Login

russian armor

SU-85 and SU-76

PAGES (7)down
6 Aug 2020, 11:05 AM
#61
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 160

Tbh T-70 could have nerfed down AI capabilities, buff its AT to make it more usefull against mediums. It would be wost at AI (but still usable), better at overall AT. Maybe even add somesort of AT ability. In other words mix between stuart and puma. Decent at both.

While SU-76 could use brummbar attack model, to make it mobile AI howi.

I this case:
M5 - mobile reinforcement\Suppresion platform.
T70 - decent LV counter with AI capabilities.
SU76 - dedicated AI support unit.


It never could be real, because 2/3 of that tier are already AI units.

Any AI oriented redesign to SU-76 is as real as pink unicorn.


Problem is all AI and AT of T3 is concentraded in T-70, at all all you need by the time you can get it. And by the time something what cant be countered by T70 at all hits the field you already would have T4 or AT guns if you gone T2.

T3 is in general badly designed for soviets.
6 Aug 2020, 13:16 PM
#62
avatar of Maret

Posts: 703

Tbh T-70 could have nerfed down AI capabilities, buff its AT to make it more usefull against mediums. It would be wost at AI (but still usable), better at overall AT. Maybe even add somesort of AT ability. In other words mix between stuart and puma. Decent at both.

While SU-76 could use brummbar attack model, to make it mobile AI howi.

I this case:
M5 - mobile reinforcement\Suppresion platform.
T70 - decent LV counter with AI capabilities.
SU76 - dedicated AI support unit.

Problem is all AI and AT of T3 is concentraded in T-70, at all all you need by the time you can get it. And by the time something what cant be countered by T70 at all hits the field you already would have T4 or AT guns if you gone T2.

T3 is in general badly designed for soviets.


It sounds as good idea in right direction. If SU-76 will become main AI dealer in T3, while still not so mobile and friendly to use as old-70, it can find place. Then Axis could counter LV SU push much easier and don't suffer from T-70 that can kill any LV that axis have.

Main idea should be: T-70 could work as AI and AT vs LV, but SU-76 as AI much better. While SU-76 give for SU player good AI and support tools (smoke barrage as example) it still vulnerable to enemy LV and save possibility for Axis player to counter SU-76 by 222 or Luchs.
6 Aug 2020, 15:18 PM
#63
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7353 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Aug 2020, 13:16 PMMaret


It sounds as good idea in right direction. If SU-76 will become main AI dealer in T3, while still not so mobile and friendly to use as old-70, it can find place. Then Axis could counter LV SU push much easier and don't suffer from T-70 that can kill any LV that axis have.

Main idea should be: T-70 could work as AI and AT vs LV, but SU-76 as AI much better. While SU-76 give for SU player good AI and support tools (smoke barrage as example) it still vulnerable to enemy LV and save possibility for Axis player to counter SU-76 by 222 or Luchs.


If you were to nerf or remove the T70 from T3, people would just use the M5 Quad as a shock unit. If that is not viable, then people will just skip T3 all together, play T2 Zis and try to get a fast T34 or Katyusha in teamgames.

We have the current situation with the T70 because you can't normalise the tech expenditures between factions at equivalent timings.


Starting mp (including initial unit) > Opening strat > Medics/Light vehicles/Upgrades >= Light Tanks > Medium tanks.


6 Aug 2020, 15:41 PM
#64
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 160



If you were to nerf or remove the T70 from T3, people would just use the M5 Quad as a shock unit. If that is not viable, then people will just skip T3 all together, play T2 Zis and try to get a fast T34 or Katyusha in teamgames.

We have the current situation with the T70 because you can't normalise the tech expenditures between factions at equivalent timings.


Starting mp (including initial unit) > Opening strat > Medics/Light vehicles/Upgrades >= Light Tanks > Medium tanks.




People get T70 because its the strongest LV in the game strate of the bat and can pay off easily pays off . With perfect sniping AI, best wipe on retreat possibilies, really good mobility and can fight any LV but puma 1v1 without support. Whole possibly needed AI and AT of T3 contained in 1 unit.

If main AI perfomance of T70 was transfered to SU76, while AT of T70 improved sligtly to maybe poke for additional damage mediums, counter the LVs and have some AI, then it would just give game good.

Also AT gun isn't an aswer for LVs, otherwise ppl wouldnt get AEC\Pumas to fight them.
6 Aug 2020, 16:29 PM
#65
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7353 | Subs: 1



People get T70 because its the strongest LV in the game strate of the bat and can pay off easily pays off . With perfect sniping AI, best wipe on retreat possibilies, really good mobility and can fight any LV but puma 1v1 without support. Whole possibly needed AI and AT of T3 contained in 1 unit.

If main AI perfomance of T70 was transfered to SU76, while AT of T70 improved sligtly to maybe poke for additional damage mediums, counter the LVs and have some AI, then it would just give game good.

Also AT gun isn't an aswer for LVs, otherwise ppl wouldnt get AEC\Pumas to fight them.


People get a T70 because it's OP. It's OP because it's the latest light tank to arrive, has the highest requirements to unlocked on a standard build and the faction doesn't have any tools to let it scale at that point in the game.

On teamgames, a Soviet player can rely on their partner to skip plenty of costs which are mandatory on 1v1.


Puma is basically used to avoid getting their P2 killed. AEC on it's own provides enough pressure to infantry, specially if combined later on with a Valentine.


Values might be off by some bit, since this is an old post, but the general principle still applies.



And that doesn't take into account initial mp + unit discrepancy.

Every time M5, T70 or Su76 is brought up, i think this point keeps getting ignored. People focus on the tree (unit) and ignore the forest behind.
6 Aug 2020, 17:12 PM
#66
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 160



People get a T70 because it's OP. It's OP because it's the latest light tank to arrive, has the highest requirements to unlocked on a standard build and the faction doesn't have any tools to let it scale at that point in the game.


People get T70 because its OP, its OP because its the most expensive to get, why its the most expensive because its OP.

Thats why I in general think that soviet T3 is one of the worst designed things in general and both t70 and su-76 need to be rethinked. Aswell as units in it.

With this justification appyed we would have still had immortal unstoppable KT, because its the most expensive heavy tank to get.

6 Aug 2020, 18:11 PM
#67
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 7353 | Subs: 1



People get T70 because its OP, its OP because its the most expensive to get, why its the most expensive because its OP.

Thats why I in general think that soviet T3 is one of the worst designed things in general and both t70 and su-76 need to be rethinked. Aswell as units in it.

With this justification appyed we would have still had immortal unstoppable KT, because its the most expensive heavy tank to get.


But the unit itself is not expensive.

The tier was relevant, when you could just rely on T3, skip getting T4 and get Call in vehicles for late game. That was one way to play with mass Su76s and T70s.


The difference between KT and T70, is that OKW doesn't need the KT to win a game at it arrives late enough for any faction to have a complete army roster and tools.


The T70 needs a nerf, in order to make space for other things to be buffed and changed. T70 and Su76 changes in isolation would just make things worst than now.
6 Aug 2020, 19:06 PM
#68
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 4344 | Subs: 1

So the current consensus is instead of making one unit more interesting we take 2, swap their roles entirely and somehow manage to have that balanced with the minimal support we have for balance patches? Does anybody else notice how the other allied light tanks are AT primarily but don't get used as AT primarily because using a 3hk tank that has to be in enemy range to shoot isn't at all feasible? No. The T70 cannot be made into the tiers AT specialist nor does it make sense to turn the su76 into an faction swapped stug E. Both units need refinement not a redesign that could completely screw the faction for the rest of the games life.
6 Aug 2020, 19:27 PM
#69
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 296

So the current consensus is instead of making one unit more interesting we take 2, swap their roles entirely and somehow manage to have that balanced with the minimal support we have for balance patches? Does anybody else notice how the other allied light tanks are AT primarily but don't get used as AT primarily because using a 3hk tank that has to be in enemy range to shoot isn't at all feasible? No. The T70 cannot be made into the tiers AT specialist nor does it make sense to turn the su76 into an faction swapped stug E. Both units need refinement not a redesign that could completely screw the faction for the rest of the games life.


Agreed
6 Aug 2020, 19:34 PM
#70
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15703 | Subs: 7



People get T70 because its the strongest LV in the game strate of the bat and can pay off easily pays off . With perfect sniping AI, best wipe on retreat possibilies, really good mobility and can fight any LV but puma 1v1 without support. Whole possibly needed AI and AT of T3 contained in 1 unit.

If main AI perfomance of T70 was transfered to SU76, while AT of T70 improved sligtly to maybe poke for additional damage mediums, counter the LVs and have some AI, then it would just give game good.

Also AT gun isn't an aswer for LVs, otherwise ppl wouldnt get AEC\Pumas to fight them.


People get T-70 because penal strats are slow and you need that extra push early mid game to equalize resource disadvantage from early game, while cons just trip and fall on their faces the moment axis weapon upgrades and PGs come into play and you can't pick guard doctrines 100% of the time.

People don't get it because its strong, people get it to get back on equal field as soviets early game is on the weak or slow side, depending on your opening.
6 Aug 2020, 21:48 PM
#71
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 59



People get T-70 because penal strats are slow and you need that extra push early mid game to equalize resource disadvantage from early game, while cons just trip and fall on their faces the moment axis weapon upgrades and PGs come into play and you can't pick guard doctrines 100% of the time.

People don't get it because its strong, people get it to get back on equal field as soviets early game is on the weak or slow side, depending on your opening.


You can also go svt cons and negate mentioned setbacks.

So the current consensus is instead of making one unit more interesting we take 2, swap their roles entirely and somehow manage to have that balanced with the minimal support we have for balance patches? Does anybody else notice how the other allied light tanks are AT primarily but don't get used as AT primarily because using a 3hk tank that has to be in enemy range to shoot isn't at all feasible? No. The T70 cannot be made into the tiers AT specialist nor does it make sense to turn the su76 into an faction swapped stug E. Both units need refinement not a redesign that could completely screw the faction for the rest of the games life.

I don't believe it is a consensus. It is just 1 guy that wants another Stuart with a t70 skin.

As for the topic, imo to make su76 a little more viable, as many already pointed out, the barrage ability needs some readjustments. The CD is the first thing that comes to mind.
6 Aug 2020, 22:01 PM
#72
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15703 | Subs: 7



You can also go svt cons and negate mentioned setbacks.

When you need doctrine to survive, base army does not work.
We've been there already, lets not go back.
7 Aug 2020, 00:43 AM
#73
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 4344 | Subs: 1



You can also go svt cons and negate mentioned setbacks.


I don't believe it is a consensus. It is just 1 guy that wants another Stuart with a t70 skin.

As for the topic, imo to make su76 a little more viable, as many already pointed out, the barrage ability needs some readjustments. The CD is the first thing that comes to mind.


To your first reply, though not to me, I want to reply:every faction should have what it needs to survive against another in its entirety without picking a commander. A commander can make it easier, but never ever ever should a commander be REQUIRED. If it is the balance is poor. If every faction can fight one another without a commander then commanders can be balanced without needing to be slated to fill balance holes.


As for the second bit to which you are replying to me, there were a few agreements and a follow up in how to make it work. This much discussion into a bad idea makes me nervous. It would be like if the balance team decided to the usf mortar needed attention because there was 3 posts in succession about 3 weeks ago. It's a dangerous waste of already limited resources to humor these outlandish suggestions. Not outlandish necessarily in scope, but given the restricted resources we need to only give credence to changes that span wide.
7 Aug 2020, 03:28 AM
#74
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 160



People get T-70 because penal strats are slow and you need that extra push early mid game to equalize resource disadvantage from early game, while cons just trip and fall on their faces the moment axis weapon upgrades and PGs come into play and you can't pick guard doctrines 100% of the time.

People don't get it because its strong, people get it to get back on equal field as soviets early game is on the weak or slow side, depending on your opening.


Well I do agree with that. But again its really a soft spot to base anything around it.

On the one hand, soviets do struggle without any cons doc boost and t70 power is somewhat justified, on the other hand cons can be boosted with the commander and have t70.

But still, even if people get t70 because its needed its still pretty much a powerspike in 1 unit, which is still even in vacuum insanly powerfull.

Idk, maybe its just its attach and damage model feels really toxic to play against. Maybe its just need to be reajusted to have same AI but without sniping retreating squads and models left and right.


To your first reply, though not to me, I want to reply:every faction should have what it needs to survive against another in its entirety without picking a commander. A commander can make it easier, but never ever ever should a commander be REQUIRED. If it is the balance is poor.


Well tbh it is the case for quite a while. I think its overextended a bit that soviets REQUIRE some commanders, but without them they will have unnessesery hard time.

But again ost with prostruppen and 5 men grens or mobile defence are still a common thing, because of hardtime against USF\LVs for instance. OKW sometimes forced into pfusiliers for that early snare or JLI to fight brits.

Cases like this are actually quite common.
7 Aug 2020, 05:26 AM
#75
avatar of Maret

Posts: 703

Problem tih SU-76 that you don't need it in T3 - you don't need to fight against LV Axis push. T-70 do it. I see only 2 possible decisions about SU-76:
1. Make from it dedicated AI support unit. Player could choose or aggrssive T-70 or more defensive orientated SU-76. But without AI support you can't have map control.
2. Move to T4 and make from it "su-85 for poors" or at least give to it some buffs when T4 deployed. In this case player could try to play against enemy medium push with SU-76 and be better position when T4 deployed.

Any simple buffs/nerfs in T3 don't change situation at all. SU-76 good only against LV or sub-mediums (stugs and short P4), while Axis don't play them in this timeframe.
Also problem of SU-76 that if you build it right after your T-70 die, you almost don't have chances to build T4 after that. Enemy will be push you with medim tank and you still need 90+90 (T4+t-34) fuel or 90+120(T4+su-85) to get first top tier armor unit. It means that in sometime you will be in situation with 1 su-76 against 2 p4. Even 1vs1 bad call, 1vs2 is almost dead end situation. If you lost it you need build 2-nd or try to stop enemy armor by infantry - penals mostly, because if you have cons you have zis and don't need su-76. Sad fairytale.
7 Aug 2020, 05:54 AM
#76
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 4344 | Subs: 1

Make t3 cheaper.
Put T70 behind 7 man sidetech so that M5 and SU76 come sooner and maybe actually are attractive but also skipping the T70 makes t4 hit a bit sooner. Not like the t34 with its inability to bounce any axis hard AT but the Puma will be overbearing if a bit sooner anyways...
. And again to reiterate making the su76", a soviet stug E, is as stupid as stupid ideas come. Let's lump that right in with stock 5 man grens..
7 Aug 2020, 06:39 AM
#77
avatar of Maret

Posts: 703

Make t3 cheaper.
Put T70 behind 7 man sidetech so that M5 and SU76 come sooner and maybe actually are attractive but also skipping the T70 makes t4 hit a bit sooner. Not like the t34 with its inability to bounce any axis hard AT but the Puma will be overbearing if a bit sooner anyways...
. And again to reiterate making the su76", a soviet stug E, is as stupid as stupid ideas come. Let's lump that right in with stock 5 man grens..


And farewell T-70...if T3 will be cheaper with lock t-70 in upgrade, it will make only one thing - players entirelly skip any armor in T3 and build fast T4. Zis, baby-at guns and ptrs enough to hold any axis LV. Also it will be mean that from T1 you can only play defensive doc, because 7-th cons don't have sense for penals. It don't make SU-76 popular. M5 maybe, but don't SU-76. I already told before that SU-76 can even put in T0. No one will be build it as start unit. Any possible enemies next 4-5 minutes after deploy t-70 or SU-76 are infantry, team weapon and sometimes LV. SU-76 don't give you AI - no AI - no map control. The most earlier axis armor you can see in game flameht or 222. Do you need SU-76 to counter them?
7 Aug 2020, 08:27 AM
#78
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8818 | Subs: 1

T-70's ability to wipe retreating infantry needs to be toned down and it will not break the faction at all.

In addition Ostheer could get better tools against it like improving the the capability of Ostwind to fight the T-70.

SU-76 is fine.
One could make the Su-76 more popular with a number of changes like:

make the KV-8/Su-76 easier to get

create more room for PzIV by lowering the effectiveness of TDs like the SU-85 against them
7 Aug 2020, 08:31 AM
#79
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 15703 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Aug 2020, 08:27 AMVipper
T-70's ability to wipe retreating infantry needs to be toned down and it will not break the faction at all.

And how would that work without botching its performance overall?
It already got RoF and scatter nerfs back in the day.
You're suggesting something that is not possible to implement without massive impact on overall performance of the unit.

In addition Ostheer could get better tools against it like improving the the capability of Ostwind to fight the T-70.


Like.... putting down a teller mine?
Or having shreck PG squad on field?
Or maybe ATG?

SU-76 is fine.
One could make the Su-76 more popular with a number of changes like:

make the KV-8/Su-76 easier to get

create more room for PzIV by lowering the effectiveness of TDs like the SU-85 against them

Ahh yes, the famous "it will be buffed, if we nerf everything else" line.
Not happening.
7 Aug 2020, 09:07 AM
#80
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8818 | Subs: 1


And how would that work without botching its performance overall?
It already got RoF and scatter nerfs back in the day.
You're suggesting something that is not possible to implement without massive impact on overall performance of the unit.

I can think of at least 3 different ways to achieve that. It is actually self-evident that it can be done since the majority of tanks are inferior at wipes on retreats.

I will not go into this since this thread is about SU-85 and SU-76.


Like.... putting down a teller mine?
Or having shreck PG squad on field?
Or maybe ATG?

None of solution you mentioned can chase a T-70, they all require the T-70 to move into them. Actually even member of the MOD team have recognized that Ostwind should perform better vs T-70.

I will not go into this since this thread is about SU-85 and SU-76.


Ahh yes, the famous "it will be buffed, if we nerf everything else" line.
Not happening.

That is simply your twisted perception of things, it also a lye.

I have never said anything even remotely similar to that. So I would appreciated it if you at least had the decency to remove the quotation marks you used to create the illusion that you have actually quoted me.

Bottom line here is that SU-76 is far inferior vs PzIV to SU-85 and thus one is better of making SU-85 even if the enemy is making PzIVs. Overlap in this role is an issue and buffing the SU-76 will not solve the problems.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
64 bit beta
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag Scotch
  • Oberkommando West flag VonAsten
  • U.S. Forces flag [NS] aerafield
  • U.S. Forces flag T.R. CrossFire
uploaded by aerafield

Board Info

151 posts in the last 24h
534 posts in the last week
2009 posts in the last month
Registered members: 21084
Welcome our newest member, Mealyse80s
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM