Combat Mission Units: T70M

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Clearly, this is coming out ona Saturday, which is not the usual Friday. Schedule is a little off right now, but that's because Persian Predicament is kicking off! So the lead-in video should be coming up next Friday (or earlier if you're a member of some description).

[@user-go3yy2xl6m]

That commander/gunner/loader is the busiest man in the Soviet Union.

[@robertkalinic335]

He just lifts the entire turret up to look around and does firing and reloading from his hip like the soviet man he is expected to be.

[@alexisXcore93]

@@robertkalinic335 firing on the move while standing must the the greatest powermove

[@jamesduston9292]

Second busiest man, comrade.The busiest is Joseph Stalin

[@d.c.6065]

When I asked you "Do the T Seventy too," this wasn't what I meant! :P

[@BunkerFox]

Pros: Small and Cute Cons: Everything else

[@wheneggsdrop1701]

I need one as a daily driver

[@M1912TrenchGun]

8:43 This is the saving grace of all the (at least on the surface) subpar light tanks in Combat Mission. In CMBN especially you'll sometimes get a single Stuart to accompany your Rifle Company which doesn't seem like much but when that thing is the only bulletproof vehicle on the map then it might as well be an Abrams.

[@curlymcdom]

See also the Pacific and East Asia theatres

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Something, something, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king etc

[@diobrando2575]

You are correct in the machine gun not being belt fed. the DT machine gun uses a pan magazine, a 63 round one. The infantry version, the DP-27, used a 47 round pan magazine. Also, while not relevant to Combat Mission now, there was a version of the DP-27 that was belt fed, called the RP-46, China and North Korea also produced them under different names, so one day we could see that in a Combat Mission game. Once again a very good video!

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Ah! It's the pizza gun then! But I guess a 63 round drum counts as extra topping and you can't discus it at the enemy as effectively. Fond memorys of the DP-27 and the RP-46 from Red Orchestra 2 and Rising Storm 2

[@arandomperson7713]

In my experience, the T-70 has a surprisingly trolly armour scheme. The UFP slope can actually somewhat resist 3.7cm AP from Ostwinds as well (I’m not sure if the Pak36 is in RT, but I’m pretty sure it can resist that) but the real goldmine is the turret. The curved mantlet allows the T-70 to sometimes resist shells that it has absolutely no business surviving, up to even main tank gun rounds. As an example, a hull-down T-70 somehow managed to deflect a Panther’s 7.5cm AP round…into the hull roof. The driver did not very much enjoy that experience. Also, the 45mm main gun can actually do some work against Panzer 4’s frontally, but only (ironically) if they are hull-down. The flat 50mm thickness of the Panzer 4’s turret face on all variants turns out to be quite a weakness, as the 45 can consistently punch holes through them. If the T-70’s terrible spotting makes it lose sight of each target it hits (from the smoke generated by the hit), making it switch onto the next, the T-70 can indeed disable multiple Panzer 4’s consecutively. This totally isn’t due to experience, no! That village was evidently guarded by a rare breed of two-man Stalin tanks.

[@CruelDwarf]

The main 'selling point' of T-70 to the Soviets wasn't that it was any good in any possible role. Its point was that it was better than T-60 and it was cheap and it was possible to make it in factories incapable of making T-34s. A tank is better than no tank. Its deficiencies were recognized and as you noted correctly, the production was ceased eventually and proposed further upgraded variant - called T-80 - was cancelled too because it was established that supply of lend-lease Valentines was sufficient enough to fill the need for the light tanks in the Red Army. So factories that were making T-70s were fully repurposed for making SU-76s.

[@OperatorMax1993]

And the same goes for the modern period like the T-72, Any tank is better than no tank

[@jackeyboy6538]

I’m a crack addict and this video format is my crack

[@UshankasandAKs]

Always loved the nifty little soviet light tanks throughout the war Edit: also yes please do more guides like these covering preferably the less conspicuous vehicles found in warfare

[@antikythera42]

The T70M feels like a tank design from like 1929 made a decade too late

[@andrewsterge4089]

One of the biggest drawbacks of the T-70 organizationally was that its higher speed caused them to enter the battlefield before the T-34s and KV-1s mainly caused by poor communication from lack of radios. This would cause a penny packet attack where T-70s would arrive first followed by T-34s and later by KV-1s instead of a concentrated armored attack. Very cool unit to explore!

[@jussi8111]

still better than any of the french 2 man tanks cus atleast it actually had a usable gun

[@tehwin89]

After trying the R-35 in Fortress Italy, it certainly cant get much worse, but the practicality of both is pretty similar. If there are any enemy AFVs heavier than a half track, they are pretty useless at dealing with them, but otherwise they are great little infantry support guns if you can keep them away from bazookas and AT guns. Bonus is you can get some with radios.

[@alexy590]

I like the idea of these micro unit guides for vehicles about which there isn't much to say. I think Jeeps would be good a choice for one of these. Both WW2 and Cold War variants.

[@skinnybob6784]

Imagine starting out as a commander for the T70M, then surviving, killing, climbing the ranks and by late war commanding an IS-2 invading Germany..

[@MisdirectedSasha]

I remember reading that the Soviets replaced T-60 and T-70 in the reconnaissance role with Lend-Lease supplied Valentines whenever they were available, and thinking "why the hell would you do that?" But then I read up a bit on the general characteristics of the various available Soviet light tanks, and it made perfect sense.

[@дроу]

You can try to combine Il-2 with warthunder because it has x-ray mode where you can showcase internal components

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Of all things, I actually had a look round the interior in RO2

[@d.c.6065]

Of all your videos that I expected to say “RO2 Supremacy” on, this was not one of them. Nevertheless: RO2 Supremacy!

[@Bushydem0n]

One of my favourite little tanks of ww2, so glad you covered it

[@seankong9733]

More WWII Soviet unit guides! The T70 is actually a neat little tank that I do take somewhat often in my CMRT games. It's not the best by a long shot, but it is cheap, and the 45mm gun is rapid firing enough to to really do a number on light vehicles like armoured cars and halftracks. Paired with superior medium tanks like the Sherman or T-34, I find it has a nice niche in knocking out those lighter vehicles while the medium tanks focus on the real threats

[@Koehfurn]

The soviets really liked the two engine setup didn’t they? Love the unit guides, and mini entries make sense for stuff that isn’t too in depth like this unit.

[@boomboomf2268]

Factor of engine production really. From my reading they didn't "like" it at all, it was just was a case of "what engines do we have that can fit a light tank of this dimensions, that isn't needed for a more important vehicle like a T-34". Hence the truck engines on the early model

[@mzjalic324]

Having shorter guides sounds like a good idea! It is unfortunate that there isn’t really space for the history lesson that usually accompanies them though

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Yeah, that's the downside. This one was experimental, so I might try to incorporate more of the history in later ones,the challenge is trying to fit it all in under ten minutes

[@tinchorb1340]

i like this micro-unit guide idea for videos

[@kushanblackrazor6614]

I remember slaughtering T-60's and T-70's a lot in Steel Panthers. That 45mm gun is a lot more formidable in 1941 but by the time it shows up in this package it's a much longer row to hoe. At the end of the day, bad tank is better than no tank, but even the T-34 has more going for it than this little fella. Thankfully for the Soviets, there's not really a shortage of better tanks by 1944.

[@potatoemperor8541]

It's great to see a video for the T70 and shorter videos for single pieces of equipment (and maybe 1 or 2 variants) would be great to see more of.

[@Bacho_Grande]

Keep up the good work! Love the idea of talking about unit capabilities with Combat Mission b-roll examples in action.

[@user-zw6mp2ko5v]

I love seeing these unit guides for the lesser used units. I hope that you will continue this trend. Personally id love to see the 21st panzer funnies at some point.

[@wojszach4443]

That was funniest tank to use in Red orchestra 2, mainly because you were reloading the gun yourself and could see the beautifull animations firsthand

[@Tamburello_1994]

Get some honey on that voice, Hap. Signed: Sick-in-bed too.

[@Pippin1972]

No chance of radios is rather harsh since a good proportion of T-70s from GAZ were produced with radios. I wonder if they could have a certain chance to spawn with a radio like the chances of certain weapons showing up in infantry squads. Not great from a game design perspective, I guess. Randomness, point cost and probably couldn't be applied to much else.

[@usuallyhapless9481]

I think vehicles have all their kit hardcoded. I'd be interesting to see where they put the radio and who operated it. The TC seems catastrophically overworked already.

[@CruelDwarf]

@@usuallyhapless9481 I think that radio-equipped ones were sacrificing a chunk of the ammunition for the capability.

[@Pippin1972]

@usuallyhapless9481 It was another task of the TC. Hope they were mostly doing recon hull-down at the time they transmit, let alone focus on listening to the net. I'm getting this info from the excellent blog Tank Archives, highly recommend.

[@Tekisasubakani]

So the T-70 carries 70 rounds for the main gun? There's something satisfying about that. Gotta love light tanks, any chance of the Chaffee in the future?

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Maybe. The whole point is that this is an option for filler or quick content covering units that otherwise wouldn't deserve a full guide. The Chaffee is an interesting one off, so it's a strong contender

[@Tekisasubakani]

@usuallyhapless9481 Maybe is better than no!

[@usuallyhapless9481]

It's got the cool mini 75mm gun!

[@Tekisasubakani]

@@usuallyhapless9481 I had a coworker who's father was a tank commander in an M24 in the ETO during WWII, she had some great pictures she showed me. When she was a young child, she actually met Dick Winters! Of course, at the time, he was just another veteran associate of her dad's. Small world sometimes, eh?

[@YourRulerSkeletos]

I'm very partial to the T-70 due to the oddly capable frontal slope against contemporary 37/40mm guns. Is the T-80 in CM anywhere? It increases the armor and turret crew by one, at the cost of yet more mobility. It and the T-70 also share the T-34's driver's hatch over-modeling in most depictions, where the sloped square is able to deflect things it absolutely should not.

[@usuallyhapless9481]

There are T80s in CM, but not the ones you're thinking of

[@copter2000]

"At least it's not a tankett" - Stalin

[@Temeluchas]

1. Reconnaissance wasn't the intended role for T-60 and T-70 and was a relatively rare role for them de-facto. The basic idea was to produce something resembling a tank by truck factories while most "proper" tank factories were ramping up production after evacuation. T-70s were used as "normal" tanks - tank regiments and brigades had 1 or 2 companies armed with T-70s instead of T-34s. The only reconnaissance units that received T-70s were 10 independent armoured car battalions that received a company of T-70s each. But it is pretty much negligible: first, the Red Army had 64 such battalions; second, each such company had only 7 tanks. In short, the Soviets didn't think T-70 was suitable for reconnaissance. They just thought it was better than nothing for infantry support. 2. By the time of Red Thunder, T-70 wasn't a front-line tank. The production stopped in late 1943, and by January 1944, T-70s were excluded from all TO&Es. Throughout 1944, most surviving vehicles were transferred to the rear areas for training. Those remaining on the front lines were mostly odd tanks here and there used for auxiliary purposes, such as liaison vehicles. Encountering a full company of 7 T-70 in mid-1944 or later was unlikely. Although, I wouldn't say that it was impossible. After all, a battalion of much older T-26s was used in a major offensive in September 1944. What's even crazier is that it was used as a deep penetrating mobile force and was remarkably successful. 3. CMRT uses T-70s in "cavalry tank regiments", which weren't formally a thing. Some independent tank regiments were transferred to cavalry divisions in 1943 to fulfill the new cavalry TO&E. By the time this TO&E was introduced, tank regiments had either 23 T-34s and 16 T-70s or 32 T-34s and 7 T-70s. So that's what cavalry got. But by mid-1944, about 40% of tank regiments in cavalry divisions were reformed as flamethrower tank regiments (3 "normal" T-34s, 18 OT-34s), 20% - were reformed as pure T-34 regiments (35 tanks), and 40% - retained the old TO&E, but T-70s were replaced with lend-lease tanks, mostly - Valentines. In fact, cavalry was the main user of Valentines in the Red Army. So, a more historically accurate version of "cavalry tank regiments" would be a combination of T-34s and Valentine III and IX. 4. T-70M never existed =) There were T-70 and T-70B. The latter had widened tracks, reinforced suspension and reduced ammo capacity (70 45-mm rounds instead of 90, so we have T-70B in CM). Both versions used the same 70 hp engines - the engines were originally 85 hp, but for the tank version, the output was reduced to 70 to ensure reliability under heavier stress. And yes, one tank per company (i.e. 1 in 7) had a radio. Which made the company commander truly the busiest tanker ever =)

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Awesome! That all makes a lot of sense.

[@alexisXcore93]

This looks like playing armor in squad while working out at the same time hahaha, just 2 guys crewing a vehicle sweating balls

[@sproge2142]

Now I'm sooooooo curious about how this ever went into production, and why it was developed! Including some IRL info about the vehicles you cover would add a lot imo, just things like how and why it exists, it's actual performance, and the opinion of the unit by the army using it.

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Yeah, but then it wouldn't be a 'mini' unit guide, would it? :P

[@sproge2142]

@@usuallyhapless9481 Fair! XD

[@quan-uo5ws]

Basically the T-70 was a bit of a desperation tank, made by small factories that did not have the tooling to produce medium tanks like the T-34. It was created because originally these factories produced the T-60 scout tank, which wasnt very good at its role (slow, very bad armament, etc) so the T-70 was created with an actual tank gun instead of the T-60s 20mm. It was basically intended as a scout tank, but in 1943 and particularly at the battle of kursk it was deployed in large numbers alongside the T-34. Safe to say, its performance as a combat tank against pz IIIs and IVs (not to speak about heavy tanks like panther or tiger) wasnt very good so eventually in 1943 T-70s ceased production, with most of the aforementioned factories producing the SU-76 instead (it was based on T-70 chassis and was rather successfull)

[@sproge2142]

@quan-uo5ws Mate, that's a 10/10 summary, thanks a lot!

[@sproge2142]

@@usuallyhapless9481 a short little info snippet like the person above me wrote could maybe fit quite nicely without making the video too long? ❤️

[@thegenericguy8309]

while I can't say it'd be a good design in any case T-70 would make a lot more sense if the Soviets were able to better procure and deploy mobile radios. as a small, inconspicuous, reasonably armed, and easily hidden fire support platform it'd be a great tool for a recon unit as something accompanying them that can be brought up to deal with threats without having to either ask for support of a more combat-oriented unit with real tanks nearby, or, failing that, retreat. if the targeting is external and it just has to come up and deal with a known threat, it'd honestly be a decent idea (although still questionably executed)

[@CruelDwarf]

Soviets were making radios in quantity. While production was still insufficient to equip every single vehicle with the radios, the main reason for radio-less tanks was that soldiers that were actually capable of using the radios (and WW2 radios are tricky things to operate at the best of days) were in shorter supply than radios. There was an interesting break-point happening in 1943, the first generation of recruits who had a chance to go through 'universal' 8-year school education started to appear in combat units in quantity and Soviets almost immediately began to transition to using more of various expensive and complicated equipment in regular units.

[@wartsnall7332]

Very informative, and entertaining.

[@realQuiGon]

That was funny. What an odd vehicle. I didn't even know of its existence before I watched the video 😄 I would love to see the German Wiesel tankette from CMSF to make an appearence in these quick guides!

[@usuallyhapless9481]

I do like the Wiesel

[@MATTHEW-jt7kn]

When you're in a desperate situation like the Soviets at the start of WW2, you have to take whatever weapons you can make. The thinking is that the T-70 was better than no tank at all. Luckily, Lend-Lease eventually provided enough light tanks that the Soviets could switch T-70 factories to making more useful SU-76's.

[@thestoicsteve]

Very useful guide.

[@wojszach4443]

as for light tank as end of tank evolution... i dont think thats the case, tanks just learned how to carry infantry inside rather than outside, when you look at it anything past bmp1 is just a light tank with trunk

[@CODRD]

Video suggestion; Back Sea Russian Infantry Company (BMP) or British Paratrooper Company/Battalion.

[@btratemylegs.6342]

Could you do the second mission in the courage and fortitude campaign?

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Is that the one with the bridge? The infamous bridge?

[@btratemylegs.6342]

@@usuallyhapless9481 yes, I’ve been trying all week and have lost at least a thousand pixeltruppen trying to take that bridge, it’s crazy!

[@btratemylegs.6342]

@ yes, I’ve tried a few times, and have gotten thrown back with heavy casualties, I’d like to see your approach to it

[@prestongarvey7745]

This is like a tank designed by a particularly divisive committee. Compromises all the way down. What’s the result? Better than a Panzer I, as long as it doesn’t get on your flank.

[@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45]

Please do a T-64 guide

[@usuallyhapless9481]

The T64 probably deserves the chunkier format

[@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45]

@usuallyhapless9481 Certainly

[@TurboLag92]

More in-depth! Still great video, though 🤙

[@ljcsteam]

BMP-1 at home

[@johnfarrelly6670]

What would be really interesting would be to see a company of T70's and maybe a platoon of T34's plus maybe a company of infantry and associated artillery/mortars against a similar AXIS allies force (Italians and maybe Hungarians?) The idea being shite tanks V shite Tanks altho the Italian and Hungarian Tanks would be slightly superior to the T70 the small number of T34's could provide balance, as ever Usual a great Video looking forward to the PVP game ! When does that drop on KZbin?

[@usuallyhapless9481]

The lack of Italians and Hungarians in CMRT would make it difficult ;)

[@GrandAdmiralThrawn7thFleet]

Why did you reduse the size of the tracers?

[@omegacentauri73]

it's not meant to observe the enemy. it's meant to serve as a moving target that reveals enemy muzzle flash and smoke, which is then observed by the T-34 crews

[@datboi7491]

Do you have a source for that, or are you just trying to correct people with your fanfiction? Because it sounds like fanfiction, what with T-34's having between "lol" and "lmao" in terms of spotting (which would be further degraded when three friendly tanks in front of you get plapped and chuck their turrets, what with your theory of "moving targets" and all).

[@omegacentauri73]

@@datboi7491 it was a joke, you humorless marxist

[@whya2ndaccount]

"Starboard" and "Port"? Its not a ship or an aircraft. 😉

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Saves me differentiating from the viewer's left/right and the vehicle's left/right :P

[@whya2ndaccount]

@@usuallyhapless9481 ??? Its the same issue. If you stand behind the vehicle (where Army's tend to take it from) Left / Port is one side. If you stand in front of the vehicle and use the viewer's perspective looking at it, Left / Port is the other side.

[@afrikacorpse]

​@@whya2ndaccount No, port and starboard specifically always refer to the left and right sides of a vessel when aboard and facing the bow, so they never change.

[@whya2ndaccount]

@@afrikacorpse Ok in that case they are exactly the same as AFV "left" and "right".

[@robertkalinic335]

Sad

[@datboi7491]

Reconnaissance vehicle with zero spotting ability. Sasuga, slavs.