ostheer medium tanks

[areckross]

Panzer II and Panzer III are obvious

[ThGermanElite]

Dont take out the Panther!!! That tank is a BEAST!!!

[Paciat]

Dont take out the Panther!!! That tank is a BEAST!!!

Do take out the Panther!!! That tank is a BEAST!!!

[ThGermanElite]

Dont take out the Panther!!! That tank is a BEAST!!!

Do take out the Panther!!! That tank is a BEAST!!!

Hahaha

[Aouch]

Well, I think the Panther could perhaps be part of the Ostheer, however, it should be part of a doctrine, since WH can built it, for PE it's a call-in after upgrading all other buildings and for OH it should be a doctrine-ability.

Again, I'm pretty sure Pz III will be OH's MBT. It's shown as Ausf. J with the long 5cm KwK and sideskirts, this tank can probably even deal with early T34.
We also see an Infantry-support-tank, the Ausf. N, 7.5cm short cannon, same as the "Stubby" Panzer IV from PE.

Therefore I can't really see the need a StuG III, taking into account, that the AI-role (earyl version with short cannon) is already fulfilled by the Pz III Ausf. N and shouldn't be more powerfull than WH StuG IV. Therefore it can only be usefull as (cheap) early-mid "tankdestroyer" to support infantry, a role which is in my opinion similiar to Pz III Ausf. J.

[vonhaggon]

    Well, in my opinion it would be a mistake to make the pzIII the main battle tank of the ostheer without stugIII support. The pzIII with its long barreled 50mm L/60 is far too inadiquate to take on a T-34 alone, or in pairs. The T34 was designed to take on and destroy pzII,pzIII, and pzIVs with ease!! Even the pzIV with its 75mm L/43 was hard pressed to take on a T34. In EF i have spent many,many hours testing the pzIV against all armor in the game and i can tell you this... A fully upgraded pzIV will lose against a regular T34 almost every time!!                                               The german command also saw this problem during the war with russia and decided to have stugIII as tank destroyer to support the pzIII and pzIV in the anti-tank role. (They probly would have used tigers and panthers, but they couldnt produce near as many of them as stugs). The stugIII with a 75mm L/48 was a huge succes in combating russian tanks of all types. One of the most succesful stgIII aces was Hauptmann Peter Franz, also a Knights Cross holder and the commander of Stug.Abt. "Grossdeutschland". He destroyed some 43 Soviet T-34/76 tanks during the Battle for Borissovka on March 14th of 1943.                                   The stugIII bridged the armored support gap between pzIII and panther for the german armored fighting force intill the end of the war. I personaly believe that the stugIII should be considered for the role of tank destroyer for the ostheer. I realize that it is a tank destroyer, but if you do the reserch you will find that the stugIII accounted for a large portion of all destroyed russian armor pieces in the war, and was seen in moscow and stalingrad! Seriously guys do the reserch, its fun to learn the truth !!!           
                             

[TacticalNuke]

Thats a very compelling argument.

[Versedhorison]

*Punchs Griptonik on the face*

I hate this Mr.Spam title, I want to get rid of it.

lol do you want a trade???

on topic as I've said before I think at least the panther and in some form the panzer 4 both need to be in the ostheer since if the ostheer is suppost to represent the war in the east then the two main tanks of the german army should be in the ostheer.

[Griptonix]

    Well, in my opinion it would be a mistake to make the pzIII the main battle tank of the ostheer without stugIII support. The pzIII with its long barreled 50mm L/60 is far too inadiquate to take on a T-34 alone, or in pairs. The T34 was designed to take on and destroy pzII,pzIII, and pzIVs with ease!! Even the pzIV with its 75mm L/43 was hard pressed to take on a T34. In EF i have spent many,many hours testing the pzIV against all armor in the game and i can tell you this... A fully upgraded pzIV will lose against a regular T34 almost every time!!                                               The german command also saw this problem during the war with russia and decided to have stugIII as tank destroyer to support the pzIII and pzIV in the anti-tank role. (They probly would have used tigers and panthers, but they couldnt produce near as many of them as stugs). The stugIII with a 75mm L/48 was a huge succes in combating russian tanks of all types. One of the most succesful stgIII aces was Hauptmann Peter Franz, also a Knights Cross holder and the commander of Stug.Abt. "Grossdeutschland". He destroyed some 43 Soviet T-34/76 tanks during the Battle for Borissovka on March 14th of 1943.                                   The stugIII bridged the armored support gap between pzIII and panther for the german armored fighting force intill the end of the war. I personaly believe that the stugIII should be considered for the role of tank destroyer for the ostheer. I realize that it is a tank destroyer, but if you do the reserch you will find that the stugIII accounted for a large portion of all destroyed russian armor pieces in the war, and was seen in moscow and stalingrad! Seriously guys do the reserch, its fun to learn the truth !!!           
                           

+1
In total agreement as most of us are on that point. Give this man a cigar!

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

Out of historical view it is no problem to make the Panzer III the main battle tank of the Ostheer.
A lot of T-34 tanks were destroyed by Panzer III. Reason are e.g. the fact that T-34 crews are nealy blind inside their tank or the fact that the scope of the T-34 is "primitive" and so one.
BUT all in all i think there is no problem out of gameplay view, too!
Perhpas one PzIII shouldnt kill a T-34 but in groups i think this wont be any problem.
BUT the most important point out of my view is the fact that anyone had said that a PzIII should be the counterpart of the T-34. We will see what for weapons Ostheer will be able to use against the red steel 

[BurroDiablo]

Of course, PzIII won't be able to go toe to toe with a T-34 head on, but this is CoH remember, so it can still give it a good beating, especially with its extra armour upgrade

[Seeme]

I think at first the when the ostheer comes out its gunna turn into giant tank battles.

[Newbie.]

I think at first the when the ostheer comes out its gunna turn into giant tank battles.

Heh, thats what makes the Eastern Front.

...

Apart from Urban Combat.

[vonhaggon]

 Well, I would hope then, that the balance between the fuel costs of the pzIII and the T34 would be studied and debated with utmost attention (as im sure it is). Of course guys, all would be forgiven if the ostheer could build Tigers in factories like those huge Is-2 are. Also, to be honest i am more happy to see pzII on the battle field! PzII is a german afv that i have been waiting on for years. It was used so much across europe that it deserves its place in the game. 

[Nubrannosaurus]

I can't impart my opinion at that time for what the Ostheer tanks should be, but one thing's for sure is that doctrinal units define a style of play, not the general standard of play.  The standard of play is the how the army functions without doctrine units.  What are its strengths?  What are its weaknesses?  With this idea, we can see that America and Wehrmacht are considered well-rounded armies, whereas the the Panzer Elite is considered fast and mobile, and the British considered defensive. 

With that in mind, you'll realize that doctrines allow players to alter their army's standard of play to a different style.  Picking Airborne makes America a more mobile, offensive army.  Picking Royal Commandos makes the British less defensive and more mobile because of their instant ability to drop three different types of gliders.  Picking Scorched Earth makes the Panzer Elite and even deadlier strike force because now they have the ability to use their speed with a deceptive offensive nature (booby-trapping).  Do you guys see where I'm going with this?

We need to develop the Ostheer as an army first, we need to define their standard of play first.  When that's done, we'll develop three different ways (doctrines) to change that standard to represent three different unique styles of play.