Login

russian armor

Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?

PAGES (21)down
24 Jun 2021, 21:28 PM
#361
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 539


Snip


I'm hesitant about 300 armor mainly for the stug and to a lesser extent the jp4. They already struggle.

With 300 armor should it still have 15% more speed? Or should it be nerfed 10% so it's 5.6 to be slightly faster? Again, the stug is now completely obsolete.

I am undecided about an mg. How much would it chop down during combined arms in combination with a better gun vs infantry that are already on average have less than 80-160hp.

I think a different approach could be to give it more sight, with a commander upgrade, something like 42-45. Not a command panther, but something that could be counter played with pios on the front line, or a 222.

More sight in team games is always good.

Without sight counterplay Scotts, Jacksons, or whatever, could have a possible first strike just by having the Pershing nearby. Along with my other idea (assault engies and rangers available) for repairs or early game aggression as well as flavor (assault battalions) without taking rangers away.

These kinds of changes to promote it's combined arms idea is more appealing to me than to make it another tiger while actually making heavies slightly more different from another.
24 Jun 2021, 23:24 PM
#364
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1120

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2021, 21:28 PMKoRneY


I'm hesitant about 300 armor mainly for the stug and to a lesser extent the jp4. They already struggle.

With 300 armor should it still have 15% more speed? Or should it be nerfed 10% so it's 5.6 to be slightly faster? Again, the stug is now completely obsolete.

I am undecided about an mg. How much would it chop down during combined arms in combination with a better gun vs infantry that are already on average have less than 80-160hp.

I think a different approach could be to give it more sight, with a commander upgrade, something like 42-45. Not a command panther, but something that could be counter played with pios on the front line, or a 222.

More sight in team games is always good.

Without sight counterplay Scotts, Jacksons, or whatever, could have a possible first strike just by having the Pershing nearby. Along with my other idea (assault engies and rangers available) for repairs or early game aggression as well as flavor (assault battalions) without taking rangers away.

These kinds of changes to promote it's combined arms idea is more appealing to me than to make it another tiger while actually making heavies slightly more different from another.


I agree with these ideas. What I'd honestly want is just taking a good look at the Pershing and revising it's stats/abilities/upgrades. I'd definitely give it at least 280 or 290 armour. The Stugs don't have godlike penetration, but they do shoot fast (same as how I like using double SU76 vs any sort of threat). And by the time the Pershing arrives, the Stug will be at least vet2. With low reload time, and possible 60% penetration chance (if armour to 290), I'd say one Stug could keep the Pershing in check, especially with the pop limitations. I don't think I've ever been able to fit anything besides a Jackson into the roster with the Pershing. Truth be told, I do always play double paks and have an AAHT defending the flanks (and vs planes) once the early game is over. So there is that pop.

One thing I definitely am stalwart about, is the underwhelming performance of Pershing, for it's price. Sure there is a thing called Combined arms, and in 1v1s or 2v2s a great ability, but in 3v3s+, an ability that promotes blobbing, is really unadvised. And if you want to keep only one infantry next to it, then you're kinda wasting the ability. I know I've always tried to synergize the combined arms, and vs lower skilled players it works wonders, but vs anyone with half a brain cell... I've always been punished by werfers or stukas, almost immediately once the icon pops up.
Not only that, but as I've said, USF is quite munitions starved in teamgames.

I don't know. Revising the Pershing would be great, but possibly out of scope.

EDIT: for the combined arms argument in 3v3s+, I mainly blame the maps. Seldom are more open maps. Maps like Hamburger like indirects (stuka and ML20/LeFH most of all) and teamweapon spamming due to all the lanes and chokepoints like bridges. Not to mention that the bottom team has the advantage. Then you have angrymundy, ettelturd...
And possibly the biggest reason would be, which is quite ironic and stupid, is the fact that you lock yourself out of the Calliope with the Heavy Cav. 1v1? No problem, don't need calliope. The population density and the population itself is low, and the maps are big enough.
2v2? The maps are about [300,400]x[300,400] and the pop density is low enough. But 3v3s and some 4v4 maps.... ~[300,450]x[300,400] ? High density, high body count, lanes == need for stuka/calliope/katy/werfer/mattress
25 Jun 2021, 07:37 AM
#370
avatar of redfox

Posts: 92

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2021, 21:28 PMKoRneY

I'm hesitant about 300 armor mainly for the stug and to a lesser extent the jp4. They already struggle.


Poor stug struggles against the heaviest tank the USF can field. Well, at least Su76 and M10 are absolutely known to turn heavy Tiger tanks into swiss cheese, so there is that.

-> Stug is not meant to counter a heavy late game tank for 630/230 mp/fuel. Get yourself a Panther or Jagdpanzer instead. Am I missing something or was this argument completely dull?
25 Jun 2021, 10:41 AM
#371
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 07:37 AMredfox


Poor stug struggles against the heaviest tank the USF can field. Well, at least Su76 and M10 are absolutely known to turn heavy Tiger tanks into swiss cheese, so there is that.



Stug III comes after 245 fuel (if ones skips T2)

Su 76 comes after 160 fuel if one goes T1 (and no clown car)

M10 can come after 225 fuel (if one skips everything)


M10 costs 80 fuel and 10 pop cap and has a turret (and better mobility)

Su 76 costs 75 fuel and 8 pop cap and has cloaking + arty

Stug III costs 90 fuel and 10 pop cap







25 Jun 2021, 11:29 AM
#372
avatar of redfox

Posts: 92

Alrighty then, are you saying the Stug is the go-to tool vs heavy tanks and counters KV1,-2,-8, IS2 and Pershing? This explains everything, I am such a noob! Did not know that Panther and Jagdpanzer are gimmicky decoration and there is a much cheaper, better tool. THE STUG! How to shot Heavies into oblivion. Obviously!

I always thought it's a cheap armored AT alternative to keep T34 and Shermans at bay, but hey, just a 4-digit thought ...
25 Jun 2021, 12:25 PM
#373
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1120




Stug III comes after 245 fuel (if ones skips T2)

Su 76 comes after 160 fuel if one goes T1 (and no clown car)

M10 can come after 225 fuel (if one skips everything)


M10 costs 80 fuel and 10 pop cap and has a turret (and better mobility)

Su 76 costs 75 fuel and 8 pop cap and has cloaking + arty

Stug III costs 90 fuel and 10 pop cap






But also to be honest. Stug can take one more shot and has a decently lower target size than the SU76 and has 160 dmg. Besides, it's idiotic to compare units directly. Stug is fine, SU76 is fine, Stug can keep the Pershing at bay.
Also, Stug is plenty better than the M10. M10 with the 140 far penetration can only ever be used up close which is again... not quite dandy to play, unless you isolate a heavy tank. Not to mention that again, Stug doesn't have a turret, but it does have only 17 target size, while an M10 has 22. So with all of it's stats, the Stug is designed, as the SU76 to shoot at max range. Double Stugs, the same as double SU76s, are brutal in teamgames. Double or triple M10s... not so much
25 Jun 2021, 13:43 PM
#374
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 11:29 AMredfox
Alrighty then, are you saying the Stug is the go-to tool vs heavy tanks and counters KV1,-2,-8, IS2 and Pershing? This explains everything, I am such a noob! Did not know that Panther and Jagdpanzer are gimmicky decoration and there is a much cheaper, better tool. THE STUG! How to shot Heavies into oblivion. Obviously!

I always thought it's a cheap armored AT alternative to keep T34 and Shermans at bay, but hey, just a 4-digit thought ...


My main point was that Stug IIIs cost more than the TDs you compared them to and come later and also have no arty and no cloak unlike the Su 76. So of course Su 76s won't "turn Tiger tanks into swiss cheese" ... at least as long as you use just one or two of them (a lone Stug won't "shoot heavies into oblivion" either btw. only once one gets 2 of them they become a reliable treat to most unsupported Heavies that just run straight into them). Wasn't saying that they are the go-to tool vs heavies


Jagdpanzer is OKW btw.

Regarding the Stugs role:

Double Stug III is nice but Panther is better (better AI, 360° Mg, Turret, and also better against heavies)
25 Jun 2021, 13:54 PM
#375
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 539

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 07:37 AMredfox


Poor stug struggles against the heaviest tank the USF can field. Well, at least Su76 and M10 are absolutely known to turn heavy Tiger tanks into swiss cheese, so there is that.

-> Stug is not meant to counter a heavy late game tank for 630/230 mp/fuel. Get yourself a Panther or Jagdpanzer instead. Am I missing something or was this argument completely dull?


Su76 retains a barrage and an m10 is doctrinal - impossible and irrelevant in a Pershing vs tiger discussion.

Not much of a discussion with you anyway. You seem to think that we start at t4.
25 Jun 2021, 18:05 PM
#376
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 473

He does have a point though don't know why people expect the STUG to counter allied heavy tanks. That is a biased mentality fermented by AXIS being spoiled that almost all AT at their disposable can penetrate any allied vehicle.


Stug not being able to penetrate Pershing if it got buffed is the worst excuse/argument for fixing a unit that is clearly sub-par (which is evident by the long discussion about it).

USF doesn't have Tiger/Tiger Ace JAG/Elephant or anything similar. The one heavy tank that they have should be excellent however it excels at nothing which is the problem.


"The M26 was intended as a replacement of the M4 Sherman,[citation needed] but a prolonged development period meant that only a small number saw combat in Europe. Based on the criteria of firepower, mobility, and protection, US historian R. P. Hunnicutt ranked the Pershing behind the German Tiger II heavy tank, but ahead of the Tiger I heavy and Panther medium tanks."
is

The Pershing is clearly not better than a Tiger in game and is barely better than a Panther which is significantly cheaper.



25 Jun 2021, 18:09 PM
#377
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

There are more people playing with the perishing but it can be easily countered with panthers. Without calliope playing against usf is much much easier too.
25 Jun 2021, 19:25 PM
#378
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2418 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 07:37 AMredfox


Poor stug struggles against the heaviest tank the USF can field. Well, at least Su76 and M10 are absolutely known to turn heavy Tiger tanks into swiss cheese, so there is that.

-> Stug is not meant to counter a heavy late game tank for 630/230 mp/fuel. Get yourself a Panther or Jagdpanzer instead. Am I missing something or was this argument completely dull?


Agree. It's a weird argument.
25 Jun 2021, 22:13 PM
#379
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5268

I still think ass engies in the commander instead of rangers would do a world of good for the Pershing.
25 Jun 2021, 23:32 PM
#380
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1120

I still think ass engies in the commander instead of rangers would do a world of good for the Pershing.


Not really. Maybe in 1v1s. However, I doubt you could fit everything inside the 100 pop cap in 3v3s+. Rangers give the option of having an AT squad that is more mobile than the M57, and in the end, a lower muni cost (150 muni once vs constant muni dump in M57), which leads to some stability. Not to mention that 3 zook rangers are more than decent at fighting anything up to a KT (also a larger role for Combined Arms)
PAGES (21)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
Autumn Open

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Soviets flag Scoped
  • U.S. Forces flag NiteNite
  • Ostheer flag Imperial Dane
  • Ostheer flag HelpingHans
uploaded by Scoped

Board Info

216 users are online: 2 members and 214 guests
Pip, SturmTigerGaddafi
44 posts in the last 24h
343 posts in the last week
1695 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25977
Welcome our newest member, rileadcruze
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM