They cost the same as a heavy tank and you can't place a secondary cannon on to it. Without a secondary cannon to put on them for extra hard and soft attack they are essentially useless and not worth building.
- 4
- 1
- 1
Modern Tanks are USELESS!
- Thread starter Bolshevik-
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
They're expensive/end game, not useless.
The hard atack from secondary cannon is negligible.
Is jut a "wonder weapon" of tanks, along with Super-Heavy Tank.
forum.paradoxplaza.com
The hard atack from secondary cannon is negligible.
Is jut a "wonder weapon" of tanks, along with Super-Heavy Tank.
Super Heavy Gun in Modern Tank.
Its has any use? I don't play MP games, so im a bit dumb about TD use. U basically can use Super-Heavy Gun in Modern Tank switching the role and the Turret. But comparing with other guns, doesn't seem all that "game changer" weapon. I'm missing...
- 1
- 1
Alright so its only use is as a tank destroyer. No reason to use it as a tank.They're expensive/end game, not useless.
The hard atack from secondary cannon is negligible.
Is jut a "wonder weapon" of tanks, along with Super-Heavy Tank.
Super Heavy Gun in Modern Tank.
Its has any use? I don't play MP games, so im a bit dumb about TD use. U basically can use Super-Heavy Gun in Modern Tank switching the role and the Turret. But comparing with other guns, doesn't seem all that "game changer" weapon. I'm missing...
- 1
i think they should cost less than heavies. not that it would matter most games, but main battle tank did not share relative cost/issues with heavy tanks
- 2
- 1
The whole concept of a 'modern' tank as a separate battalion and line of equipment should be abolished. They should just be another tier of equipment within the existing tank tanks. Modern lights, modern mediums (current in game moderns), modern heavies. This would get rid of at least some of the battalion count inflation, because currently the moderns don't differ from mediums very much at all. Mediums are slightly better on supply and weight, modern SPAA still has its suppression bugged, medium tanks are slightly worse at amphibious.
The only real benefit to keeping it separate right now, is to get around the equipment mixing problems. But given that so few people actually reach modern tanks to begin with, this doesn't seem particularly practical.
As it stands though, the purpose of the modern chassis is to take 'medium' level battalion stats (almost entirely the same), give it access to 'heavy' weapons and armour. The problem with that, is... no one cares. Armour is basically already (to an extent) a dumpstat on tanks, the point of putting ticks into armour is to get breakthrough, not the armour, so you would probably end up with just as many ticks because the breakthrough would be the same between them. The hardness in MP is also largely a detriment, hard attacks are far more plentiful in MP.
As for this guns, this allows for for a 'tank' (rather than TD or SPG, which ultimately just means +BRK) using heavy howitzer, HVC3 or HC3 (rather than medium howitzer, medium cannon, or improved high velocity cannon, which means +performance). Or a TD with the SHC, but lets never talk about that again. But we could already do that with a heavy chassis, without needing to invest nearly as much into tech, and with fewer vehicles per battalion which is essentially just a discount on all the modules. A modern with HVC3 would cost ~1100 IC, a heavy would only cost 900.
The only real benefit to keeping it separate right now, is to get around the equipment mixing problems. But given that so few people actually reach modern tanks to begin with, this doesn't seem particularly practical.
As it stands though, the purpose of the modern chassis is to take 'medium' level battalion stats (almost entirely the same), give it access to 'heavy' weapons and armour. The problem with that, is... no one cares. Armour is basically already (to an extent) a dumpstat on tanks, the point of putting ticks into armour is to get breakthrough, not the armour, so you would probably end up with just as many ticks because the breakthrough would be the same between them. The hardness in MP is also largely a detriment, hard attacks are far more plentiful in MP.
As for this guns, this allows for for a 'tank' (rather than TD or SPG, which ultimately just means +BRK) using heavy howitzer, HVC3 or HC3 (rather than medium howitzer, medium cannon, or improved high velocity cannon, which means +performance). Or a TD with the SHC, but lets never talk about that again. But we could already do that with a heavy chassis, without needing to invest nearly as much into tech, and with fewer vehicles per battalion which is essentially just a discount on all the modules. A modern with HVC3 would cost ~1100 IC, a heavy would only cost 900.
- 5
- 1
Hardness is almost never a detriment. Only the most dedicated heavy tank divisions with 8 HT and 3 MOT will have more hard attack than soft attack. And that's only if you build tanks with the high velocity gun. If you put heavy howitzer + secondary gun + machine gun, the heavy tank will always have more soft attack than hard attack.
I mean theres nothing modern about a modern tank that is worse than a ww2 tank. You need the extra soft and hard attack from additional heavy guns on your tankThey probably have that base on the Abrams tanks!
- 1
That because you ignore their armor and reliability.
The reality is you don't need that extra attack to win. You can use the IC saving on planes or more tank divisions. Do you have 1000 CAS on the air zone already, if not then try it.
yeah cas is important but AT divisions stacked in groups of 10 will stop tanks from crossing a river. Thing Stalin line
- 1
If you replace one heavy tank with one TD, then it just barely has more hard attack than soft attack. However, the tanks being used have only 2 MGs. If you utilize a slightly different tank design with 3 MGs:
Even dedicated heavy tank divisions with 1 HTD has more soft attack than hard attack.
Attachments
- 1
those images show more that getting hit by them is a wash for hard vs soft. i guess you'd still prefer hard though, because it will make opposing infantry less effective while basically being the same vs stuff like this
I wasn't really going to comment on your original mention of 8 tanks 3 mot, because I felt like a 22 wide template was already outside the realm of consideration for a sweaty MP template. Most of the tank templates I'm familiar with discussing, are 42w with something like 8 mek, 6 tanks 6 TD, and either 1 SPAA or 2 towed AA. And then you bring out more of these small templates, while they also all have support artillery, and you only go as far as to include 1 TD. All of those things really do combine to skew towards soft attack.
Also, are you really using MA-R, mass mob doctrine to show us these tanks? Thats the only way I can get 24.1 org and 0.48 recovery. Well, at least it isn't SF doctrine to try to lean into the extra soft attack from support companies.
I don't want to bother right now with completely reverse engineering your exact techs and designs to see what else there is to find.
Anyway, 22w tank templates are not something I'm familiar with discussing in terms of MP. What sort of mods or rulesets does your group use, that might encourage the use of this sort of thing?
- 1
Use Modern Tanks with MOT is a waste, at height u can afford Modern Tanks u can afford MEC III.
no one uses low width tanks like these even in pure vanilla, they get clicked and lose a lot of strength due to low hp
- 1
Yeah, the template you've suggested does have more hard attack than soft attack. That's because there are equal numbers of heavy tanks and heavy TDs. The only benefits to having this many HTDs are higher hard attack and piercing. If you want to maximize breakthrough, heavy tanks are the way to go. Heavy tanks also have slightly higher org and HP than TDs; this applies for all 4 doctrines. I used mass assault because it's not a real game, I picked a "neutral" doctrine which doesn't affect breakthrough or soft attack values.
Attachments
You forgot the speed. With modern tanks you can make insane 12km/s monstrosity and by the time you have researched modern tanks your industry is so large you are not going to worry about the IC cost. Heavy tank and super heavies are slow and have too much terrain penalties too.
Is this about Hearts of Iron IV or did a Ukrainian farmer steal your T-55?
- 3
you also have nukes though, which break the ai's deathstacks of infantry quicker