Patch v.51512

[[EUG] MadMat]

FIXES:

• fixing some aircraft armament's display.
  
• fixing DT LMG's rates of fire & damage.
  
• fixing Mustad Mantlid (Est. penal troops)'s number of SMG models displayed
  
• fixing Mustad Mantlid's lack of acknows
  
• fixing some typos in AG Burning Baltics' battalions' names
  
• fixing the Skijäger Pionier's HUGE (17 --> 3) amount of explosives
  
• fixing "Gabby"'s wingmen, now coming with P-47D-25 variant too.
  
• correcting general Ziegler (11. SS commander)'s wrong portrait
  
• replacing the Finnish planes in AG Burning Baltics' 11-y RAP with proper Soviet ones
  
  GENERIC:
  
• decreased HMG vehicle (MG 34/42, 12.7mm & +) range to 750m
  
• decreased HMG vehicle's suppression to match their LMG counterparts
  
• decreased HE suppress on armored target.
  
• increasing double snipers' damages from 1 to 2
  
• Fanatical units now capture enemy broken units
  
• decreased HMG AA damage & suppress
  
  AXIS:
  
• LMG 34 & 42's suppress nerf
  
• decreased Sturm-Skijäger's price from 35 to 25
  
• adding the missing Tank Buster trait to the SS-Pz.Grenadier (MG-26)
  
• increased Panzer IV H (vanilla & leader, all nations)'s price from 70 to 75
  
• decreased Flak 88mm's RoF from 12 to 10 (ground fire only, AA one unchanged)
  
• (Blindata) decreasing A elite German Panzer IV H from 3 to 2, on par with other cards Panzr IV H
  
  ALLIES:
  
• standardizing all Cromwell, Churchill & Challenger's Besa MG ammo at 6250 rounds
  
• Polish Sherman V's veterancy ratio changed on par with other Shermans
  
• renaming the Estonian PIONEERID (PPSh) into PIONEERID (PPS) (some people really have too much free time ;))
  
• increased D-5T (T-34/85 obr. 43, IS-1 & KV-85) & D-5S (SU-85)'s RoF from 5 to 6
  
• increased ZiS-S-53 (T-34/85 obr. 44) gun's range from 1750m to 2000m
  
• increased T-34/85 obr. 44's price from 105 to 110.
  
• increased T-34/85 KOMBAT's price from 145 to 150.
  
• decreased all M10 Wolverine (but US one with HVAP)'s price from 70 to 65.

[Bergwerkzwerg]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

IS 2, su 122, ISU 122 HE ammunition was also dangerous to German tanks, causing damage, ignition of the tank, no penetration was needed at all, only 2-3 hits - the crew inside was injured and barely able to escape from the tank. But as we have already written, the Russians produced up to about 30,000 IL2 and IL10 and 14,000,000 ptab bombs, thus leading a cheap anti-tank fight. Not an expensive attempt to penetrate the AP projectile. Yes, it had hundreds of SU100, BS3 - but it's not in the game, 90mm aa gun, M36 Jakcson, Il10. I wonder when the E100 and Mause will be.

Are we still talking about the historical facts which are reflected in the game? Because it's a RTS with limited unit scale and no global strategy game. The sovietunion could produce ten time more planes, it would change anything in the single battlegroups ingame.
And you can not ignite a tank without penetrating it. But i'm very curious about your sources which combine soviet and german values about lost tanks. I'm very sure SU- and ISU-152 will not look good. Don't overestimate an army where all bigger tanks used artillery guns instead of designated tank guns.
The last sentence is way to silly to respond to it, sorry. If you don't get the difference between reflecting certain technical facts in a game and the composition of battlegroups, i can't help you. And i also have no problems with being harsh about german battlegroups. For example, the Arado Ar 234 never operated at the eastern front. So don't try to push my into a corner where i'm certainly not standing.

[AI hard]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Bergwerkzwerg:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

I write badly in English - meaning 1 shot, hit and is2 is destroyed - no repeated hits that would damage the armor.

The Russians did not need to shoot tungsten - SU, ISU 152 successfully destroyed the Tigers, KT with cheap explosive ammunition - this is almost out of the question. I have never had such an intervention, hitting yes, no effect.

No problems, we will get along with it. :)

1) If the Kingtiger hits and penetrates the IS-2, the projectile will deal its base damage (as far as i remember it is 8 Damage) and then the game rolls out critical effects. If the critical roll deals additional damage, than the IS-2 can be destroyed by a Kingtiger with the first penetrating hit. The IS-2 instead will kill every tank with the first penetrating hit without needing the roll due to the higher base damage.

2) The myth about SU-152 und ISU-152 being effective tank killers is nice to to believe but also debunked. Of course you can disable an enemy tank with a big HE-shell, but the percentage of doing so was very low in WW2 depending on the typical engagements and the advantage of the german tanks due to better optics, overview and accuracy. But this a topic for itself. I can guarantee you that the 152mm gun couldn't penetrate Tiger E's or Kingtiger's on high combat distances.

[AI hard]

-But the projectile can't penetrate at such a distance. I understand that if it penetrates, it will destroy :-)

-Su 152 etc is not a myth - clearly eliminated from the fight successfully and cheaply.

- It is not true that the Germans have better optics - it's just parrots. In addition, most of the fighting took place within 1 km - the landscape did not allow greater surveillance. Russian sights were well developed and allowed accurate firing. I wrote that 8 hours ago in the thread. The Russians really dealt with German tanks cheaply - by air. Squadron Commander of the 58th SAF, A.A.Bondar destroyed or damaged 70 German tanks - dozens of them - in a short time 1943-45.

I have also posted photos of gun barells.

[Nannun]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Peiper:

Just checked. Why in the world would T34's have equal optics and WORSE accuracy than Panthers and Tigers???? 40 to 55% base on the Russian tanks? You've got to be kidding me. What are your sources? The "Glorious History of the Great Patriotic War" by the USSR's propaganda division??? Hey man, I don't mind paying more for quality over quantity in terms of units, but don't reverse historical truths!

Total agree!

[Bergwerkzwerg]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Nannun:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Peiper:

Just checked. Why in the world would T34's have equal optics and WORSE accuracy than Panthers and Tigers???? 40 to 55% base on the Russian tanks? You've got to be kidding me. What are your sources? The "Glorious History of the Great Patriotic War" by the USSR's propaganda division??? Hey man, I don't mind paying more for quality over quantity in terms of units, but don't reverse historical truths!

Total agree!

Totally. +1

[Nannun]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

-But the projectile can't penetrate at such a distance. I understand that if it penetrates, it will destroy :-)

-Su 152 etc is not a myth - clearly eliminated from the fight successfully and cheaply.

- It is not true that the Germans have better optics - it's just parrots. In addition, most of the fighting took place within 1 km - the landscape did not allow greater surveillance. Russian sights were well developed and allowed accurate firing. I wrote that 8 hours ago in the thread. The Russians really dealt with German tanks cheaply - by air. Squadron Commander of the 58th SAF, A.A.Bondar destroyed or damaged 70 German tanks - dozens of them - in a short time 1943-45.

I have also posted photos of gun barells.

Russian propaganda movies

[Bergwerkzwerg]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

-But the projectile can't penetrate at such a distance. I understand that if it penetrates, it will destroy :-)

-Su 152 etc is not a myth - clearly eliminated from the fight successfully and cheaply.

- It is not true that the Germans have better optics - it's just parrots. In addition, most of the fighting took place within 1 km - the landscape did not allow greater surveillance. Russian sights were well developed and allowed accurate firing. I wrote that 8 hours ago in the thread. The Russians really dealt with German tanks cheaply - by air. Squadron Commander of the 58th SAF, A.A.Bondar destroyed or damaged 70 German tanks - dozens of them - in a short time 1943-45.

I have also posted photos of gun barells.

It's a myth that the SU- and ISU-152 were very successful as tank destroyers. They could fit into this role but only because the Red Army had nothing better to deal with heavy german tanks. Same counts for the IS-2, which only got its 122mm because they didn't have anything better. Nobody will deny that these assault guns could destroy an enemy heavy tank. But the technical specifications like low rate of fire and bad overview about the battlefield made them inferior to designated tank destroyers the germans used.

Couldn't find anything about an A. A. Bondar. Any reliable sources about him? And also don't mix different things up. First you were complaining about KT vs IS-2, now jump back to aircrafts. Sharing historical infos about technical specifications will not work like that.

The terrain in the soviet union provides also a lot of spaces with 2km combat distances and more. And even in this shorter engagements the germans were in advantage due to their better designed tanks ergonomically spoken and not to mention the better leadership of troops. Even in late 1944, early 1945, the Red Army leaders made the same mistakes as in 1941/42.

[Woozle]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Bergwerkzwerg:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

I write badly in English - meaning 1 shot, hit and is2 is destroyed - no repeated hits that would damage the armor.

The Russians did not need to shoot tungsten - SU, ISU 152 successfully destroyed the Tigers, KT with cheap explosive ammunition - this is almost out of the question. I have never had such an intervention, hitting yes, no effect.

No problems, we will get along with it. :)

1) If the Kingtiger hits and penetrates the IS-2, the projectile will deal its base damage (as far as i remember it is 8 Damage) and then the game rolls out critical effects. If the critical roll deals additional damage, than the IS-2 can be destroyed by a Kingtiger with the first penetrating hit. The IS-2 instead will kill every tank with the first penetrating hit without needing the roll due to the higher base damage.

2) The myth about SU-152 und ISU-152 being effective tank killers is nice to to believe but also debunked. Of course you can disable an enemy tank with a big HE-shell, but the percentage of doing so was very low in WW2 depending on the typical engagements and the advantage of the german tanks due to better optics, overview and accuracy. But this a topic for itself. I can guarantee you that the 152mm gun couldn't penetrate Tiger E's or Kingtiger's on high combat distances. Operation Citadel is a great example how inferior soviet tanks were against german counterparts even with the advantage of terrain and knowlegde about getting attacked.

http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/03/suisu-152-vs-german-big-cats.html The only one here peddling myths is you.

[Bergwerkzwerg]

Ursprungligen skrivet av ʷᵒᵒᶻˡᵉ:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Bergwerkzwerg:

No problems, we will get along with it. :)

1) If the Kingtiger hits and penetrates the IS-2, the projectile will deal its base damage (as far as i remember it is 8 Damage) and then the game rolls out critical effects. If the critical roll deals additional damage, than the IS-2 can be destroyed by a Kingtiger with the first penetrating hit. The IS-2 instead will kill every tank with the first penetrating hit without needing the roll due to the higher base damage.

2) The myth about SU-152 und ISU-152 being effective tank killers is nice to to believe but also debunked. Of course you can disable an enemy tank with a big HE-shell, but the percentage of doing so was very low in WW2 depending on the typical engagements and the advantage of the german tanks due to better optics, overview and accuracy. But this a topic for itself. I can guarantee you that the 152mm gun couldn't penetrate Tiger E's or Kingtiger's on high combat distances. Operation Citadel is a great example how inferior soviet tanks were against german counterparts even with the advantage of terrain and knowlegde about getting attacked.

http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/03/suisu-152-vs-german-big-cats.html The only one here peddling myths is you.

And you're the one who obviously can't understand what others wrote. So feel free to take a second look.
You linked a source which only shows the effect of a shell against different targets. The source doesn't provide anything useful about accuracy, rate of fire and the usage of the whole assault gun as complete unit. And that's the difference between me and you. While i can look on different aspects one by one and then making a whole picture out of it you only want to see what fits your agenda.

The SU- and ISU-152 as complete weapon base were not very good in dealing the role of a tank destroyer and i explained that in another post already. The term "Beast killer" or "Beast slayer" is only a propagandic term made by the soviet leaders to cover up their lack of assets to deal with german heavy tanks. The poor rate of fire, not more than 2 shots per minute, the low accuracy and therefore the short combat distanced for effective usage, the poor visibilty for the commander, the low velocity gun, the low penetrating gun when it came to AP, extreme low amount of AP and concrete piercing shells, the poor leadership and usage of such assault guns, all leads to a very mediocre tank destroyer. That the gun has the potential to knock out a heavy tank by a single hit was never denied by me.
-> https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet/isu_bm_projects
(i know the tankarchives website and this article also used it, so don't come with that)

[lscander]

German recon infantry have received reduced price in the previous patch, shouldn't other country's counterpart get the same treatment? And I believe the balance problem brought by the map design, SD1 is totally balanced even with different ranges, that's because it's easy to maneuver with tactic and achieve close range combat or flanking, but in SD2 map which is designed based on 2000m max range it is simply impossible for guns with nerfed range to achieve such tactics.

[✠Cherrybomb✠]

Ursprungligen skrivet av lscander:

German recon infantry have received reduced price in the previous patch, shouldn't other country's counterpart get the same treatment? And I believe the balance problem brought by the map design, SD1 is totally balanced even with different ranges, that's because it's easy to maneuver with tactic and achieve close range combat or flanking, but in SD2 map which is designed based on 2000m max range it is simply impossible for guns with nerfed range to achieve such tactics.

The German scouts were just overprieced and set on pair with allied counter parts.
I spend around 600h into that game and did not find a single one without enought cover for stealth, ambushes or flanks in the last two years. Games would usually end in an IS-2 rumbeling, if that's the case.

[Kyso4ek]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Bergwerkzwerg:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Milanocuki:

-But the projectile can't penetrate at such a distance. I understand that if it penetrates, it will destroy :-)

-Su 152 etc is not a myth - clearly eliminated from the fight successfully and cheaply.

- It is not true that the Germans have better optics - it's just parrots. In addition, most of the fighting took place within 1 km - the landscape did not allow greater surveillance. Russian sights were well developed and allowed accurate firing. I wrote that 8 hours ago in the thread. The Russians really dealt with German tanks cheaply - by air. Squadron Commander of the 58th SAF, A.A.Bondar destroyed or damaged 70 German tanks - dozens of them - in a short time 1943-45.

I have also posted photos of gun barells.

It's a myth that the SU- and ISU-152 were very successful as tank destroyers. They could fit into this role but only because the Red Army had nothing better to deal with heavy german tanks. Same counts for the IS-2, which only got its 122mm because they didn't have anything better. Nobody will deny that these assault guns could destroy an enemy heavy tank. But the technical specifications like low rate of fire and bad overview about the battlefield made them inferior to designated tank destroyers the germans used.

Couldn't find anything about an A. A. Bondar. Any reliable sources about him? And also don't mix different things up. First you were complaining about KT vs IS-2, now jump back to aircrafts. Sharing historical infos about technical specifications will not work like that.

The terrain in the soviet union provides also a lot of spaces with 2km combat distances and more. And even in this shorter engagements the germans were in advantage due to their better designed tanks ergonomically spoken and not to mention the better leadership of troops. Even in late 1944, early 1945, the Red Army leaders made the same mistakes as in 1941/42.

It is a myth that su152 being effective tank destroyers is a myth.
https://www.tankarchives.ca/2021/04/spg-feedback.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfYBQIC-70U
They were effective tank destroyers at ranges of 2 km.
The term beast killer is a historical nickname of su152 self propelled gun during the battle of Kursk. One of the crews acheived a lot of tank kills and they gave it a nickname like that.

[RakkoHug~<3]

OVERSIGHT/BUG: GD's MG42 HMG team uses regular army trooper unit icon and model instead of using the GD counterparts.

OVERSIGHT/BUG: Flak 41 has incorrect model and stat.

[AI hard]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Bergwerkzwerg:

...

You are wrong, in a few years you will reach what I do. The stated accuracy of the Russian tanks speaks clearly. The problem of the Russians was radios, slowness in negotiations. In addition, the Germans used civilians as a living shield, it is a well-known thing. Why isn't it in the game? You believed Goebbells' propaganda about the victorious German weapons. I do not deviate from the topic - I say that even the most ordinary Su152 with absolute accuracy of 98x98, ideal 32x32cm per 1km of HE ammunition was able to cope with one shot with KT, although it was designed to do so. Who suffered substantial, damage - was excluded from the fight. Any impact on the turret of the German tank HE with ammunition 76.2 into the shield of the cannon, meant scattered aiming. Larger calibers caused jamming of the cannon control, power failure, intercom, brake system of the cannon, sometimes a gasoline engine fire. In the event of damage to the turret gears or an explosion of ammunition.

The Russians solved the anti-tank fight more easily, like the US, GB - by plane. Was the US unable to put a 90mm AA cannon on the sherman's chassis? It had penetrators 300mm 100m, 3km 150mm. For peace of mind, Jackson36. But they solved it with cheap missiles on the Typhons. Tempest, P-47, p-38 etc. In the game, the SU 152 is degraded and its HE ammunition NERF against the panther, tiger, kingtiger, elephant, jagpanther. Maybe 8 su 152 against 1 panther will destroy a total of 32 hits. Will the panther wait so long? Ridiculous. Why is IS2, ISU 122 HE ammunition nerf? It should have a blast of 5600. That's why they were made - to have effective HE ammunition. It would be appropriate for the game to be for the anti-tank roll 12x SU 100, or isu 122 against 8 kt. The bs 3 cannon should be widely available in b + 3 divisions, in the same numbers as the Pak 43 in B phase. Undeniable thoughts.

[RakkoHug~<3]

BUG: 1st FJ's Flak 36 is listed as having Flak 41 gun in the unit stat window instead of Flak 36 gun