9.0 Feedback: Historical Battles

Hello everyone,

after very positive first impressions from last night, I decided to take a closer look at historical battles and share my impressions from them. First, overall, despite parts of it not being translated yet, the interface is very simple and streamlined. It’s very easy to orientate within it, you just take the vehicle, select historical ammo loadout below and go. The only problem I see in this is that it’s not that easy to find out, how exactly does the historical configuration of the vehicle look.

You have to:

- minimize the historical battle window
- run your mouse over the “historical loadout” icon (more like label) next to the service
- historical setup will appear, but only in names, not a “schematic” of stock/nonstock – for example, it will tell you that the engine you will be using is HL120TRM, but it won’t tell you that it’s the stock engine or top engine, you either have to know that or check the “research” window of the vehicle
- in historical battle mode, research window still shows the original random battle configuration, so if you for example want to take the Panzer IV Ausf.H in historical battles, you will be using the L/48 gun, but if you run with derp in randoms, you will see in research window that derp is still installed, this is a bit counterintuitive

Other than this, it’s fine, so let’s see our first historical battle. It’s also worth noting that since everyone “wants the Tiger”, Tiger (and generally other “big cats”) waiting times are VERY long, for testing purposes, it’s better to roll around with StuG or Panzer IV.

Battle of Kursk


The description is not translated yet, so I will do that for you, it says: “The Kursk battle is one of the key battles of WW2, the result of which was the German army suffering major defeat at the hands of the Soviet armies.”

The map is obviously Prokhorovka :)

First lesson (I learned the hard way) of historical battles is that tiers don’t matter that much. Stock tier 6 is actually WORSE than elite tier 5. This goes especially for KV-1S and Panzer IV – that’s a very good example. You see, KV-1S in this battle is historical, that means stock turret and 76mm gun. It is actually worse than elite Panzer IV Ausf.H the Germans use and despite being one tier higher and a heavy, it is defeated easily, unless the Panzer driver is a moron. Last night, there were plenty of KV-1S in the queue, their players probably looking forward to massacre Germans with the 122mm guns – sorry :P

The Kursk battle seems balanced at 8vs8 or so, I haven’t seen bigger teams than that. Not sure that is intentional, or just some test MM glitch, but it actually works really well, the battle is shorter than random and it has nice flow to it (a bit like team battles, only, you know, without the ZOMGESPORTZFFS).

What is also worth noting that even the weakest vehicles of the battle are not useless and don’t feel underpowered. Of course, there are things such as the Panzer II, that can scout and that’s pretty much it, but the Panzer IV fits perfectly and so does the StuG. Both use their historical guns (L/48 and L/43 respectively) and it works very, very well. Same goes for their Soviet counterparts – technically. Historical T-34 is able to defeat the Panzer IV (as I learned the hard way).

What is probably not so okay is the vehicle balance. You see, Germans win in 90 percent of cases. I am actually not sure why that is, because technically, Soviets have some really nasty machines as well (especially the SU-152), I suspect this has something to do with the fact that both sides in this case go for the “big guns” – the result is that the Soviets have the entire team filled with SU-152′s, plus one or two T-34′s or so and since they are very fragile and blind as a bat, the Tigers tear them apart. By the way, the Tiger feels pretty overpowered. Of course it’s still not the HURRDURRRUSH vehicle Germanophiles wished for, but it can take some punishment and for this battle, its short 88 is very sufficient. On the other hand, Ferdinand is insanely overpowered and should be removed from this battle I think (or at least reduced somehow), because it’s just ridiculous – if left unchecked and without the Soviets focusing on taking it down immediately (lol, cooperation in random – good luck), even one can decide the battle easily.

In this battle, the Germans are clearly much stronger and even if the Soviets have the most firepower they actually can have (SU-152), they are inferior due to the fact SU-152 has no armor and its camo factor isn’t exactly stellar either. This needs to be addressed I believe. The Russians need at least two or three more tanks (tier 5-6). Results such as this aren’t much fun.


Battle of Lake Balaton


The battle description says: “Balaton defense operation – counterattack of the German armies in Hungary, in the Balaton and Velence lakes region. It was ended by victory of Soviet armies.”

For some reason, this battle is played on the map Erlenberg, I can’t say it fits historically, but I guess there was no better choice (Murovanka?). This battle has exactly the opposite problem than Kursk. Here, Soviets are ridiculously overpowered. Why? Check this setup out:


You can imagine how well that battle actually went. The problem in this case is the fact that Jagdtiger is “too expensive”, when it comes to its MM weight. On paper, 128mm Jagdtiger should be able to deal with pretty much anything, but in reality, everyone else gets killed and Jagdtiger gets mobbed and killed easily. ISU-152′s (even in stock) have insane firepower and being this outnumbered just cannot be won. Of course, the problem is, there will ALWAYS be a Jagdtiger in the battle on one side, because of the crowd of “IWANNAPWN” noobs. In this case, the Panzer IV is equipped with the L/43 gun and running that against ISU-152 armor (you can’t penetrate it from front without gold ammo, of which you have exactly 3 rounds) is absolutely pointless. StuG obviously suffers from the same issues and Tiger II really can’t decide that battle against such odds. This battle is very poorly balanced overall.

Even without the ISU-152 spam, the setup generally looks like this:


This battle literally stands and falls on the performance of the Jagdtiger driver. If he is an idiot, like in this case, he focuses on sniping T-34′s on the other side of the map, while leaving flanks open. The small amount of German tanks protecting its flanks get overrun by a horde of T-34′s and Jagdtiger gets killed. My guess would be that Jagdtiger’s job is to destroy the most dangerous enemy targets, such as the ISU or IS. Without that, the Germans lose every time.

Battle of Ardennes


The description says “Ardennes Operation – major offensive of hitlerite forces on the western front. Happened from December 1944 to January 1945, ended with major defeat of the Germans.” Notice the term “hitlerite”… ugh.

Either way, from the vehicle setup (American tier 6′s – in Hellcat case stock – versus German tier 7′s and 8′s), you can probably imagine, how well that goes for the Americans.


Above is the typical battle result. Americans mob the smaller tanks, but can’t deal with the German heavy armor at distance, have to close in and without the advantage of cover and camouflage, Jagdpanther plus Tiger II rip them apart. In this case, Americans need SERIOUSLY more vehicles. More Jacksons would work as well probably, but I have seen very few of them.


Overall, all three battles need more balance. Last night, I wrote that it’s fun – and it is, because I was playing German in the Kursk battle and that’s something you simply can’t lose. Personally, I understand why Wargaming did what they did – abandoning the “slot” system and going for simple modified matchmaking, but it’s worth noting that it creates ridiculously unhistorical setups, such as a flood of Hellcats. I am not saying that at some point such battle did not happen (I actually don’t know whether it did), but it certainly is not a proper representative of that period’s general historical order of battle.

But it’s just a test. There is still time to tweak it.

87 thoughts on “9.0 Feedback: Historical Battles

  1. has anyone looked at the camo’s for the PZ3 yet? i suggest you try it out, it’s hilarious ;D

    • The stuG III tier IV got the same bug lol (actually i don’t like that after the Marder 38 -Tier IV- there is the StugIII -tier IV again)

  2. “German in the Kursk battle and that’s something you simply can’t lose”
    Haha. Just lost 0:7 playing a Pz IV. Wasn’t pretty.

  3. It is nearly impossible to keep a balanced lineup without long waiting times. The problem, as you said, is that a lot of people “WANNAPWN” with the biggest and meanest tank they can get. That means that a lot of them will get the german big cats or the baddest soviet td. The american tanks are screwed, while qualitatively speaking they were not that bad against the germans, they were unable to penetrate frontal armor at medium to long ranges and had to resort to maneuvering so they could hit them in the side and rear. Good luck finding a random team able to do that.

    • It’s actually quite a good fit. That region has small hills. Also no big forrests and probably the ruins where historical at the time.

      • It’s actually quite a good fit. That region has small hills. Also no big forrests and probably the ruins where historical at the time.
        Lakeville is suited for something in the Alps with the high mountain and deep lake.

  4. Just a note – to check your loadout, you don’t have to minimize the battle window, just shift it a bit higher – can hover over it on 1080p easily and it shows me the loadout even when the battle window is open.

  5. I had a lot of fun in historical, but I do agree it needs some work.

    This historical battle was pretty insane:

    I didn’t do much, but damn, the Tiger II is really powerful if the enemy team doesn’t stick together and try to take it down.

    • Well Tiger II was the best tank in the battlefield during the WWII (don’t count the Maus)

      • as if the Maus has ever been on a battlefield…
        Tiger II historically had a very bad engine too.

      • “Most powerful” =/= “best”.
        “Corrupt gigantism” (to paraphrase one of Napoleon’s Marshals) like the Jagdtiger happened specifically because Der Führer forgot about that detail and the other guys couldn’t talk enough sense to him.

    • I think that USA should get some arty,like M12, it would be nice counter for german HT and it would substitute Allies air superiority.

      • no, I don’t think arty is good for this mode, as artillery pieces is wot are not used historically and the games are too short to have a proper use of artillery

  6. I can only guess how much whine about MM this new mode will generate “der r 741878k playerz in ze q, but le battle won’t start! wg fix teh fukin mm ffs!!!11″. Just like “der r too many *insert vehicle type/class here* in battles, fu wg!11111″.

    The MM has to deal with what it’s given – if players choose tigers/panthers only, then it just can’t start a battle. The system is good, but players are mostly complete retards.

    We’ll see what happens when it goes live, if the playerbase is actually not that retarded, there should be more tanks (especially on the allied side) and more diversity… Heh, who am I kidding?…

  7. The first one historical I had a nice fight, 6vs 14, including quite a few lower tiers, 4su’s , bunch of T34′s, 1s’s etc vs 4tigers, 1ferdi and one tier 5. Quite probably this will become better when there are more tanks on the live server. Especially lower tier ones.

    And the graphics are amazing!

  8. Honestly it’s meh. It feels like Conforntation of course, but just a little more polish. The maps are still regular maps. All it is is a custom tank lineup, with modules changed around. That’s cool and all, but its not really how WoT works.

    Also the maps are just regular maps. IF you are gonna make Historic mode, give us Historic maps. That actually look like the real battle.

    Much would of loved Multi Core support, over this useless game mode.

  9. - minimize the historical battle window
    I think this is a resolution problem, I could hover over the Historical Configuration tab without having to minimize the HB tab.

    Battle of Kursk
    Every russian loss on this map is due to people camping in their tanks, the two times people
    actually pushed the 1-2 line with me and others held the enemy in the middle it was a good and close battle that we won.

    The 152mm howitzers devastate Tigers and Ferdinands, but in order to do that they need to move in a good position and in order to move they need map control, which they’ll only get if they actually press that >W< key.

    All my wins on the German side were due to the enemy camping in the corner of the 1-2 line and on the railroad. (Wtf? Who camps at the top of the railroad where you're visible form 400m?)

    Battle of Lake Balaton
    Yeap, this is the same thing as above only with switched nations.
    For some reason the germans are always fixed on taking and holding the upper left corner of the map and then get swarmed by the enemy.

    Battle of Ardennes
    That's weird, cause I've won several battles here with 6-7 US tanks vs 3-5 germans.
    These for example were both wins:

    On the other side a battle against 12 US tanks resulted in a close victory for the germans:

    For the most part it's impossible to tell how balanced the mode/maps/tanks are at the moment.
    I got so many teams that were… … special in their ways of playing, Hellcats firing ALL shells into the front of a 5% Tiger II instead of flanking it, KV-1S camping and plinging at the fronts of Tigers, etc, etc…. …

    Form my personal feeling it's not imbalanced, it could use some tweaking like more APCR shells for tanks with bad weaponry (Maybe 5-8 instead of 3), but overall it seems to work quite nicely.

    Time will tell I guess…

    On a final note:
    Yeap, the Pzkpfw II can still do it's shenanigans in HB ;)

  10. I havent tried the testserver yet (will do next week). But i think after ive read your post, SS that it would be the best to change the system alltogether.

    I will try to explain my thought.

    As far as ive read it you are already getting a historical setup in historical battles when u rdy up your 88/ L71 tiger it will get the L56.

    Why dont you go a step further and lets say “build” pre-fixed historical tanks.
    (equally crewed and skilled for everybody)
    Now you join into historical battles and start from the bottom just having the possibility to use (depending the side) a pz4 or stug / su85 or t34.

    Now u gotta fulfill something to actually unlock the possibility to use a tiger by driving pz4 or to use a ferdi/jtiger by driving stug. (or su152 by using the su85)

    So as in random where u go through the techtree, but just way shorter. That way you can assure a basic amount of smaller tanks with the bigger ones driven by more experienced historical batles drivers.

    You could even go one step further and make a new techtree for it with the real historical preset-builds u need to buy specifically to participate and limit changing options to things like just equipment/consumables for those tanks.

    Now u have a grinding factor, preset tanks and a unlocking system which basically assures that there is always a pz4 / t34 around.

    • I have suggested similar things to this before. Using tanks from a persons garage I think is a bad idea, you don’t keep that same vehicle anyway. No matter what your vehicles level or set up, you are given a different one to play the game mode. Why not like you say just have a different tree for historical? It would fix the balance problems, at least initially until everyone has unlocked high tiers.

      My idea was to have a set number of vehicles in each battle, and then have them filled by selecting at random from the group of people waiting in the que. This guarantees balance 100% of the time, and is fair to those whom would like to play big tanks sometimes, but don’t feel like waiting 10 minutes every time.

      • Both are nice thoughts, but it wouldnt work (for both WG and players) for many reasons, for example:
        1) If you give players oportunity to play with any tank without grinding it in regular tree and having that tank in garage, it wont force casual players to grind them (spend time and real money to get them and further money for garage slots to keep them).
        2) If you force players to grind vehicle for HB again, when they grinded it in regular tree already, it will piss them a lot.
        3) in the begining, everyone will gring lowtiers so battles will be full of weak vehicles, which could be fun. Then you will have short period, when some players will have top vehicles already while others are still grinding them. Then everyone will have top vehicles again and it will be the same situation as it is now.

        My opinion is, that best solution for better balance, which WG has already implemented, is forming team in same way as for teambattles. You will have slots for fixed amount of tanks and fixed tier points and you can only use each slot for several tank types. For example for germans in Kursk you will have slots 1 – 2 for Tiger/Panther, slots 3-6 for Pz.IV/Pz.III etc. while russians will have slots 1-2 for SU-152, 3-4 for SU-85 and slots 5-15 for T-34/KV-1S.
        Main advantage of this is that you can form team which can cooperate and main disadvantage is that it will be hard to form such team, because not everyone will have necessary vehicle.

        My clan (NYX) uses team training for our own HB in above mentioned style of team creation and it is much better than this state of ingame HB. Membership in our clan is not mandatory so anyone who will obey rules is welcome. See facebook group https://www.facebook.com/groups/1445875548979625/permalink/1445898662310647/

  11. The only way they can get this MM balanced is through large scale testing, which is to be expected. So they should tweak it based on what happens in the CT. Well that is what should happen but this is wargaming so………

    And why are people not driving Jacksons? It will have the 90mm right?

    • Yeah, jackson 90mm and hellcat 76mm. People play hellcats and not jacksons for the same reason so many play the KV-1S despite it being absolutely shit stock: they’re retards.

      • No, people play Hellcats for the same reason they play KV1S, its speed and gun mostly (coughOPcough). Most are not just informed enough to realize the Hellcat in HB has the 76mm.
        On the other hand, even the first gun on the Hellcat is very nice when you flank something.
        People who are retards in the Hellcat have my thanks, as they help others who know how to play the devilish machine in avoiding the nerfbat.

  12. You didn’t say anything about T-70 and SU-76 (both stock).
    They are TOTALLY USELESS in historical battles, no matter how skilled you are.

  13. Just played Ardennes as both US(E8) and German(JP).

    My reaction is the opposite. The US won hands down every time. When I was US, we had 7 Hellcats and me, an E8. Germans had 2 King Tigers. Nothing more. Still, sort of interesting I guess, since we all had stock crap guns. Took us less than 2 minutes to win.

    As a German, we had 3 PzIV, 1 KT and my JP. We faced 8 US tanks (Wolverines, hellcats, 5 Jumbos). Somewhat more balanced but still we got surrounded and it was just me and the KT back to back against 6 or so tanks. Lost it. of course.

    *EDIT* Just want to add that it was very fun though, I love assymetrical gameplay and having to use stock gear.

  14. “the Panzer IV fits perfectly and so does the StuG. Both use their historical guns (L/48 and L/43 respectively)”

    Hm? StuG should have the L/48 as well shouldn’t it?

    Also, what gun does the Jumbo use in the Ardennes scenario?

  15. I think that two things must be done to make this mode better:
    1) Give substantial bonuses to those, who play less powerful tanks/sides (T-70 or US side – Hellcats and Shermans are overall more difficult to play than any German tank in the battle). Something like +100% credits and EXP for playing small tanks would be ok, considering you can’t make 1000 EXP in battle playing stock T-70 against Tigers, so double expereince just evens things out. +10-30 for less powerful side would also be ok just to make queues shorter.
    2) Allow platoons/pre-made teams of decent size (4-5 at least) to participate. Make a balancer rule – each side must have the same number of such platoons + there migth be random player to make both sides equal. Random team must be really good to win against 2 Tiger II playing as Hellcats with almost no gold ammo and stock guns. However, organised team can think of something and it would be really fun expereince – something like raid boss in MMORPGs, only more fun and you can play as a boss. Such complicated asymmetrical modes are bad for random but great for small organised teams with team-speak.

    • I totally agree for the experience part. just played a historical battle in the default map because i can’t read russian in my Pzkfwg IV ausführung H and i hurt quite alot of SU-152 and think playing this tank should have more experience.
      second idea is great. WG said though that platoons would come later on.

    • Teams already have 7v7 and CW… and TC (who plays it nowdays?:D)
      Foreveralones only have Random…

  16. The absolutely RIDICULOUS amount of TD’s promote camping to the degree where a crap team of SU152′s can lose half their team and still just camp to victory.

  17. I had team where we had 5 su-152, and enemy had 4 tigers, 2 panzer IVs and Ferninand

  18. You guys are missing the point. Its called historical for a reason. You may participate in a historical battle, but you cant change history…. (sarcasm may apply)

  19. Battle of Lake Balaton, which happened in 1945, and they are still giving the panzer IV’s L/43′s? They REALLY need to work on their load outs.

        • Panzer IV’s went to the L/48 standard in March 1943

          EDIT – German Panzers, can’t say hand me downs given to balkan allies or upgrades on old models pulled from training units were of the same quality

  20. The main reason for historical battles to look like they do now is that people are playing them as if they were in randoms. This is cause they don’t know how to act.

    Drivin US they take Hellcats and think they’ll own, while they get the stock gun. They could get the Jackson and rape everything with the 90mm.

    Russians lose cause they split their forces, so if Germans stay together, they overwelm one side and then take care of the other.

    Germans lose – just like Soviets – when splitting, but more important is focusing firepower on one target. Germans should shoot the same enemy, and they can win.

    That’s awesome in historical. This mode will be much harder to play for regular random newbie, but it will require you to cooperate and actually chat with others (i.e. note that the Tiger gets stock radio, 310m range…), and this will make it great. I’m pretty sure that once people get to know this mode, they will start to try to talk to each other and maybe – maybe – it will improve the overall skill of the playerbase.

    Gotta love the increased fps, even with better graphics :3

    • “I’m pretty sure that once people get to know this mode, they will start to exploit it. Trying to ‘talk’ (aka ‘noobtiger gtfo’) to each other will ‘improve’ the overall skill of the playerbase.”

  21. have you seen 5 American tanks shooting he only at tiger 2 ? i had :)
    and it works. 76 mm he makes like 2 – 80 dmg with average of 15 and ap can penetrate side of tiger 2 turret like 1 per 4-5 hits so as long you flank from 2 sides and keep distance you can win. hellcats ofc have this much easier.
    I was playing Sherman jumbo all time

  22. how can i play at test server…
    50 000th at queue…
    yeah really? i am not gonna wait for atleast 2 hours to wait…
    fuck useless to download test server

  23. I guess all their talk about bigger battles was bullshit, we’re moving the opposite direction.. 8vs8, 7vs5.. how boring

    If you could at least full-company these battles, but with randoms? couldn’t be less interesting.

    • In order to get bigger numbers of players in each team they have to make bigger maps. And those are on halt because “esports and stuff”.

      • Random battles without your friends pretty much goes against esports though, so they really have not a fucking clue what they’re doing.

  24. I think what makes this mode fun is asymmetric combat. Standard battle and standard maps detract from the asymmetry. It should be custom-made maps only for HB and battle mode should match battle, such as assault mode for Ardennes.

  25. The problem of MM, especially in historical battles, will remain until they increase the size of maps and the number of tanks.

    This is because as maps and the number of tanks increases there will be increase in variability in the game.

  26. WG need to set a balanced standart for historical game mode.
    It should allways be (for example, prokhorovka) 1 Tiger, 2 Panthers , few PzIVs and Stugs, and one or two panzer 2′s vs lots of T-34s and SU-85s, some SU-152s, medium amount of KV-1S.

  27. Too many scrubs on these teams. These small teams require people to work together which won’t happen. This mode should be a team battle type mode.

  28. I agree 100%, SS.

    Never lost a tank in the Battle of Kursk when playing on the German side.

    And Russians are super OP on Lake Balaton as well.

    • I agree about Kursk. Soviets are too dependent on SU-152′s that end up camping and letting the battle get out of hand before they attempt to do anything. Only chance is to play SU-152 yourself.

      I disagree about Lake Balaton. I won with Germans on Lake Balaton in JagdPanther and Pz IV G. The Germans just need good support from their lower tier tanks. It’s kind of like an escort mission in other games: you need to focus on keeping the noob in the big fat JagdTiger alive.

  29. Also, does anybody know why the M4A3E8(76)W is using the 75mm gun in historical battles? Is this Wargaming’s saying “we wanted 75mm M4s but with better handling for balance purposes, so just pretend the Easy Eights are not Easy Eights” ??

  30. I’ve played about a dozen historical battles and not yet had one good game. It mainly boils down to- everything below tier 5 is a joke and the US get shafted by often having to face a tier eight backed up by a pack of sevens using only tier sixes and having one extra vehicle to compensate. I did have one 7 vs two KT game, which we still lost because my jackson stationary behind a bush got spotted by a KT without me seeing him and the rest of my team managed to somehow kill one tank then fed themselves to the remaining KT like the retards they are- well, one tank had the right idea but when you’re trying to help a team that fucking stupid its’ a lost cause).

    I’m also finding that although the ping and fps is good, everything seems sluggish, especially aiming and shooting, so my accuracy so far has been something like 25% while on the live server it’s more like 75%, although this isn’t just in historical battles on the test server regular games something’s wrong as well with me managing to miss at literally point blank range while stationary shooting at huge targets multiple times in a row.

    • So far I have won every USA game playing as Jackson, doing the majority of teteams damage. the one game i went hellcat there wa sno jackson and USA lost, Hopefully peoples hellcat fetish will wear offa nd the will us ethe jackson which has no prob at all penning tiger 2. That are a lot of really bad hellcat players on the test server right now use dto 90mm guns and armoured turrets.

  31. It doesn’t depend on nation, it depends only on players. I saw IS’s or ISU’s pwning Jagdtigers and SU-152 pens most of the time Tigers frontally with AP dealing 7-800 dmg, so it depends on many factors. I played the whole morning and won and lost on both sides.

  32. Hmm…maybe a way to balance the Ferdinand in historical battles could be done in the same way as the Panzer IV and StuG III, by splitting it up. Maybe have the Elefant (early Ferdinand with no defensive MG) as a tier 7, with slightly more sluggish mobility and the Jagdpanther’s 105 mm as its top gun (in historical it would have the long 88 mm gun). Still OP? Maybe, but the armor would likely be lower, and the HP a fair deal lower.

    • Ferdinand was the vehicle without the MG, Elefant was the model that came after the failures were discovered at Kursk with the MG and StuG cupola

  33. I noticed something quite nasty: they get your gold for the premium ammo, but if you don’t use them they don’t give you back your gold but credits…..

  34. I played with t34-85, pz4 H, tiger and panther on all possible maps. And i must say historical battles are nice. Ofc campers loose, like in regular random. 10vs15 Will be more balanced than 5vs9, so im waiting for more players. Only issue for me is that tier 4 and 5 have about 300dmg lower dpm than higher tiers, and hp difference between tiers 4&5 vs 6&7 is way too big. Good luck with 460hp t34 vs 1500hp tiger. And as someone said,,pz4 has l48 in kursk Battle, but in rest only l43. Another thing- Germans have no tanks on 6 tier(not counting td’s), it pushes more players to choose tier 7 rather than 5, at least because of 3x bigger hp pool. In randoms tier 5 sucks as well.

  35. Played Battle of Lake Balaton 4 times on JTiger. With a bit of communications and some teamplay it’s easy to play against Zveroboy-rush. 1 and 1st lose was my 1st battle, where i was failure with positioning And 1 of wined battles was with eu-mates. 2 hints for playing this battle on brave PanzerWaffe side:
    1) Stick together with your team. ALWAYS.
    2) Think bout your position. It must be as effective and flexible as possible. Use advantages of your machine to the maximum against overwhelming forces.
    Yes, i know that is obvious, but it’s a core.

    If somebody wants, u can join me bit later. We can try to get into same battle on 1 side and have some fun. http://puu.sh/7G2nl.jpg