Login

russian armor

Is the Brummbar perfectly fine?

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (6)down
Is the Brummbar perfectly fine?
Option Distribution Votes
60%
40%
If you think the Brum needs a buff what would be best solution?
Option Distribution Votes
26%
14%
0%
12%
16%
33%
Total votes: 111
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
13 Jan 2020, 17:15 PM
#1
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
After more than a year of using the triple nerfed Brum I want to hear everyone's opinion.
13 Jan 2020, 17:24 PM
#2
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2355

Slow projectile speed is fine, it gives room for counterplay and retreat if the other player really wants. It preserves mainlines but still punishes team weapons, wich is perfect.

I would like an armor buff definitely, since it doesnt harms any other tanks, damn i would even buff it to withstand HVAP of M36s. Since its a hull tank it can get snared easily when used offensively and it will die to flanking attacks in no time.

I will suggest to give it a single extra HE shell, single shot use to be fired like a mini ST round. It stuns tanks, it suppress squads.
13 Jan 2020, 17:35 PM
#3
avatar of Clarity

Posts: 364

I think the Brummbar is decent performance wise but its just too expensive considering you already have to go Tier 4 to get it. Cheaper TD's absolutely shut it down and premium mediums also defeat it pretty handedly. Or at least allow it to duel tanks a bit better if it's gonna stay the same cost.
13 Jan 2020, 17:37 PM
#4
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 2867

Make the barrage vet 0 and free, decrease standard firing range to 25. Have it function kinda like a mortar on steroids.
13 Jan 2020, 18:04 PM
#5
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 899

Right now the main issue is that it's over-priced for what you're getting. We can either lower the price (down to 120f?) or increase the performance. My preference would be to increase the front armor a fair bit while keeping the price the same.

Make the barrage vet 0 and free, decrease standard firing range to 25. Have it function kinda like a mortar on steroids.


This would make the unit unusable. There just isn't the need for a short range siege unit.
13 Jan 2020, 18:05 PM
#6
avatar of Fire and Terror

Posts: 236

i think stupa is kind of fine now to be honest, it used to be way to armored to be penetrated by paks. If it needs anything then it could do with a small hp buff so it survives an extra shot
13 Jan 2020, 18:16 PM
#7
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 2867

This would make the unit unusable. There just isn't the need for a short range siege unit.


Short range for attack ground and manual attack. The siege barrage ability could have 50-60 range.
13 Jan 2020, 18:23 PM
#8
avatar of EtherealDragon

Posts: 1537 | Subs: 1

Brummbar still basically 2 shots infantry and even a glancing single hit will force a retreat because it leaves all the models with basically 0 health so yeah, it's still "perfectly fine". I think the issue is mostly how the Ostwind is much more cost-effective to use and comes in a lower tier- Brumbar itself functions perfectly fine.
13 Jan 2020, 18:28 PM
#9
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 2446 | Subs: 5

The Brummbar isn't easy to balance. Mostly because of the huge skill ceiling. The current Brummbar is absolutely devastating in the hands of a good player who can consistently use hold fire / attack ground to maximize the damage by manually aiming (targeting the middle of squads and predicting shots against moving targets). But for those who can't, the unit's performance is understandably weaker as the auto-fire isn't as effective.

There's also the issue of the unit already being good in teamgames regardless, and Ostheer as a faction being very strong in teamgames right now. Any buffs to T4 to make it more viable in 1v1s will affect the current status quo in teamgames, so they will have to be very careful.

My personal preference would be a very slight increase in projectile speed, as this wouldn't really affect high level play (predictive attack grounding on moving squads is already quite easy with the current velocity) but it would help the unit perform a bit better for the average player as its auto-attack against moving targets would become slightly better.
13 Jan 2020, 19:23 PM
#10
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Brummbar still basically 2 shots infantry and even a glancing single hit will force a retreat because it leaves all the models with basically 0 health so yeah, it's still "perfectly fine". I think the issue is mostly how the Ostwind is much more cost-effective to use and comes in a lower tier- Brumbar itself functions perfectly fine.


So the Brummbar isn't cost effective as an Ostwind, a well balanced unit. Hence you're saying the Brum is not a cost effective unit making T4 the paper tiger that it is right now.
13 Jan 2020, 19:39 PM
#11
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2561 | Subs: 1

Firepowerwise the unit is great. However, it can't stay on the field for long in my experience, so I would give it more frontal armor.
13 Jan 2020, 19:39 PM
#12
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2536 | Subs: 1

Don't see how you can buff the brumbarr without fucking up team games. Its plenty good in team games, and so is Ostheer. Feels unnecessary from that perspective

And no, the game is not only balanced around 1v1. Maybe that used to Relic's philosophy, but recent patches have definitely had changes that were geared towards team games
13 Jan 2020, 19:46 PM
#13
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2355

i think stupa is kind of fine now to be honest, it used to be way to armored to be penetrated by paks. If it needs anything then it could do with a small hp buff so it survives an extra shot

Stupa is kind of meant to counter paks...
At the same time ATGs are ment to counter armor.

I would balance it towards the stupa because its more niche unit than ATGs.
13 Jan 2020, 19:54 PM
#14
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Don't see how you can buff the brumbarr without fucking up team games. Its plenty good in team games, and so is Ostheer. Feels unnecessary from that perspective

And no, the game is not only balanced around 1v1. Maybe that used to Relic's philosophy, but recent patches have definitely had changes that were geared towards team games


I play team games too. It's not balanced because TDs basically penetrate it 95% of the time while pak,stug,jp4 struggle against a cheaper KV8.
13 Jan 2020, 19:55 PM
#15
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Apparently half the the forum members so far think that a unit that is rarely used is "perfectly fine." Just shows what kind of people dominate this forum.
13 Jan 2020, 20:03 PM
#16
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7286 | Subs: 1

Apparently half the the forum members so far think that a unit that is rarely used is "perfectly fine." Just shows what kind of people dominate this forum.


Maybe you just don't know how to properly make a poll?

Units are not black and white. UP or OP. Brummbar is in that limbo between fine and niche.
I voted it is fine and that it needs buffs.
13 Jan 2020, 20:07 PM
#17
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
Most of the people defending the poor performance of the Brum are using the excuse that it's balanced in team games. Not sure why suddenly putting it in a game with more players would made it balanced. TDs still pen the defenseless tank 95% of the time.

These people are also inferring that Ost 1v1 players don't deserve a late game because T4 being trash is balanced while SU gets a crap ton of doctrinal heavies, none of them are a slouch. IS2 - best heavy tank compared to the other two heavies. KV2 was always great, ISU - what the Brum couldn't even dream of being a fraction of. KV8 isn't a heavy but almost has the health and armor of one is also better than the Brum. But of course, allied players can only see the stock units and say, "wahhh SU has shitty tanks" while 3 quarter of the docs have doctrinal armor. So the supposed late game faction has a worse late game than SU and likely Brits too as Comet got buffed and can completely stand up to the panther and a decent AoE to hurt inf, Croc is great, regular churchill is super cost effective meat shield, etc. Ost's stock T4 units are all underperforming with the Brum being the biggest offender of them all.

So much for tHe lAtE gAMe fActIOn.
13 Jan 2020, 20:08 PM
#18
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned


Maybe you just don't know how to properly make a poll?

Units are not black and white. UP or OP. Brummbar is in that limbo between fine and niche.
I voted it is fine and that it needs buffs.


I said "perfectly fine." So if u later voted that it needs buffs, you should say that it was overnerfed, NOT "perfectly fine" even if you'd like to see just a very small buff.
13 Jan 2020, 20:20 PM
#19
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 899

Short range for attack ground and manual attack. The siege barrage ability could have 50-60 range.


Yea, that 50-60 range barrage would make it useless. Right now, as Sander93 said (below), it's a very high skill "anti-infantry" unit; but you need to 'skill-shot' (auto-fire off, attack ground) 100% of its shots for it to be any good.

If you remove that play-style, you're left with a tank that can't hit infantry (barrage would be too slow and easy to dodge), but also one where it needs to get into AT range to do anything useful (there's a lot of 60-range Allied AT). Consider how often the JT's "barrage" ability is used (i.e. almost never), then consider that it would have ~half the range, less armor, and less HP.

The Brummbar isn't easy to balance. Mostly because of the huge skill ceiling. The current Brummbar is absolutely devastating in the hands of a good player who can consistently use hold fire / attack ground to maximize the damage by manually aiming (targeting the middle of squads and predicting shots against moving targets). But for those who can't, the unit's performance is understandably weaker as the auto-fire isn't as effective.


Is the Brummbar's "skill-shot" power any different than the KV8-Flamer/Churchill croc's auto-fire, though? It seems to me that a unit that requires a ton of input should be a lot better than one that required little-to-none.


Stupa is kind of meant to counter paks...
At the same time ATGs are ment to counter armor.

I would balance it towards the stupa because its more niche unit than ATGs.


IMO, it's meant to counter anything "soft", similar to allied Flamer-Heavies (KV8/Croc) - it just requires skill to do so, rather than relying on Flamer's auto-attack and AoE/DOT.

13 Jan 2020, 20:20 PM
#20
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2536 | Subs: 1

Not sure why suddenly putting it in a game with more players would made it balanced. TDs still pen the defenseless tank 95% of the time.


And this is why health points exist

And it's pretty simple why it's better in team games. More blobbing and more clustering gives it better targets
PAGES (6)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag |Zeva| The Angry Dutchman
  • U.S. Forces flag Nicko
uploaded by Stijndee

Board Info

250 users are online: 3 members and 247 guests
destroyer2612, Maret, Milky
78 posts in the last 24h
599 posts in the last week
2985 posts in the last month
Registered members: 27983
Welcome our newest member, 7gabriellac7623fo0
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM