Login

russian armor

Tank Destroyer Standardization

18 Mar 2020, 20:26 PM
#41
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2390 | Subs: 1



I literally said that and you just repeat xD

"makes it a tank that if you have to retreat with it and you're not flanked/ambushed, you're playing it wrong."


But it CAN escape flanks and ambushes, that's my entire point. Its superior moving accuracy and great mobility means that it can run away and fight back reliably, while other tanks are missing shots
18 Mar 2020, 20:40 PM
#42
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15146 | Subs: 7


No matter how much veterancy you slap onto SU85, it will grow no turret.

TBH the only situation where turret would be useful is if you're flanked or chasing around corners, first case, TD would die anyway without support, 2nd case no 60 range TD should ever be in that spot anyway.

Turret is quite important in certain situations, but I'd put more value on focused sight.
18 Mar 2020, 20:52 PM
#43
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3934 | Subs: 1



Jackson is a king of speed and maneuverability. It's a tank with a position and role brilliantly defined. Glass cannon by definition. It needs no nerfs/buffs. And Jackson can't really escape any ambush. 1v1 or 2v1 engagement it can escape if it leaves immediately and has luck on it's side (It's better to be born without a male reproductive organ, than without luck, cause with luck, your MRO will grow out of nowhere), but it's low armour really makes it a tank that if you have to retreat with it and you're not flanked/ambushed, you're playing it wrong. I never used Jackson on the same control unit bind (ctrl-X) with any other unit. Jacksons are their own bind always behind other units. Also, sight is important here too as a factor. You need vision to utilize range.

Glass cannon by definition? I'd like to read your definition of glass cannon because mine isn't "every bit as durable as any other allied td but also able to escape damage easier and also able to dish it out better" it's "can deal great damage but if you misplay slightly it's toast"
18 Mar 2020, 20:59 PM
#44
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 2390 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2020, 20:40 PMKatitof

TBH the only situation where turret would be useful is if you're flanked or chasing around corners, first case, TD would die anyway without support, 2nd case no 60 range TD should ever be in that spot anyway


1st case the su85 might die even with support. It may never get a single shot off on the tank, whereas if jackson gets 1 then all you need is 1 snare to save its life while its runs away OR maybe even kills the tank once it re-establishes range advantage

2nd case, the entire greatness of the Jackson is that it CAN chase much better than FF or SU85. If a tank gets behind an los blocker as its running away, the Jackson is far far better at securing the kill AND at escaping after its done it

Focused sight is awesome but it also amplifies the disadvantage of no turret if you use it. Now its even easier to flank

18 Mar 2020, 21:32 PM
#45
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 889

Very bad idea. Panther (heavy armor, speed, penetration and top MG) with 60 range. :hansWUT:
18 Mar 2020, 21:44 PM
#46
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15146 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2020, 21:32 PMAradan
Very bad idea. Panther (heavy armor, speed, penetration and top MG) with 60 range. :hansWUT:

We know it is bad idea.
We had that at one point.
18 Mar 2020, 21:44 PM
#47
avatar of SaintPauli

Posts: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Mar 2020, 21:32 PMAradan
Very bad idea. Panther (heavy armor, speed, penetration and top MG) with 60 range. :hansWUT:
What I proposed was not only about the Panther – Also I proposed a Panther with 60 range but lower armor, lower health and no top MG. (other tank destroyers would be able to kill a panther in 4 shots if we lower health to 800)
19 Mar 2020, 02:35 AM
#48
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3595 | Subs: 1

FF is by far the worst TD. Not sure how people think it's somehow good. Super vulnerable to blitzing P4s or Panthers, super vulnerable against ATGs and handheld AT. Cant reliably penetrate heavy tanks and has a reload that makes you wonder if the thing is bugged. Just spamming 6 pounders and using the fuel for AVRE, Comet or Croc is WAY better than going FF


As someone who builds FF every game as brits, I'd say this is wrong. The FF may look bad on paper because of its long reload, but the first round goes out just as fast as others. I know you know that the FF deals 200 per shot, but a lot of players don't know how useful that is. The FF combo is probably the fastest burst damaging combo left in the game. You can take down a 640HP medium in about 11 seconds if both those shots pen. That's faster than ANY other TD in the game including the StuG and JP4. It won't win without support like the jackson, and it won't self spot to 70 range like the su85, but 11 second TTK with about 9 seconds TTK at vet 2 is pretty strong when your opponent steps a little bit too far forward with his P4 and those mistakes can be very costly.
19 Mar 2020, 05:20 AM
#49
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 605

As someone said before, FF is the best heavy tank destroyer design-wise, and i prefer it to keep up that way.
19 Mar 2020, 06:04 AM
#50
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 709

Agree with katitof that Tulips are extra, but my question is: Is HHF seriously saying FF is bad rn? Or that standardization will make it bad? I’m confused.


I simply replied to vipper challenging his calls for a redesign to TDs. Because he's trying to fight problems that don't exist.

I don't think anyone seriously believes FF is OP vs mediums, but he somehow lumps everything in with Jackson performance as if FF and SU85 can perform the same.

Jackson and panther can back away shooting and scooting vs such med rushes. FF and SU85 can not.

But I do think FF popcap is a point or two high, trying to field a FF and Churchill literally eats up all of your late game pop.
19 Mar 2020, 06:23 AM
#51
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 889

What I proposed was not only about the Panther – Also I proposed a Panther with 60 range but lower armor, lower health and no top MG. (other tank destroyers would be able to kill a panther in 4 shots if we lower health to 800)


But this will remove diversity from the game.
Turret TD (Panther, FF + Jackson) allways win versus SU-85/JgPzIV.

If you want more tanks battles, lets make T-34/85 stock unit and SU-85 doctrinal.
19 Mar 2020, 07:56 AM
#52
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8219 | Subs: 1



I simply replied to vipper challenging his calls for a redesign to TDs. Because he's trying to fight problems that don't exist.

And here lies your problem, you feel the need to "challenge" me.

At this point I have to point out that I did not start this thread I simply point out to OP that changing the damage is not enough to for make the a distinction "between heavy TDs" and "medium Tds". If the "heavy TDs" are more accurate, have more damage and penetration they will simply be "better" TDs.



I don't think anyone seriously believes FF is OP vs mediums, but he somehow lumps everything in with Jackson performance as if FF and SU85 can perform the same.

Jackson and panther can back away shooting and scooting vs such med rushes. FF and SU85 can not.

But I do think FF popcap is a point or two high, trying to field a FF and Churchill literally eats up all of your late game pop.
19 Mar 2020, 08:16 AM
#53
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 709

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Mar 2020, 07:56 AMVipper

And here lies your problem, you feel the need to "challenge" me.

At this point I have to point out that I did not start this thread I simply point out to OP that changing the damage is not enough to for make the a distinction "between heavy TDs" and "medium Tds". If the "heavy TDs" are more accurate, have more damage and penetration they will simply be "better" TDs.


There's simply nothing wrong with discussing and challenging other people's viewpoints. This is a forum, this is what forums are for.

If you want to decrease jackson or panther effectivemess vs mediums actually the best answer would be to mirror them with the firefly. It's by far weakest TD vs mediums in the game but still counters a heavy tank with the correct micro and support in its sniper role.

Of course this would mean hefty DPS nerfs and mobility nerfs to the other TDs as I pointed out in the panther thread...
19 Mar 2020, 08:28 AM
#54
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8219 | Subs: 1


There's simply nothing wrong with discussing and challenging other people's viewpoints. This is a forum, this is what forums are for.

Challenging other people views is fine as long as it done in constructive way and not in "forum warrior" way.

Challenging other people and not their view is simply non constructive.


If you want to decrease TD effectivemess vs mediums actually the best answer would be to mirror them with the firefly. It's by far weakest TD vs mediums in the game but still counters a heavy tank with the correct micro and support in its sniper role.

Of course this would mean hefty DPS nerfs to the other TDs as I pointed out in the panther thread...

Nope the distance FF is not that big specially since it can delete a medium with one reload. And there reason why it feel to you that FF is up vs mediums is simply because other TDs are OP vs mediums.

If you are losing FF to PzIV you are probably doing something wrong.

Actually a Panther with the sight, accuracy, damage and vet bonuses of the FF would be OP vs mediums even it had that same reload and did not have Tulips. A vet 3 FF kills a medium with 2 reloads.

I can make a mode for to you to test.
19 Mar 2020, 08:44 AM
#55
avatar of Goldenpunch

Posts: 43

Tank Destroyer Standardization

The game is designed around asymmetrical fractions. We all like this difference in gameplay but admittedly it creates problems in terms of balance and creates “crutch units” that fill the holes in the army composition (Elephant, Panic Puma). I think that we can keep the asymmetrical strengths and weaknesses of the fractions and still have equality in terms of army capabilities. In terms of balance, I think that the biggest problem right now is the tank destroyers. With that in mind I propose the following standardization.
(I acknowledge that there are other glaring balance problems, but please keep to the topic)

All armies should have medium tank destroyer and a heavy tank destroyer. In terms of availability and cost efficiency each unit should be designed to counter a specific set of targets. This is how I envision the unit tiers:

Heavy Tank Destroyers (Range 60 - 200 damage)
Jackson, Sherman Firefly, SU-85, Panther

Medium Tank Destroyers (Range 50 - 160 damage)
M10, SU-76, StuG G, Jagdpanzer IV

Heavy Tanks
Health divisible by 200

Medium Tanks
Health divisible by 160


Heavy tank destroyers should do 200 damage and have a range of 60. In terms of targets, all heavy tanks health should be divisible by 200. This will make the heavy tank destroyers more cost-efficient vs the heavy tanks without improving the efficiency vs medium tanks. Changes in rate of fire should be made to keep current time to kill vs heavy tanks the same while nerfing the time to kill medium tanks. In terms of units this mostly effects the panthers’ offensive capabilities. The health of the panther should in term be brought down to 800 and the armour should also be significantly lowered. The machine gunner could be removed to emphasize the tank destroying nature of the unit.

Medium tank destroyers should do 160 damage and have a range of 50. This means nerfing the range of the Jagdpanzer IV and the SU-76. The SU-76 should, however, have its damage increased to 160. Currently the Brits and the USF does not have a stock medium tanks destroyer. The M10 should be given to both of those amies as a stock unit (this alleviates the problem of the Jackson/Firefly having to counter to all armour)

Addendum: The Panic Puma is designated as a range 50 tank destroyer. Its range should be brought down to 40 to prevent it from countering all light tanks. At the same time, it should be mad available to Wehr as a stock unit.


- SaintPauli


You are trying to kill game. No. You shall not kill asymmetrical design of this game.
19 Mar 2020, 14:08 PM
#56
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1162


You shall not kill asymmetrical design of this game.


Asymmetrical design started to die first patches after release. There was a time Elefant had spotting option like SU85 etc. and more, after the years a lot of gimmicks were moved to other fractions to balance them, that is a positive step. Ostheer got nerfed to make place for OKW. Then brits were designed as Ostheer-clone etc.

Now have so many spotting options for soviets fraction, non-doc cancer = nobrainer. Fan-boy move.

Can community stop fighing from fraction positions? Simply make them balanced, without any fan-boy shit?

19 Mar 2020, 14:49 PM
#57
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 889



Now have so many spotting options for soviets fraction, non-doc cancer = nobrainer. Fan-boy move.

Can community stop fighing from fraction positions? Simply make them balanced, without any fan-boy shit?



On this forum? No

Some people play all fractions and their opinions are very useful.
But most play only one side and would rather not publish their own playercard.

TD from my opinion (good know only okw and soviet) and team games experience:

Su-85 (with lack of medium tanks) is only way fight versus panthers and tigers (with using fuel). Penals are good, but you need luck (as with shreck inf.). You simply cannot use fuel more appropriately, because T34/76 have no chance in team games.

JgPzIV is practically unit, but OKW mostly dont need it (Shreck and rak quite easily crush soviet TD). Panther and KT are more useful and fun.
JT is king of late game, but it is doctrinal.
19 Mar 2020, 14:55 PM
#58
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 2599

Now have so many spotting options for soviets fraction, non-doc cancer = nobrainer. Fan-boy move.


uhhhhhh OKW has Puma with map hack at vet 5, Kubel with map hack at vet 1, IR HT with map hack at 5 fuel that's turning into double sight pios, Luchs/Jagdpanzer IV that can move with camo and spot/scout, and doctrinal scout planes.

Ostheer has 42 sight Pios, sniper, Scout Car with vet sight increase, and lots of doctrinal scouting options.

Complaining about Soviet non-doctrinal scouting is absurd and hilarious.
19 Mar 2020, 15:24 PM
#59
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1162



uhhhhhh OKW has Puma with map hack at vet 5, Kubel with map hack at vet 1, IR HT with map hack at 5 fuel that's turning into double sight pios, Luchs/Jagdpanzer IV that can move with camo and spot/scout, and doctrinal scout planes.

Ostheer has 42 sight Pios, sniper, Scout Car with vet sight increase, and lots of doctrinal scouting options.

Complaining about Soviet non-doctrinal scouting is absurd and hilarious.


Now we are at a point we can speak. Most things I would change without any contradiction.

But it seems you are a really salty man, doesn't interrested in balancing at all, hm?

OKW
a. You mean "SdKfz 234/2 will reveal enemy troops in a radius of 35." I never thought it is such a good ability, but as passive one is was ok. Not like 222. But that is something we can speak about.

b. You mean "Detection-ability", yea. Same as a., it is a nice gimmick, but nothing game-destroying like UHU-bug or Soviets sight-buff abilities.

c. UHU will be changed. Now it generates normal sight. Don't forget T70 can nearlly generate same sight, SU85 can spot for itself with same sight.

d. the move + cammo was something I criticize since release of OKW. It should be a stationary ability for Jagdpanzer4. Luchs is a troll-vehicle, never heard that someone was angry because of its cammo, it has bad sight.

Ostheer:
a. They have the sight because they suck at fighing (maybe worst fighting unit for its price) and Ostheer lacks in sight units. Instead of giving them something else they made Pios be recoons-troups. I am no fan of that too. Better remove Scope, give 222 same sight-ability as T70.

b. The sight becomes 60 I think, on a vehicle able to take 2 shots and then it is gone... for me no big deal? Is it? 222 is a bad unit with a lot if potetioal to balace Ostheer with passive stuff for lategame.

c. German recoon is worst ingame. Let me explain: Alliis AA is way more potential as Ostheer's and OKW's.
You don't believe? Testing it needs you 10 min.




19 Mar 2020, 15:32 PM
#60
avatar of Stormjäger

Posts: 2599



Now we are at a point we can speak. Most things I would change without any contradiction.

But it seems you are a really salty man, doesn't interrested in balancing at all, hm? Yes I am salty and I'm not interested in balancing because I disagree with your incredible balance opinions. I should be put in jail.

OKW
a. You mean "SdKfz 234/2 will reveal enemy troops in a radius of 35." I never thought it is such a good ability, but as passive one is was ok. Not like 222. But that is something we can speak about. It's a free passive maphack. Not sure what the 222 does better. Still it's at vet 5 so nobody complains.

b. You mean "Detection-ability", yea. Same as a., it is a nice gimmick, but nothing game-destroying like UHU-bug or Soviets sight-buff abilities. No proof of soviet abilities being game destroying.

c. UHU will be changed. Now it generates normal sight. Don't forget T70 can nearlly generate same sight, SU85 can spot for itself with same sight. 80 sight is not normal sight and T70 does not get anywhere near 80 sight and neither does the su85 which also gets a small cone and a big cooldown debuff when it activates it.

d. the move + cammo was something I criticize since release of OKW. It should be a stationary ability for Jagdpanzer4. Luchs is a troll-vehicle, never heard that someone was angry because of its cammo, it has bad sight. Still there, still something very useful and unique.

Ostheer:
a. They have the sight because they suck at fighing (maybe worst fighting unit for its price) and Ostheer lacks in sight units. Instead of giving them something else they made Pios be recoons-troups. I am no fan of that too. Better remove Scope, give 222 same sight-ability as T70. Pios are perfectly fine and the 222 is perfectly fine as is. Stock T70 sight would be a huge buff that would be unfair.

c. German recoon is worst ingame. Let me explain: Alliis AA is way more potential as Ostheer's and OKW's.
You don't believe? Testing it needs you 10 min. Yeah the Quad AA is OP at shooting down planes, that's got nothing to do with UKF/USF AA and the Soviet player doesn't always get the quad AA in 1v1.

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
  • Ostheer flag borobadger
  • U.S. Forces flag DaPopeCOH
uploaded by borobadger

Board Info

176 users are online: 3 members and 173 guests
MMX, Loxley, Partisanship
109 posts in the last 24h
803 posts in the last week
4650 posts in the last month
Registered members: 21495
Welcome our newest member, 6avae9922tM7
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM