Well, the thread name kind off says its all, really... In the last DD in which art of the game was covered, dev posted a screen with set of soviet tanks, most probably it was picture with visualized brainstorm over soviet tank tree composition.
Well... I have some concerns with it, most of them really small ( and one was even covered by dev in DD comment section ) but only one of them is irks me really strong.
With my mad paint skilz i made an picture with possible soviet tree look based on screen from DD.
With help of it i will now express what i see as a problems in soviet tank tree. Starting from top to bottom of the picture.
1. Great war tank - this is really a minor, but still if i started why not cover even so minor "problems". In the screen from DD soviet GW tank is called... just called GW tank, well considering that soviets will start with T-26 and BT tanks researched anyway ( first in production since 1931, second since 1932 ) it is indeed a really minor concern of mine. But while we here, why not add just minor flavor and call it MS-1 ( or T-18 ) AKA first soviet mass produced tank? Yes, it was a reverse engendered and adapted to soviet industrial capabilities of the time version of Fiat 3000, but still some additional flavor never did any harm to anyone.
2. BT-7 - this is too a really small concern of mine. In picture from DD BT tank is said to be specifically BT-7, this kind off strange to me, why not just call it BT, why label it specifically as BT-7? OFC it could be that in game itself it is indeed called just BT and not BT-7, so my concerns over it could be vane. But as i said, it is just one of minor concerns, not a biggie.
3. A-32 - and this is my mane concern with soviet tank tech tree. Why in hell a tank that in reality not only was not mass produced ( at least not with said designation ) but also it was never intended to be mass produced to begin with, because it was a prototype, and not just a prototype, it was basically a first model of tank that is better known under name T-34... Placing it in a tech tree... is just completely wrong on so many levels... Especially considering that here are enough of much more fitting and mass produced alternatives. Starting from T-28 to T-50. Yes, T-28 is much older design than 1939 ( tank was in production since 1932 ) but at least it is real mass produced machine and not a tank that by HOI4 terms would be better described as a basic T-34 "variant"... As for T-50, yes it was a light tank and not medium, but if we look at UK tree game already takes liberties with brit tank classifications interpretation. And from the historical POW it is actually would make sence, considering that in reality T-34 actually was never intended to compose main bulk of soviet tank force. That role was originally intended for, yep, T-50. The plan was to make T-50 a main soviet tank, while T-34 was intended to be a support tank ala pz3/pz4 german combo. But war changed everything and T-50 was quickly put aside in favor of more powerfull T-34. The third way to deal with A-32 nonsense is to "downgrade" T-34 to 1939 tank model, but considering that in german tree pz4 is listed as 1941 tank model, it would look a bit strange... So in my opinion replacing A-32 with T-50 is a best way to deal with this A-32 non sense.
4. At first i was intended to butthurt about choice of advanced soviet LT in favor of T-60 family instead of more advanced T-50, but considering that T-60 ( and later T-70/80) was main soviet LT during war i guess it make sense to choose it instead of T-50. Plus i already kind off asked to designate T-50 as 1939 soviet medium tank in previous paragraph.
5. T-44 - it is just a minor concern but still i will voice it. In my opinion T-43 would be a better candidate to fulfill a role of advanced soviet medium tank. First of all T-43 was an earlier design than T-44, so it is naturally suits better to be 1943 model medium tank. T-43 was designed in 1942-43, produced and trialed ( including actual combat trials ) in 1943. T-44 on the other hand was designed in 1943-44, produced in 1944, and it never participated in any combat. But mine mane gripe with it is that... it is basically a T-54 prototype. Well not literally ( unlike A-32/T-34), but still its a fact that one of the up-armored and up-gunned experimental variants of T-44 became a basis for later T-54 prototype.
6. IS-7 - once again, a minor complain, in my opinion considering "nature" and design dates of super heavies from tech trees of other major nations, KV-4 or KV-5 would suit the role of soviet SH monstrosity better. Really the only thing that advocates presence of IS-7 in tech tree, is a fact that it was actually produced ( well and that it just looks super cool, so ok its two things ). But if you compare it with SH designs of other nation it would became apparent that it just doesnt fit in to play this role. First of all design date are off, unlike say Tortoise or Maus that were designed during war, IS-7 is a 1945 post war design, and first working prototypes were delivered in 1946. Second, for its time IS-7 was an extremely advanced machine, placing it in the same category as Maus and Tortoise ( i assume that US super heavy will be T-95 and french one would be FCM F1 )... would play a really bad service for RL IS-7 considering that in game all of them would have literally same stats, obviously its really minor but still a minus from a historical flavor standpoint. Now, why i think that KV-4 or KV-5 ( mostly KV-5 really, considering that KV-4 design was not even finalized before project was completely scraped in favor of KV-5 ), first of all it is date of KV-4/5 design was started - 1941 ( a much closer to 1943 doesnt it?). Second, the design itself is more akin to other nation SH tanks, ie it is gigantic heavily armored monstrosity which weighted around 100 tonnes, a dire contrast with sleek IS-7 which weighted little less than 70 tonnes while having 60 km/h max speed ( compare this to amazing max speed of Maus/Tortoise/T-95 ).
All in all, IS-7 is a definite improvement over an IS-3 which played role of soviet SH in previous HOI games, but i really would preferred to see a KV-5.
7. I intended to rant about barrel length of t-54 but dev covered it in respective DD comments.
With my mad paint skilz i made an picture with possible soviet tree look based on screen from DD.
1. Great war tank - this is really a minor, but still if i started why not cover even so minor "problems". In the screen from DD soviet GW tank is called... just called GW tank, well considering that soviets will start with T-26 and BT tanks researched anyway ( first in production since 1931, second since 1932 ) it is indeed a really minor concern of mine. But while we here, why not add just minor flavor and call it MS-1 ( or T-18 ) AKA first soviet mass produced tank? Yes, it was a reverse engendered and adapted to soviet industrial capabilities of the time version of Fiat 3000, but still some additional flavor never did any harm to anyone.
2. BT-7 - this is too a really small concern of mine. In picture from DD BT tank is said to be specifically BT-7, this kind off strange to me, why not just call it BT, why label it specifically as BT-7?
OFC it could be that in game itself it is indeed called just BT and not BT-7, so my concerns over it could be vane. But as i said, it is just one of minor concerns, not a biggie.3. A-32 - and this is my mane concern with soviet tank tech tree. Why in hell a tank that in reality not only was not mass produced ( at least not with said designation ) but also it was never intended to be mass produced to begin with, because it was a prototype, and not just a prototype, it was basically a first model of tank that is better known under name T-34... Placing it in a tech tree... is just completely wrong on so many levels... Especially considering that here are enough of much more fitting and mass produced alternatives. Starting from T-28 to T-50. Yes, T-28 is much older design than 1939 ( tank was in production since 1932 ) but at least it is real mass produced machine and not a tank that by HOI4 terms would be better described as a basic T-34 "variant"... As for T-50, yes it was a light tank and not medium, but if we look at UK tree game already takes liberties with brit tank classifications interpretation. And from the historical POW it is actually would make sence, considering that in reality T-34 actually was never intended to compose main bulk of soviet tank force. That role was originally intended for, yep, T-50. The plan was to make T-50 a main soviet tank, while T-34 was intended to be a support tank ala pz3/pz4 german combo. But war changed everything and T-50 was quickly put aside in favor of more powerfull T-34. The third way to deal with A-32 nonsense is to "downgrade" T-34 to 1939 tank model, but considering that in german tree pz4 is listed as 1941 tank model, it would look a bit strange... So in my opinion replacing A-32 with T-50 is a best way to deal with this A-32 non sense.
4. At first i was intended to butthurt about choice of advanced soviet LT in favor of T-60 family instead of more advanced T-50, but considering that T-60 ( and later T-70/80) was main soviet LT during war i guess it make sense to choose it instead of T-50. Plus i already kind off asked to designate T-50 as 1939 soviet medium tank in previous paragraph.
5. T-44 - it is just a minor concern but still i will voice it. In my opinion T-43 would be a better candidate to fulfill a role of advanced soviet medium tank. First of all T-43 was an earlier design than T-44, so it is naturally suits better to be 1943 model medium tank. T-43 was designed in 1942-43, produced and trialed ( including actual combat trials ) in 1943. T-44 on the other hand was designed in 1943-44, produced in 1944, and it never participated in any combat. But mine mane gripe with it is that... it is basically a T-54 prototype. Well not literally ( unlike A-32/T-34), but still its a fact that one of the up-armored and up-gunned experimental variants of T-44 became a basis for later T-54 prototype.
6. IS-7 - once again, a minor complain, in my opinion considering "nature" and design dates of super heavies from tech trees of other major nations, KV-4 or KV-5 would suit the role of soviet SH monstrosity better. Really the only thing that advocates presence of IS-7 in tech tree, is a fact that it was actually produced ( well and that it just looks super cool, so ok its two things
). But if you compare it with SH designs of other nation it would became apparent that it just doesnt fit in to play this role. First of all design date are off, unlike say Tortoise or Maus that were designed during war, IS-7 is a 1945 post war design, and first working prototypes were delivered in 1946. Second, for its time IS-7 was an extremely advanced machine, placing it in the same category as Maus and Tortoise ( i assume that US super heavy will be T-95 and french one would be FCM F1 )... would play a really bad service for RL IS-7 considering that in game all of them would have literally same stats, obviously its really minor but still a minus from a historical flavor standpoint. Now, why i think that KV-4 or KV-5 ( mostly KV-5 really, considering that KV-4 design was not even finalized before project was completely scraped in favor of KV-5 ), first of all it is date of KV-4/5 design was started - 1941 ( a much closer to 1943 doesnt it?). Second, the design itself is more akin to other nation SH tanks, ie it is gigantic heavily armored monstrosity which weighted around 100 tonnes, a dire contrast with sleek IS-7 which weighted little less than 70 tonnes while having 60 km/h max speed ( compare this to amazing max speed of Maus/Tortoise/T-95 ). All in all, IS-7 is a definite improvement over an IS-3 which played role of soviet SH in previous HOI games, but i really would preferred to see a KV-5.
7. I intended to rant about barrel length of t-54 but dev covered it in respective DD comments.
- 9
- 2
- 1
