3rd Armored Division balance thread

[Tankhunter__]

Another point you bring up that I want to address is why I am bitching about 3AD specifically. That is because 3AD will the America's ONLY armored division in this game. 12th SS isn't even the heaviest armor the Germans will get. What that means is that US armor will be basically useless when going up against any German armor divisions (of which there will be 4). I just don't want this game to play out like some strange mirror world where Polish and Free French divisions do 90% of the heavy lifting in matches due to the severely gimped American force. I want all of the divisions to be more or less viable and as of right now I don't see the American 3rd Armored having any real place in the released lineup.

12th SS is probably the most well-equipped Panzer division, or maybe equal with Panzer Lehr. 21st Panzer has S35s, Panzer IVs, and King Tigers. 116th Panzer is in an odd situation, as its Panthers didn't arrive until July, and were actually a battalion from another division. I expect they'll have less access to Panthers(or maybe none at all for Flavor), but thanks to their requistioning of Panzer IIIs(75mm short and 50mm long guns) and early Panzer IV models(Short 75mm) on the way to the front, will have better Phase A armor than 12th SS.

 

[Boxman]

12th SS is probably the most well-equipped Panzer division, or maybe equal with Panzer Lehr. 21st Panzer has S35s, Panzer IVs, and King Tigers. 116th Panzer is in an odd situation, as its Panthers didn't arrive until July, and were actually a battalion from another division. I expect they'll have less access to Panthers(or maybe none at all for Flavor), but thanks to their requistioning of Panzer IIIs(75mm short and 50mm long guns) and early Panzer IV models(Short 75mm) on the way to the front, will have better Phase A armor than 12th SS.

Panzer Lehr will have the best German armor in the game. The screenshots shown have shown this.

Again, against these units it seems as though there is no real place for the 3AD to do anything. If they can barely sometimes engage Panthers and score kills, Tigers and Jagdpanthers are going to demolish them entirely.

 

[Grosnours]

Never forget the game is based on three different phases, each having a potentially different balance. Utterly dominating phase C might be nice but might mean nothing in the end if phase A and B went wrong.
Balancing is much more complex now than merely comparing unit stats, it has to take into account the differences in phases. There are reasons why most of the best players will swear by the scots, and those don't have any Jumbo nor Panthers.

 

[Malakin]

I feel like the reaction time for vehicles in starting to turn towards a target and the speed of the turn might be the real problem, means you barely get a shot off on the side armour. Especially when you take into account the units automatically turning their armour towards the biggest threat even when its out of sight.

Tanks just have to react slower and stay facing the direction you put them in untill they have somthing to shoot.

 

[Tankhunter__]

Panzer Lehr will have the best German armor in the game. The screenshots shown have shown this.

Again, against these units it seems as though there is no real place for the 3AD to do anything. If they can barely sometimes engage Panthers and score kills, Tigers and Jagdpanthers are going to demolish them entirely.

The Jagdpanther is another matter, but the Tiger is worse armored than the Panther. It won't be any more of a threat. King Tiger and Jagdpanther will be much worse than the Panther to deal with, but not the Tiger Is

 

[IS-2]

No, it's neither just „the M10's gun but on a fast chassis with no armor“ nor „it doesn't contain the key to curb stomping Tiger IIs“. It indeed does – or better did.

The 76 mm 3-inch Gun M7 (L/50) the M10 Wolverine used was not the same the M18 Hellcat was equipped with, as »during the development of the rival M18 76mm GMC (later known as „Hellcat“; editor's note) Ordnance designed a new, lighterweight 76mm gun better suited for use in tanks or tank destroyers. This gun fired the same projectile as the 3-inch gun, but was labeled as a 76mm gun since it used a different ammunition type with a new propellant casing that would not fit in the 3-inch gun.«¹ The outcome was the gun known as the 76 mm M1 being 52 calibers in length the Hellcat was sporting. Yes Sir, that's a difference!

I would, at least to some extend …
That afore-mentioned key was indeed present, as – to my knowledge – the M18 was allowed to fire and equipped with High-velocity armor-piercing-ammunition (HVAP), British term: Armour-piercing, composite rigid-ammunition (APCR) which the M10 Wolverine lacked. This kind of round the Germans recognized as plain, vanilla-flavoured Hartkernmunition greatly topped the penetration-values by wide margin and increased the stopping-power towards levels whereat the M18 indeed could penetrate and destroy PzKpfw VI aka Tiger IIs …


I'm sorry but things just have had to be clarified here.


Smartcom

¹ Source: Page 18, »M10 and M36 Tank Destroyers 1942-53« — New Vanguard, 1st edition (2004), Osprey Publishing, ISBN: 1-84176-469-8

The performance difference was 3-4mm of penetration.

And the magic burger 76mm HVAP didn't offer much greater capability than regular AP against a lot of German types frontally, especially because the Hellcat was expected to be firing from the flanks. In that case the shell was completely pointless and actually reduced the amount of spalling/shell fragmentation inside the target tank.

Yes HVAP on paper had very high penetration, but since the diameter of the shell is so low armour thickness/ shell diameter efficiency combined with sloped armour completely obliterated the shells effectiveness. This is why HVAP shattered frequently and why 76mm HVAP can not pierce a Panther hull >300m, but 90mm T33 AP can at 1000m with much less penetration on paper. It also helps that you can put bite caps on full shells to help against slopes. APCR/HVAP also lost lots of it's penetration over range because of how light they were.

And yeah, 76mm HVAP could penetrate a King Tiger frontally. But only in the turret face that is not covered by the mantlet which was practically an impossible target (mostly due to gunners just shooting center of mass) as the KT's service record proved.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

There are reasons why most of the best players will swear by the scots, and those don't have any Jumbo nor Panthers.

Crocodiles and AVREs? No Jumbos required.

 

[Grosnours]

Crocodiles and AVREs? No Jumbos required.

True, but in fairness the supremacy of those only lasts for about a dozen minutes, whereas a Jumbo or a Panther can be a pain for much longer.
In other terms, scots are anything but a one-trick-pony.

 

[mitchverr]

APDS for the 57mm then to help the yanks out? ^^

 

[ZhukoDim]

Crocodiles and AVREs? No Jumbos required.

Actualy Croc and Avre only little part of the HUGE picture.

 

[Had a dad]

many posts deleted / infractions handed out. For those that had their posts erased, this forum does not tolerate the types of posting that is done elsewhere. Don't continue the crap, just hit report, move along and I will be here soon enough.

 

[RSW2002]

Back to topic...

I think 3rd Armored is mostly balanced and isn't "severely gimped" as some have stated, but there are some adjustments needed imo:

- Jumbos should be less numerous and shift more towards being a Phase C unit, but get cards with higher veterancy added, so the 1000m 11AP at least hits stuff when in range.

- M4A1s should be available as a Phase B card with high availability and some of the non-command Sherman variants should be available with higher veterancy/lower availability.

- The damage on the .50 cal is ungodly, especially against airplanes (which it engages at 1000m for some reason). If you bring enough tanks and halftracks, you don't even need to buy dedicated AA to scare off or even kill planes (Luftlande has a very hard time dealing with Jumbos surrounded with halftracks). It needs its range reduced and its accuracy adjusted.

- Recon tab should have a card of M8 with increased veterancy/low availability in Phase B or C.

- You shouldn't have less infantry slots than 12. SS, especially if the infantry you get isn't that great to begin with. Trade one of the artillery slots for one infantry slot.

- The decks biggest design flaw imo is the lack of any sort of mobile AT unit, which shouldn't happen in an armored division. Didn't they have M10s? Give them 1 or 2 in Phase B.

 

[Dongs Galore]

The M10 issue has been repeatedly raised and denied, on the grounds that 3AD's tank destroyers were an attachment and not organic to the division.

 

[RagingRusski]

Back to topic...

I think 3rd Armored is mostly balanced and isn't "severely gimped" as some have stated, but there are some adjustments needed imo:

- Jumbos should be less numerous and shift more towards being a Phase C unit, but get cards with higher veterancy added, so the 1000m 11AP at least hits stuff when in range.

- M4A1s should be available as a Phase B card with high availability and some of the non-command Sherman variants should be available with higher veterancy/lower availability.

- The damage on the .50 cal is ungodly, especially against airplanes (which it engages at 1000m for some reason). If you bring enough tanks and halftracks, you don't even need to buy dedicated AA to scare off or even kill planes (Luftlande has a very hard time dealing with Jumbos surrounded with halftracks). It needs its range reduced and its accuracy adjusted.

- Recon tab should have a card of M8 with increased veterancy/low availability in Phase B or C.

- You shouldn't have less infantry slots than 12. SS, especially if the infantry you get isn't that great to begin with. Trade one of the artillery slots for one infantry slot.

- The decks biggest design flaw imo is the lack of any sort of mobile AT unit, which shouldn't happen in an armored division. Didn't they have M10s? Give them 1 or 2 in Phase B.

A very sensible adjustment. I'd be all for it.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

The M10 issue has been repeatedly raised and denied, on the grounds that 3AD's tank destroyers were an attachment and not organic to the division.

There is a single US armored division in the game, and they get neither M10s nor M18s? That seems... odd.

 

[RSW2002]

The M10 issue has been repeatedly raised and denied, on the grounds that 3AD's tank destroyers were an attachment and not organic to the division.

By that logic, the Germans would suddenly find themselves with a lot less equipment than they currently have/are planned to get.

The 3rd Armored is the only US armored division planned for the game, correct? They should have M10s imo. And they need them.

 

[RagingRusski]

By that logic, the Germans would suddenly find themselves with a lot less equipment than they currently have/are planned to get.

The 3rd Armored is the only US armored division planned for the game, correct? They should have M10s imo. And they need them.

By their logic, the Panzer Lehr would be stripped of KT's since they were not organic to the division, but we all know that's not going to happen.

 

[Dongs Galore]

The US Infantry division gets TDs instead.

 

[Had a dad]

There is a single US armored division in the game, and they get neither M10s nor M18s? That seems... odd.

not really... well it depends. if I remember correctly there were 3 or 4 TD battalions attached at various times, 2 came in at the end of june, and one of those was around for about a month...and then later another was added around the time of the BotB... I can't remember if a 4th was added in the beginning of 45.

 

[Dongs Galore]

The objection which has been raised by posters ITT to giving 3AD tank destroyers is that they wouldn't really be much help because the 76 isn't that good and the M10 has bad armor.

imo being able to fire at 1200m more than makes up for that but so far this argument has not prevailed