We have A SERIOUS balance issue here

[Lord KhaZimir]

Considering its 200+ points, yeah. Nothing in that price range gets insta gibbed, not counting poor unit use (eg backing a Panther/King into battle), An equivalent was if the US had an AT plane that could just strafe and kill a KT from the front. It would be OP.

I think id be fine if 88's were reverted back to just being suppression on aircraft instead of downright snipers. No other unit single handedly kills 200+ pt units with little to no effort, while still being deadly to other categories of targets.

Personally, I think that all battlegroups should have 88 availability looked at.

Flak 88' were used as AT guns as well as AA gun. This is probably the most famous gun of the WWII ! The only thing that stopped T34s, they are not OP. Maybe they deserve an higher price but i think the real problem is game mechanic. Non armored stuff have an higher durability on the field, not only flak88 but AT guns are really hard to kill compared to a tank.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Yeah. With AoE from HE-shell around 30-40 m. Good luck with that...

Maybe the Cromwell VI's gun is too small, but I know for sure that it works with the M4(105). Try it out for yourself.

Flak 88' were used as AT guns as well as AA gun. This is probably the most famous gun of the WWII ! The only thing that stopped T34s, they are not OP. Maybe they deserve an higher price but i think the real problem is game mechanic. Non armored stuff have an higher durability on the field, not only flak88 but AT guns are really hard to kill compared to a tank.

The Panzer IIIs and PaK 38s could combat the T-34s effectively in 1941. The overrated piece of junk known as the T-34 needs to be taken down from its pedestal. Nothing in the German arsenal but FlaK 88s could penetrate the thick front armor of some of the KV tanks in the early war, though. Even the side and rear armor of the KV tank was very thick by 1941 standards.

 

[Hawk8762]

Flak 88' were used as AT guns as well as AA gun. This is probably the most famous gun of the WWII ! The only thing that stopped T34s, they are not OP. Maybe they deserve an higher price but i think the real problem is game mechanic. Non armored stuff have an higher durability on the field, not only flak88 but AT guns are really hard to kill compared to a tank.

Never intentionally used in an attack mind you. While 88's being too durable is 100% a valid point, the use in game is atrociously wrong from a historical point. Its iconic, I get it, but It should not be sniping planes in game. It was meant for shooting at large b17 formations.
Make it a stun only weapon for air (the ultimate stun weapon mind you, still capable of shutting down airspaces) and add a significant aim time penalty from switching between ground and air. Hell, make it a play controlled toggle button, so the crew EITHER has the weapon raised for AA defense, or lowered for AT.

 

[Jonnydodger]

Never intentionally used in an attack mind you. While 88's being too durable is 100% a valid point, the use in game is atrociously wrong from a historical point. Its iconic, I get it, but It should not be sniping planes in game. It was meant for shooting at large b17 formations.
Make it a stun only weapon for air (the ultimate stun weapon mind you, still capable of shutting down airspaces) and add a significant aim time penalty from switching between ground and air. Hell, make it a play controlled toggle button, so the crew EITHER has the weapon raised for AA defense, or lowered for AT.

Are we sure you're not just generalising a situation? As in, the 88s panicked your plane but another AA gun destroyed it? Maybe it's time we asked for proof.

 

[Hawk8762]

Are we sure you're not just generalising a situation? As in, the 88s panicked your plane but another AA gun destroyed it? Maybe it's time we asked for proof.

I'm not sure how to dig out replays. But it was def 88's. Ill try to verbalize the picture:
You call in a p47, it spawn, flies towards its target for maybe a second when 4 or so 88's impact it and it instantly dies. WELL over friendly lines

 

[Hawk8762]

Maybe the Cromwell VI's gun is too small, but I know for sure that it works with the M4(105). Try it out for yourself.

The Panzer IIIs and PaK 38s could combat the T-34s effectively in 1941. The overrated piece of junk known as the T-34 needs to be taken down from its pedestal. Nothing in the German arsenal but FlaK 88s could penetrate the thick front armor of some of the KV tanks in the early war, though. Even the side and rear armor of the KV tank was very thick by 1941 standards.

I'm afraid sir you do not know your armor very well. The t34 was an amazingly designed tank. One of the first, if not THE first to be using the concept of sloped armor. Now it was nowhere near the level of invulnerability as the KV, but panzers, short of the tiger, were simply not able to penetrate one from the front, not counting lucky hits and other non-controllable factors.
Poor Soviet training and maintenance led to the panzers still coming out on top, and If I remember my numbers correctly, out of 800 armored vehicles in a singe soviet armored group (forget which one), only 84 ever saw combat. The rest were abandoned by their crews.

 

[Herr_Robert]

I'm afraid sir you do not know your armor very well. The t34 was an amazingly designed tank. One of the first, if not THE first to be using the concept of sloped armor. Now it was nowhere near the level of invulnerability as the KV, but panzers, short of the tiger, were simply not able to penetrate one from the front, not counting lucky hits and other non-controllable factors.
Poor Soviet training and maintenance led to the panzers still coming out on top, and If I remember my numbers correctly, out of 800 armored vehicles in a singe soviet armored group (forget which one), only 84 ever saw combat. The rest were abandoned by their crews.

Nothing short of a Tiger could penetrate the T-34 frontally? You have no idea what you are talking about. When the Panzer IVs were upgunned in 1942-1943, they could knock out T-34s frontally with ease.

 

[Hawk8762]

Another issue, is if a 16th Luftwaffe starts with two 88's, and everyone does, and sets up a basic defensive line, he can then use his significant supply of ground attack aircraft to mercilessly and safely pummel allied lines, because he knows it is literally impossible for allied fighters to attack said German aircraft.
No allied battlegroup has enough AA, or enough income to get enough AA to stave off early bomber attacks.

 

[Hawk8762]

Nothing short of a Tiger could penetrate the T-34 frontally? You have no idea what you are talking about. When the Panzer IVs were upgunned in 1942-1943, they could knock out T-34s frontally with ease.

Yeah, later. I'm talking initial push into Russia, the T34 and KV completely caught the Germans off guard.
And "ease" is a relative term.

 

[King Of Heroes]

Yeah. With AoE from HE-shell around 30-40 m. Good luck with that...

The FlaKs will be a fair bit into the dispersion circle at anything between 1201-1300 and consider you have a bigger chance to miss (and thus hit closer to the FlaK) than hit the center (Out of AoE range)

And any experienced player does that for a reason: It works.

 

[IronHat]

The FlaKs will be a fair bit into the dispersion circle at anything between 1201-1300 and consider you have a bigger chance to miss (and thus hit closer to the FlaK) than hit the center (Out of AoE range)

And any experienced player does that for a reason: It works.

that seem doable on an open field, but if the 88 is hiding in a tree line they can just move back. Anyone experienced with ATG would know to quickly relocate a fight.

the 88mm flak is also extremely cost effective. The gun is effective against everything in the game. Plane, tank, infantry. In phase A it's also the best atg available to anyone. Ironically only the captured FF have a higher AP value.

 

[Lord KhaZimir]

Another issue, is if a 16th Luftwaffe starts with two 88's, and everyone does, and sets up a basic defensive line, he can then use his significant supply of ground attack aircraft to mercilessly and safely pummel allied lines, because he knows it is literally impossible for allied fighters to attack said German aircraft.
No allied battlegroup has enough AA, or enough income to get enough AA to stave off early bomber attacks.

If they start with Flak 88' spam, that means that they lack sure air and probably infantry or support. Use it at your advantage. Don't waste your money on planes against 16th Luftwaffe, invest it in artillery.

 

[Hawk8762]

If they start with Flak 88' spam, that means that they lack sure air and probably infantry or support. Use it at your advantage. Don't waste your money on planes against 16th Luftwaffe, invest it in artillery.

There in is the problem
His 88's can be an active part of his line, artillery cant. So my points going to artillery, are not in my line, my line which he can now simply push with 88 support.

 

[Hawk8762]

I feel a LOT of the issue would be resolved if 88's were much more squishy, and there in not as appealing as a direct combat unit. ANd artillery, even smaller would be more likely to get kills, there in FORCING 88's to be deployed farther back (which they SHOULD be)

 

[Hidden Gunman]

Maybe the Cromwell VI's gun is too small, but I know for sure that it works with the M4(105). Try it out for yourself.



The Panzer IIIs and PaK 38s could combat the T-34s effectively in 1941. The overrated piece of junk known as the T-34 needs to be taken down from its pedestal. Nothing in the German arsenal but FlaK 88s could penetrate the thick front armor of some of the KV tanks in the early war, though. Even the side and rear armor of the KV tank was very thick by 1941 standards.

That piece of junk just happened to be rolling through the streets of Berlin in 1945...just thought I'd mention that. Round about early June '45 I don't think the germans were even capable of doing that....

In fairness though, you are right...right up until the mud and snow came. Then the germans had to lay down a lumber yard just to keep the tank's belly out of the mud, and a broom to brush the mice out of the wiring. I don't agree with the idea that T34's were impenetrable, they were, but they were designed to work in crap conditions, driven and fought in by kulaks, and deployed in mass. The success of that is measured by my first statement.

On topic though, the '88 issue is a victim of the game character...IRL, those AA mount '88s were in depth, and primarily intended to engage aircraft, and used in the ground AT role in emergencies, more or less. When they carved up a fair chunk of Goodwood, they had to be ordered not to engage aircraft and to take on the tanks...and they did so at long range. We don't have that long range in game terms, for the simple reason that all direct fire weapons engage under 1200m. That saves allied players on broad and more open maps being shredded before they get part way across the map, it also means that we see a mass of AA units appearing in the front line, when in reality that was very unlikely to occur, notwithstanding that they aren't concealable like AT guns.

 

[King Of Heroes]

that seem doable on an open field, but if the 88 is hiding in a tree line they can just move back. Anyone experienced with ATG would know to quickly relocate a fight.

the 88mm flak is also extremely cost effective. The gun is effective against everything in the game. Plane, tank, infantry. In phase A it's also the best atg available to anyone. Ironically only the captured FF have a higher AP value.

FlaKs can't hide in a treeline.

You're thinking of the PaK aren't you?

 

[Herr_Robert]

Yeah, later. I'm talking initial push into Russia, the T34 and KV completely caught the Germans off guard.
And "ease" is a relative term.

Why did you mention the Tiger then? It came long after the Panzer IV was upgunned. The 75mm KwK 40 L/43 could penetrate the T-34's frontal armor at well over 1000m - sounds easy enough to me. Add to that the superior optics of the German tanks, and the Panzer IV is likely to spot the T-34 first.

That piece of junk just happened to be rolling through the streets of Berlin in 1945...just thought I'd mention that. Round about early June '45 I don't think the germans were even capable of doing that....

It wasn't bad in every way. It had a greater potential for upgrades than the Panzer IV, for example. But it's definately one of the most overrated tanks in history. Had the Russians lost the war - which they would have without Western aid - I doubt its reputation would be so good. Their factories were able to spit out T-34s because the Western Allies provided them with raw materials, food, trucks, etc, which allowed them to focus their production on war materials.

On topic though, the '88 issue is a victim of the game character...IRL, those AA mount '88s were in depth, and primarily intended to engage aircraft, and used in the ground AT role in emergencies, more or less. When they carved up a fair chunk of Goodwood, they had to be ordered not to engage aircraft and to take on the tanks...and they did so at long range. We don't have that long range in game terms, for the simple reason that all direct fire weapons engage under 1200m. That saves allied players on broad and more open maps being shredded before they get part way across the map, it also means that we see a mass of AA units appearing in the front line, when in reality that was very unlikely to occur, notwithstanding that they aren't concealable like AT guns.

Yeah, that's true. The FlaK 88s only accounted for 3.4% of T-34 kills in the early war on the eastern front. I have not seen statistics from other theaters, but it was exceptionally useful against British armor in North Africa because the early British tanks didn't have HE shells.

 

[Max_Damage]

Soviet tankers tried to avoid land leased tech like plague. Diesel on a tank is so much better: it gives torque and offroad, it is not flammable while petrol engines erupt in flames and are very hazardous to the crew. Sherman's armor was also of poor quality, it was too soft and sometimes couldnt withstand a ricocheting shell.

its not the armor which was impenetrable it is the combination of powerful gun, speed, reliability and good engine.

pz4 is a nice tank but you can clearly see in the game why it was very obsolete early into the war with only 6-8 frontal armor, a 45 mm gun can defeat it. T34 requires a pak40 which is a pain to use due to its weight and also it was not proliferate until like mid 1943. before that the germans actually converted french 75 mm guns which used flawed HEAT ammo. pak97/38

 

[Admiral_Awesome]

I'm not sure how to dig out replays. But it was def 88's. Ill try to verbalize the picture:
You call in a p47, it spawn, flies towards its target for maybe a second when 4 or so 88's impact it and it instantly dies. WELL over friendly lines

So, you're basically saying that it is wrong that 4 or so flak 88's (your statement indicates that it might have been even more), which are a hard counter against air, are able to shoot down air instantly? They are amassing 480 points of hard counter against you and you complain about the fact, that it did work?

Would it sound wrong to you if I were complaining that half of that point sum (240 points) in paks is able to insta kill my precious german tank?

 

[fufubear]

Soviet tankers tried to avoid land leased tech like plague. Diesel on a tank is so much better: it gives torque and offroad, it is not flammable while petrol engines erupt in flames and are very hazardous to the crew. Sherman's armor was also of poor quality, it was too soft and sometimes couldnt withstand a ricocheting shell.

The diesel vs gasoline point you made is largely a myth. German tanks used gasoline yet they didn't always burst into flames. The only difference was that diesel was only a little less likely to catch fire against molotov cocktails (don't blow this out of proportion).

And the Sherman had thicker armor than the t34.