Login

russian armor

Comet armor and abilities

1 Sep 2020, 16:53 PM
#1
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 1328 | Subs: 1

Well, it's a quite straight forward topic:

After the recent reworks the Comet has become the favourite late game unit of UKF. It comes with a couple of abilities like the phosphorus shell and a normal grenade as well as warspeed. If's fairly affordable and mobile, can take 5 shots and - its most preeminent characteristic: has 290 armor.
It fits the general theme of UKFs high armor - something that Axis' units are not tailored to counter as easily. Which by itself is totally fine.

From my personal games as well as Streams, I got the feeling that the Comet is too much of a no brainer unit. There is not much reason to get a Cromwell when you could get a Comet as well. The Comet is good vs infantry and decent vs tanks with its 210/190/170 penetration except for heavies and the Panther/Brummbär.
So I think the Comet could do with a slight nerf.

I do not really understand why it needs 290 armor. Axis units have comparatively lower penetration, so 290 armor indirectly force building at least a PaK (although it can be decently threatened with some infantry support and/or the grenade if not snare is nearby) and better yet a Panther since the Comet cannot counter the Panther's heavy armor. Mediums are absolutely no match against the Comet due to the low penetration. I would get that if the Comet would be an AT specialist, but this is not the case.

Alternatively, we could take away some of the utility. The Comet has three stock utilities: War speed, the grenade and the phosphorus shell. I would not take away war speed since this would create a weird situation where you tech hammer tactics and then get a tank that does not benefit from it. The phosphorus shell allows it to dislodge Axis team weapons and infantry, something that UKF is bad at due to indirect fire. Still, since the Comet is already packed with utility, I'd rather move the phosphorus shell to the Cromwell (if that is possible) once hammer is teched.
One could also remove the grenade, but I somehow have the feeling that this ability is used so rarely that it would still not change the Comet enough to remove the no brainer status.
1 Sep 2020, 17:40 PM
#2
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 220

Honestly comet is less of a problem, in terms of armor. Panther has same 260 frontal armor and 90 rear armor, while coment has like 110 or 120 rear armor, but 160 less HP.

On the other hand all Churchills are just stupidly OP in terms of survivability. When I checked them, them both crock and AVRE had 1080 HP and standart one has 1400 HP while having 290 frontal and 180 (!!!!!) rear armor. To give it perspective, PIV at close range has 120 penetration I belive and JP4 has 185 penetration at medium range.

Not to mention that regular churchill has better penetration then PIV.

But on the topic, its in general problem with all heavy tanks (soviet especially with KVs), when medium tanks are not effective against them even from rear (aside from doc.ones), while its honestly really stupid considering you can out-flank and out play your opponent but it still wont pay off.
Comet is at least somewhat killable if you flank it with mediums.

Panther on the other hand has best excample of it, because even T34\76 with its 90 penetration at max range will penetrate it if panther is possitioned badly.
1 Sep 2020, 19:06 PM
#3
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3014

I agree that comet could lose some armor. I think that'd be a better nerf than having it lose the utility.

And honestly I think WP on cromwells would be a bit too scary. It'd be really easy to close out games if the enemy doesn't have a medium tank by abusing it or by simply just WPing his AT and driving circles around it.
1 Sep 2020, 19:32 PM
#4
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 356

Panther has 260 armour, not 290. Close but still...
Comet is fine in my book I guess. Whilst it's a better generalist tank than Panther (same price range), it's worse at AT with lower range and penetration and less hp (30 more armour which is a couple of percentages higher bounce chance vs mediums). If Comet should lose something... it should lose the grenade ability or war speed. Reduces the power vs team weapons whilst not reducing the overall generalist feel to the unit and if it loses warspeed it's more vulnerable to Stugs and paks and Shrecks which would still fit it's description of a premium generalist medium tank. I wouldn't touch armour as it's a late game unit designed for tank brawling.
Loses to Panther but wins vs other medium tanks by a large margin.

The asymmetry: Panther (available to both axis factions) wins 1v1 vs all allied tanks, doctrinal or otherwise but poor vs infantry without MG upgrade while ally tanks usually outclass axis in terms of versatility (axis relies on doctrines for tank utility).
Comet is still a great tank, one of the best in COH2. Is that title an overture to a nerf? Shouldn't be but it's not my call to make.
1 Sep 2020, 20:14 PM
#5
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1334

Maybe give stug 60 range instead of nerfing comet (though it really deserves a tiny nerf - grenade should be more expensive (35 instead of 20 if I remember the current price correctly), war speed should probably cost munitions paid by sappers when "adding" it to a tank (20 would probably be enough)). Better to increase/add the price than get rid of a cool feature I guess. Oh, rear armour of course! (Together with church and ISU)
1 Sep 2020, 20:14 PM
#6
avatar of Grim

Posts: 908

I just find the comet so lacklustre tbh and most of the time I regret teching for it instead of getting fireflys.

1 Sep 2020, 20:29 PM
#7
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 9050 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Sep 2020, 20:14 PMGrim
I just find the comet so lacklustre tbh and most of the time I regret teching for it instead of getting fireflys.


Warspeed/Hammer trucking/Heavy gammon are worth the tech cost on their own even if one does not build a single Comet
1 Sep 2020, 21:21 PM
#8
avatar of Leo251

Posts: 219

Absolutely agreed. I also find Comet a bit OP, specially in armor, acceleration and speed terms.
I think it should lose it AI power. Should be only good against tanks. Cannot be excellent at everything.
1 Sep 2020, 21:30 PM
#9
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 356

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Sep 2020, 21:21 PMLeo251
Absolutely agreed. I also find Comet a bit OP, specially in armor, acceleration and speed terms.
I think it should lose it AI power. Should be only good against tanks. Cannot be excellent at everything.


But it's not. It's OK vs AI and OK vs tanks. It's penetration is reliable close range. Why would anyone buy comet if it were only good vs tanks? The whole reason patches addressed comet AI through MG buffs was because comet was completely unreliable at killing infantry, especially with it's poor accuracy. It needs to lose utility and that's it.
1 Sep 2020, 21:32 PM
#10
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 711

ai and at should be left as is. Abilities makes the tank very unique and attractive to go for. If anything should be nerfed, it should be its armour.
2 Sep 2020, 02:25 AM
#11
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 705

Honestly comet is less of a problem, in terms of armor. Panther has same 260 frontal armor and 90 rear armor, while coment has like 110 or 120 rear armor, but 160 less HP.

On the other hand all Churchills are just stupidly OP in terms of survivability. When I checked them, them both crock and AVRE had 1080 HP and standart one has 1400 HP while having 290 frontal and 180 (!!!!!) rear armor. To give it perspective, PIV at close range has 120 penetration I belive and JP4 has 185 penetration at medium range.

Not to mention that regular churchill has better penetration then PIV.



a bit of correction here but stock churchill have only 240 front armor, which is the same with OKW p4, and so AT, TD like stug or JP4 all have decent change of pen it front. Churchill's survivability come mostly from it HP (and the smoke) and it also mean a Vet dispenser for all units pen it.

2 Sep 2020, 02:40 AM
#12
avatar of Heavy Sapper

Posts: 705

jump backJump back to quoted post1 Sep 2020, 21:21 PMLeo251
Absolutely agreed. I also find Comet a bit OP, specially in armor, acceleration and speed terms.
I think it should lose it AI power. Should be only good against tanks. Cannot be excellent at everything.


i dont mind if the commet become a Panther clone but you have to careful with what you wish. Currently, the commet AT is OK-ish at best and it AI got buff through MG which seriously decrease when yellow covers are every where late game. At it timming, armor mean very little if it have to fight panther everywhere, againt hight pen gun, more HP (like the case of panther or chill) is always more reliable than a couple of armor.

Point is, if pp want to turn commet in to an AT specialist, no matter what, it will end up being a panther clone, and playing again a panther horde late game was never a comfortable experience.
2 Sep 2020, 03:06 AM
#13
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 220



a bit of correction here but stock churchill have only 240 front armor, which is the same with OKW p4, and so AT, TD like stug or JP4 all have decent change of pen it front. Churchill's survivability come mostly from it HP (and the smoke) and it also mean a Vet dispenser for all units pen it.

Yeah 240, my mistake. Regarding veterancy, it was the case when it was more expensive, with its correct cost, it provides as much vet as penetrating regular medium I belive.


i dont mind if the commet become a Panther clone but you have to careful with what you wish. Currently, the commet AT is OK-ish at best


What is OK-ish btw? I mean, just as panther is supperior and can beat any medium without a problem, aswell as its mobility + free war speed provide you with great flanking options. Its penetration will always penetrate rear of any heavy tank.

I mean, the only big difference between Panther and Comet, is that Panther can somewhat fight heavies frontally.
2 Sep 2020, 05:25 AM
#14
avatar of Spoof

Posts: 86

Just nerf its armor. The comet is supposed to be a versatile late game tank, and the abilities reflect that.
2 Sep 2020, 06:52 AM
#15
avatar of Unit G17

Posts: 285

I think the Comet is fine as it is, but if it really needs 'nerf', then just increase its fuel price by 10, so it is the same as panther.
2 Sep 2020, 08:06 AM
#16
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2178 | Subs: 1

The armour can not be nerfed without increasing the HP. The Comet is WAY too expensive to be a 800 HP unit with mediocre armour. T34/85 costs 130 fuel with way cheaper tech and has same HP.

I think the Comet is overall fine as it is, only change that makes sense is making it more expensive by raising the fuel price by 10-15.
2 Sep 2020, 08:09 AM
#17
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2178 | Subs: 1



On the other hand all Churchills are just stupidly OP in terms of survivability. When I checked them, them both crock and AVRE had 1080 HP and standart one has 1400 HP while having 290 frontal and 180 (!!!!!) rear armor. To give it perspective, PIV at close range has 120 penetration I belive and JP4 has 185 penetration at medium range.


The normal churchill has 240 armour and not 290.
2 Sep 2020, 08:46 AM
#18
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 1328 | Subs: 1


I mean, the only big difference between Panther and Comet, is that Panther can somewhat fight heavies frontally.

The Panther is a clear AT specialist. The AI is very bad and only the pintle makes it usable in that regard, although still not good. The Comet is a generalist and the gun can do some serious damage to infantry.

The armour can not be nerfed without increasing the HP. The Comet is WAY too expensive to be a 800 HP unit with mediocre armour. T34/85 costs 130 fuel with way cheaper tech and has same HP.

I think the Comet is overall fine as it is, only change that makes sense is making it more expensive by raising the fuel price by 10-15.


If your main argument is the survivability, the old Pershing had 800 HP and 300 armor for a much higher price. Obviously the gun is very different and adds to the cost, but even costly units can work with that amount of health/armor. The T34/85 might habe the same amount of health, but if I am not mistaken also only has 160 armor and can therefore be easily countered by a StuG and other "lighter" AT options without the need to go for Panther as the best counter. There is also no war speed ability that can get you out of tricky situations.



Overall I just think the Comet needs to lose its no brainer status, although I find the issue quite hard to nail down. Is it the armor? Maybe. The utility? Might be as well. Could also be the general faction issue, although Brits play fine without going for either hammer or anvil, so I'd exclude the last part.
If all other factions double down on a vehicle, that's a serious strat with clear weaknesses and strenghts since it creates gaps in the line up. Double medium tank? A light TD or additional PaK might do. Double Panther? You will lack behind in the AI departement although you will stomp enemy vehicles. Double Katy/PWerfer? Susceptible to dives and armor pushes. Other factions thereby promote either combined arms or a clearly planned out strategy.

Double Comet? Absolute standard.
2 Sep 2020, 10:28 AM
#19
avatar of IncaUna

Posts: 1

The armour can not be nerfed without increasing the HP. The Comet is WAY too expensive to be a 800 HP unit with mediocre armour. T34/85 costs 130 fuel with way cheaper tech and has same HP.

I think the Comet is overall fine as it is, only change that makes sense is making it more expensive by raising the fuel price by 10-15.

+1
2 Sep 2020, 10:30 AM
#20
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 267

I'll be careful with any nerfs to the comet considering its history iver being stupid op or never used again.

The comet in my opinnion could loose the grenade ability and probably go up to 185 fuel.
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 T.R. FIRE AND TERROR
  • Soviets flag B-Sky-IIRevolutionII
uploaded by B-Sky-IIRevolutionII

Board Info

184 users are online: 5 members and 179 guests
Sturmpanther, Darkpiatre, TheRestaurant, Sander93, VonIvan
96 posts in the last 24h
578 posts in the last week
2086 posts in the last month
Registered members: 22691
Welcome our newest member, alantushef
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM