Blitzkrieg Mod Forum

Can i ask if we can treat so far every tank the same way?
What i mean is, that axis tanks generally take far less damage from arty than allied. Yes, people will say now: "But KT and stuff get killed so easily by arty". True, but allied tanks even faster.

The cost Argument? A stug doesnt cost more than a sherman and a Panther not more than a Pershing.

Current situation is:

Any axis tank takes 25% less damage from the original arty damage. The heaviest 50% less, Jagdpanther also 60% less. And even open top Ostwind 25% reduced damage and even axis halftracks and sdkfz 234 receive less damage from arty than an allied Pershing does. A direct hit instant kills though but they survive longer when arty explodes all arround than any allied vehicle etc.
The only axis vehicle vulnerable to arty seems to be the Marder. The Hetzer takes also full damage from arty.
Allied does not have such damage reduction except the churchill crocc that takes damage from arty like axis medium armor.
But any axis tank (or vehicle) takes less damage from arty than Jumbo, pershing or even SP.
Losing a KT to arty is super nasty. And when it happens, all hate arty.
Any allied player knows that probably half of all allied tank losses in a game will be caused by arty use.


So i am asking if we can make it more standardized when it comes to taken damage from arty. I think i dont have to mention that axis throw all sorts of arty against allied tanks... no matter where they are. Personally i had tank kill scores with Hummels that was above 30 in a single game.

To be more accurate: 105 shell deals 335 damage and that boosted by 50% right in the center of the explosion (direct hit). A Tank IV (or any other medium axis) receives 376,875 damage. HP are 636 so far.

A sherman (inculde jumbos etc which arent cheap) receives 502 damage. A basic sherman or 76 has 636 HP as well.

A Hummel deals 500 to 900 damage with a single direct hit. Its an insta kill actually.
After the suggested damage reduction the damage for hummel would still reach from 450 to 675 damage which can still instant kill allied medium armor such as shermans.


idk why it is made this way, but i dont think it should stay. Allieds have also expensive tanks, the SP cant be replaced even.
Despite this axis have the weapons to crack any armor in normal engagments. Allieds not (with exception of one single unit) and really need arty and stuff to kill the biggest things.

So i cant see the reason why axis need to be more powerfull against armor than allied arty.

And when someone comes with priest, its one doc. a Hummel is even more deadly due to higher rof.


Also, allied arty deals less damage to allied tanks as well. Axis arty deals always the full damage.
And the Panther can bounce of arty shots.

Sure! I can agree on weakening Axis tanks even more against Allied arty, because obviously they are too "stronk" vs arty at the moment... However, I would agree on this.. only in 1 condition. Which is; Only if it was possible to play Allied vs Allied.
Because I could almost assure you that Axis would be no longer found on the lobby anymore then :P

I am sorry Hawks, but I really can't be with you on this... I mean; when I see a KT dying just by 5 direct Priest hits in less than 8 seconds.. then it doesn't seem like what you are telling here is meaningful at all to be honest. Keeping in mind that the KT is the MOST expensive unit in the entire game btw! Or let's not talk about Airborne airplanes wiping out even the JagdTiger.
And yes, I would definitely consider airplanes being "arty" as well.

And also, Allied tanks should not be more resistant the other way around.. not only because Allied tanks are cheaper... But because Axis arty is more expensive too.

I think Axis tanks should take more damage from M1 Garand as well.

From a gameplay perspective, I disagree as well. Tanks I think are and should be a natural counter to artillery (which allied docs are now FILLED with but thankfully that will change soon). Besides, it's not like cats are THAT hard to deal with anymore since the pershing buff...

If you standardized it the OTHER way where allied tanks took less damage from artillery then maybe it'll be less frustrating? Then maybe shermans would be worth a damn and armor doc wouldnt JUST be jumbos, calliopes, and pershings. I'd even go so far to say get rid of the sniper in every doc except for a few (US and WM), then you'll have an armor doc that incentivizes the natural tools that come with the doc: the sherman varieties.

Wow. Wtf. Where did i say to increase the damage?!

I want the opposite. No change for axis armor lol. Just saying that allied tanks should also be more resistant to arty up to a degree as axis tanks.
I dont get why a churchill takes more damage than a stug.

Sometimes i am afraid that you guys dont even read a post entirley.

I want a standardisation using axis tanks as the standard not the other way arround.

@Tiger:
Where is axis arty more expensive lol. A 105 from def doc cost same as US 105 or CW 25 pdr.
I dont get this at all.


And yes, any loss of heavy tank or expensive tank to arty is frustrating. But not just for axis. That was my statment.

And yes, armor can be a natural counter to arty since only direct hits would actually really harm a tank. But thats not the case for allied armor.

Wow. Wtf. Where did i say to increase the damage?!

I was wondering the same. I was about to post but got confused about why the fuck people were talking about artillery agasint axis tanks when it's far worse for allies. I mean, not only does axis artillery do more dmg allied heavy tanks also have lower hp than axis Jumbo: 750, Churchill: 750, Panther: 800. And when hummel can do up to 900 dmg (Artillery doesn't get random dmg like tanks) will one hit kill jumbo and churchills even while overrepaired.

I'm pretty tired of having my heavy tanks get one hit killed by some stupid artillery. Pretty pissed having my medium tanks destroeyd in one hit too.

The price of the Hummel barrage is twice more expensive than the Priest's... Then why shouldn't a single hit by such a high caliber 150mm gun instantly kill any cheap Churchill or a Sherman??!! Even the Wespe barrage costs more than the Priest barrage.. although both have the same caliber! Aside that the Priest also has superior abilities, often acting like a 150mm gun and not just 105 somehow. Meaning that Axis arty would have to be significantly cheaper if the damage was ever reduced against Allied tanks.

But you know what? Even on a direct hit, 90% of the times currently a Grille or even a Hummel would never be able to destroy a full HP Sherman.. in fact, I have seen them often hit but only deal little to no damage at all.

The cost and the damage are both justified in my opinion, and the Allied tanks are way more cost effective already.

Also wespe has double the scatter of priest you can check in corsix.

Tiger. You are derailing the topic. Barrage cost doesnt count. I could argue the same way: "Calli cost 95 ammo for a long barrage, why it doesnt kill tanks?"
Do you see how wrong such arguments are. And when i kill (or extremly damage) a pershing or comet with 50 ammo barrage from hotchkiss (no joke) i do think its a good trade.
besides most axis anti tank weapons in late games are decent oneshoter. Why is it necessary that arty blows half of the tanks up already and leaving the few surivers left with little HP against defenses like 88 guns or Panther guns.

And Where is priest cheaper? the long range thing? Put a ammo HT behind and wespe is the cheapest 105 arty per use when using basic barrage.

The Hummel will afterall take tanks literally out of combat.
Spending 200 ammo or more for long tom just to see a stug and tank IV left with low HP is as if you hit a tank with Hummel in a shot that is left with 0.001 HP


And why would it be so wrong? Get a vet wespe or something and the accuracy is deadly like the priest. I tested it with Hummel in many occassions.
It would simply break the dominance of arty against tanks a bit and less being an "answer to everything". Besides that the 210 nebler, stuka and hotchkiss are very deadly against incoming tank assaults. Like killing half of the advancing tanks before the battle starts.

As i said, the damage would still be significant. Stugs arent more costly than shermans, Panther not more than a pershing and so on.

Danikas wrote:Also wespe has double the scatter of priest you can check in corsix.

It makes you hit more tanks. Since allied tanks are being used more in combination (one anti inf, one anti tank and so on) it actually helps to blaster the entire area killing and badly damage as many tanks as possible. Basically, in this regard, i would be happy if wespe would have scatter of a priest coz that way i would lose just one tank to a hit while the rest of the shots would do little to the others.
Bu this disadvantage just helps to damage several spread out tanks, esspecially when there is a group going for an attack.
Priest kills tanks just because it is able to hit one tank several times which is necessary to actually kill it due to exactly this lower damage per hit.

I misread. My bad. I'm in somewhat agreement then, I find it laughable that nowadays artillery is used as anti tank counter, id say for both axis and allies. Though I personally attribute that problem to playing on small maps more than balance.

kwok wrote:I misread. My bad. I'm in somewhat agreement then, I find it laughable that nowadays artillery is used as anti tank counter, id say for both axis and allies. Though I personally attribute that problem to playing on small maps more than balance.

sure, but it doesnt justify that kind of extremely different treatment. Why should a jumbo or sherman blow almost instant by a single shot while a stug can get away quite well by a random hit.

I think its that kind of random killing chance that makes arty so appealing (at least for axis). Just one hit and.... you know. I best case a single barrage kills up to 2 tanks.