by Russians to Germany, the Russian quality began to get better).

As for your post above, you forgot to mention the inessesary 4.3 BR of a 200mm penetration Machine called Fat Max, and also how they have almost non-BR missing (in fact, they are the black holes:
-3.7 with 88 truck and Pz IV G
-5.7: Tiger H1 and Panther D (with a bit of T-34-85 spam assist)
-6.7 Tigers Spam
-8.0: Leo spam.

Oh, and they are not as expensives as other nations in-game

[Raynor]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Azarias-12:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

T34-85 is a good mobility tank, good 85mm gun because it's true according to history? Before anyone show me the number of destroyed T34-85, remember there are ton of ways to kill a tank, not only tank fight.

True and False same time: as people already pointed out many times, T-34-85 in theory would be among best tanks, but irl, they suffered from bad-production issues (even thou after the push-back by Russians to Germany, the Russian quality began to get better).

As for your post above, you forgot to mention the inessesary 4.3 BR of a 200mm penetration Machine called Fat Max, and also how they have almost non-BR missing (in fact, they are the black holes:
-3.7 with 88 truck and Pz IV G
-5.7: Tiger H1 and Panther D (with a bit of T-34-85 spam assist)
-6.7 Tigers Spam
-8.0: Leo spam.

Oh, and they are not as expensives as other nations in-game

Well, still only you and me are being Bias apologist in this forum :)
Consider how many Germany players in here.

[kiro the avenger!]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

...

Tiger IIs are OP but T54s have weakspots?
I love the smell of double think in the morning.

Panther II is not a better version of the T44-100. It has worse armour, a much higher sillouette, a worse gun. I'm pretty sure it's slower as well.
6.0 Panther's are spammed because theyre the only decent mediums Germany gets between 3.7 and 6.7, and theyre on the way to gods-gift-to-warthunder the Leo.
Germany also does get the worst ATGM in the game currently, the RJPz2 with it's zero depression.
in terms of decent russian tanks about 5.3 you forgot the IS2, and the T44
German CAS is actually not that great until the Ho.229. Unlike the British and Americans they lack any dual-role fighters. I don't think you appreciate how good american fighters are carrying as many bombs as some medium bombers. They also lack any decent low altitude fighters.

[kiro the avenger!]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

T34-85 is a good mobility tank, good 85mm gun because it's true according to history? Before anyone show me the number of destroyed T34-85, remember there are ton of ways to kill a tank, not only tank fight.

TBH, this game is biased to both Germany and Russia, but late tiers are Germany.

tell me again where in WWII T34's fought against experimental US tanks from years in the past, without any infantry support, on a map like frozen pass?

6.7 is a black hole not just because of the germans, every nation is best at 6.7. IS2-44, T29, Caernavon.
5.7 is a black hole because it's the first non-premium turreted tanks germany get after 4.3 (whats that you said about zero gaps?) and the best tank before 6.7 again.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Azarias-12:

As for your post above, you forgot to mention the inessesary 4.3 BR of a 200mm penetration Machine called Fat Max, and also how they have almost non-BR missing (in fact, they are the black holes:
-3.7 with 88 truck and Pz IV G
-5.7: Tiger H1 and Panther D (with a bit of T-34-85 spam assist)
-6.7 Tigers Spam
-8.0: Leo spam.

Oh, and they are not as expensives as other nations in-game

Try playing a Panther II or Jagdtiger in SB. That'll break your piggy bank pretty quick. and if you look, russians are consistently the cheapest.
Dmax is pretty slow, with almost no armour. You feel like whining about the SU-100Y?
Soviets are the ones with zero BR holes, after all they have an entire dev team dedicated to Soviet vehicles, and all the other nations have to share a team.
Let's not forget also that one of the reasons that we're not getting capital ships is that Gajin said the Soviets didn't have a very big navy. Japanese certainly didn't hold back ground forces at all...

[Donovar]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Gotgo:

The T-34-85 is completely broken at that BR, but raising it's BR wouldn't help. At 5.7 it would go up against 6.7 tanks.

The problem comes with the horrible BR placement of US/BRIT tanks.

The Sherman Easy 8 has a 5.3 BR and when you compare that tank to the 5.3 BR T-34-85 it's full blown idiotic.

Lowering the BR of other tanks would balance it more than raising the BR of that one tank. This however is the logical time consuming way of doing things. War Thunder devs tend to prefer the quick fixes or nothing at all.

what about a sherman jumbo 76 at 6.0 thats not stupid at all huh

[Illusionyary]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Donovar:

what about a sherman jumbo 76 at 6.0 thats not stupid at all huh

I feel like Gaijin was drunk when they assigned the 76mm Jumbo to 6.0, meaning it can and will fight 7.0 tanks with a 76mm gun. Lmao.

[Banzaikampai]

Ursprungligen skrivet av kiro the avenger!:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

T34-85 is a good mobility tank, good 85mm gun because it's true according to history? Before anyone show me the number of destroyed T34-85, remember there are ton of ways to kill a tank, not only tank fight.

TBH, this game is biased to both Germany and Russia, but late tiers are Germany.

tell me again where in WWII T34's fought against experimental US tanks from years in the past, without any infantry support, on a map like frozen pass?

The thougt this game would be REALISTIC is just wrong. There are so many unlogical things in Warthunder (Crew member system, repairing tanks and planes, close to everything in Arcade, ...) And also funny MM results like the japanese offensive against Berlin or Americans shooting at British planes (Second independence war ???).

There is no realistic computer game, but compared to World of Tanks for example its just much better.

[kiro the avenger!]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Banzaikampai:

Ursprungligen skrivet av kiro the avenger!:

tell me again where in WWII T34's fought against experimental US tanks from years in the past, without any infantry support, on a map like frozen pass?

The thougt this game would be REALISTIC is just wrong. There are so many unlogical things in Warthunder (Crew member system, repairing tanks and planes, close to everything in Arcade, ...) And also funny MM results like the japanese offensive against Berlin or Americans shooting at British planes (Second independence war ???).

There is no realistic computer game, but compared to World of Tanks for example its just much better.

exactly.
any arguments about ''but it was good in real life...'' are completely and utterly irrelevant

[Rimming Enjoyer]

Ursprungligen skrivet av kiro the avenger!:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Cyka Blyat:

...

Tiger IIs are OP but T54s have weakspots?
I love the smell of double think in the morning.

Ssshhhh!

Tiger 2's are always OP, meanwhile Soviet tanks are riddled with weakspots!

Don't agree? Wehraboo!

[Banzaikampai]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alx:

Ursprungligen skrivet av kiro the avenger!:

Tiger IIs are OP but T54s have weakspots?
I love the smell of double think in the morning.

Ssshhhh!

Tiger 2's are always OP, meanwhile Soviet tanks are riddled with weakspots!

Don't agree? Wehraboo!

There are soviet tanks having weakspots and german tanks having weakspots. Germany and Russia are pretty much balanced compared to each other. The problem are US/GB tanks fighting tanks which where less produced and uncommon in the battle (Tiger 2, IS 2 ...).

[kiro the avenger!]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Banzaikampai:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Alx:

Ssshhhh!

Tiger 2's are always OP, meanwhile Soviet tanks are riddled with weakspots!

Don't agree? Wehraboo!

There are soviet tanks having weakspots and german tanks having weakspots. Germany and Russia are pretty much balanced compared to each other. The problem are US/GB tanks fighting tanks which where less produced and uncommon in the battle (Tiger 2, IS 2 ...).

point is, he called the Tiger II OP, but said the T-54 had weakspots, as if to say it wasn't OP.
which I find hilarious

[Raynor]

Ursprungligen skrivet av kiro the avenger!:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Banzaikampai:

There are soviet tanks having weakspots and german tanks having weakspots. Germany and Russia are pretty much balanced compared to each other. The problem are US/GB tanks fighting tanks which where less produced and uncommon in the battle (Tiger 2, IS 2 ...).

point is, he called the Tiger II OP, but said the T-54 had weakspots, as if to say it wasn't OP.
which I find hilarious

Seriously, please point out the words i said Tiger 2 is OP. I said King Tiger is DOMINATING TIER IV NOW. Not OP and it can be killed. Stop putting words in my mouth.

And i said i know King Tiger when uptiered have to face the T54-47 and IS-3. But every tank get trouble when uptiered (with few exception). So i think Germany players should know those tanks's weakspots, ok? Not saying T54-47 and IS-3 aren't effective when downtiered.

[Raynor]

From a player perspective: If balance only ever swung in favor of Russian machines it would be true, but that isn't the case. For a long time the Leopoard 1 was the best tank of its tier, I remember the Sherman 105 eating teams alive, I remember the Hellcat/Bulldog situations when they first came out, the German tree in particular is gifted with some low hanging competition especially once the Tiger H1 is acquired etc. But when these things cause balance issues, the players that benefit say "Historically accurate" or "Balanced and fair" while the other players will disagree and call it for what it is, stupidity. However, when a Russian machine has balance swing in its favor (like the T-34 that people are fond of) the attitude switches from "Just stupidity" to "Russian bias". Surely others recognize that this is not only inconsistent logic but also helps absolutely no one. As I have send on other threads, Gaijin made a mistake recently with APDS and HEAT-FS and they will make mistakes again, however when they do it won't be out of malice or bias but out of nearsightedness. It's called Hanlon's Razor and I wish more folks would apply it.

[Raynor]

Anton Yudintsev replied: Gentlemen, first of all, we try to make vehicles as realistic (historically wise) as possible. Of course, there are some limitations (like reliability or individual vehicle quality, which is not replicated in game in any way, and both early Russian tanks, some of US tanks, and most of late German tanks have suffered from it; or actual cost of production, or actual fuel limitations, or actual resource (how long vehicle can be operated before repair, or how easy/comfortable it is to be there, etc, etc), but those limitations are uniform, it has no country/nation alignment.
But even if we would have some bias (which we don't) in that area, the real performance will depend on relative specs, according to BR (i.e. competitors).
As for relative specs (performance) in combat, it depends on assigned Battle Rating more, than on specific performance, i.e. with whom each vehicle is fighting.
Of course, we have statistics about all vehicles, and we adjust Battle Ratings according to statistics. Except for new, recently introduced vehicles (where is no stats available), or short periods after significant mechanics change, there are no clear imbalanced vehicles. Some of vehicles can be very good on certain BR (amongst their classmates), but clearly underpowered on previous BR, or visa verse - but other than that, all of them perform about the same.
Clearly, there is no any reason for us to have any bias (Russian bias well known in English speaking community, and US/Germany bias are well known in Russian community). We can't win anything (money, popularity, whatever) by having any bias.