Login

russian armor

Can we revive Mechanized?

23 Nov 2021, 15:20 PM
#101
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1




I will ignore the irrelevant non constructive parts of your post.


I just put it into the overall context of this thread and other posts. A price adjustment was part of the further discussion.


I quoted and directly responded to Easy ♠. Do you agree that 76mm with HAVP/HE rounds at the current price would be OP yes or no?

If the your answer is yes I suggest you quote and respond to Easy ♠ and not me.
23 Nov 2021, 15:27 PM
#102
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2021, 15:20 PMVipper
I will ignore the irrelevant non constructive parts of your post.

Still no insight?

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2021, 15:20 PMVipper

I quoted and directly responded to Easy ♠. Do you agree that 76mm with HAVP/HE rounds at the current price would be OP yes or no?


I would vote totally for the combination of M4A3HE / 76mm AP so that 76mm is a straight upgrade of M4A3. Having selected the right shell would be a drastical decision in its outcome. Yes, it would need a price adjustment.

Probably better would be a slight adjustment of the standard shell without price adjustment. Lower pen a bit, buff AOE a bit. That way it would be more useful vs infantry and less useful vs tanks in standard shell mode. The shell switch would be more important and more tactical than it is now.

23 Nov 2021, 16:07 PM
#103
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1






I would vote totally for the combination of M4A3HE / 76mm AP so that 76mm is a straight upgrade of M4A3. Having selected the right shell would be a drastical decision in its outcome. Yes, it would need a price adjustment.

So you do agree that Easy ♠'s suggestion to simply to replace AP round with HE round would make the unit OP as I have pointed out it my original post.

Now I can not commend about your suggestion unless you actually specify a price.
I have to point out it that the higher the price the less attractive it would be for 640 HP tank.


Probably better would be a slight adjustment of the standard shell without price adjustment. Lower pen a bit, buff AOE a bit. That way it would be more useful vs infantry and less useful vs tanks in standard shell mode. The shell switch would be more important and more tactical than it is now.

Again without specifics I simply can not comment.

There would be very little difference in the importance of switch shell, the unit would simply be stronger in the hand of good players.
23 Nov 2021, 17:02 PM
#104
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 772


I would vote totally for the combination of M4A3HE / 76mm AP so that 76mm is a straight upgrade of M4A3. Having selected the right shell would be a drastical decision in its outcome. Yes, it would need a price adjustment.

sounds almost like Pershing to me minus round change shenanigans and some other details. And don't forget that SOV should get a copy as well.

Again, round change is not as big of a deal, unless you spam those tanks and spread them across the map to do different tasks. Round change is a "downside" of having 2 types of rounds and should not be considered as a downside overall.
23 Nov 2021, 19:28 PM
#105
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2021, 16:07 PMVipper

So you do agree that Easy ♠'s suggestion to simply to replace AP round with HE round would make the unit OP as I have pointed out it my original post.

Now I can not commend about your suggestion unless you actually specify a price.
I have to point out it that the higher the price the less attractive it would be for 640 HP tank.

Again without specifics I simply can not comment.

There would be very little difference in the importance of switch shell, the unit would simply be stronger in the hand of good players.

The need for a price adjustment does mean that it would be op without. Pretty obvious if you ask me.

I'm not sure about the exact numbers. But I would have faith in the delevoper team if they would implement it. I do think a higher priced but more capable 76mm wouldn't be anyhow more attractive in 1vs1. Obviously it would come out later. But I do think it would be a plus for teamgames where timing and price is of less importance and sheer late game power comes in handy. Having good dps at AI and AT would somehow compensate for low armor and health.
23 Nov 2021, 19:37 PM
#106
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919


sounds almost like Pershing to me minus round change shenanigans and some other details. And don't forget that SOV should get a copy as well.

There is a lot that set its apart from Pershing: Range, armor, health, Vet1 skillshot... I don't think you can compare them directly at all. SOV has doctrinal competition with T34/85 and KV-1. T34/85 ist the better package at combat atm. KV-1 is pretty good too. So its not that 76mm would give them suddenly a super strong tank. Its the other way around USF would be super happy if they could use T34/85 or KV-1. For Sov it is the smoke that is a lot more interesting since soviet tanks have none.

Again, round change is not as big of a deal, unless you spam those tanks and spread them across the map to do different tasks. Round change is a "downside" of having 2 types of rounds and should not be considered as a downside overall.

So let it cost 5 fuel and 40MP more, remove standard shell and give the AOE of standard shell to AP shell. Its no big deal anyways. We'll see.
23 Nov 2021, 20:28 PM
#107
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 772


So let it cost 5 fuel and 40MP more, remove standard shell and give the AOE of standard shell to AP shell. Its no big deal anyways. We'll see.

Nothing new, because that's almost E8 -80HP. E8 has AOE of AP shell and slighly lower pen then HVAP. Pen does not scale with vet tho.
23 Nov 2021, 20:30 PM
#108
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


The need for a price adjustment does mean that it would be op without. Pretty obvious if you ask me.

I'm not sure about the exact numbers. But I would have faith in the delevoper team if they would implement it. I do think a higher priced but more capable 76mm wouldn't be anyhow more attractive in 1vs1. Obviously it would come out later. But I do think it would be a plus for teamgames where timing and price is of less importance and sheer late game power comes in handy. Having good dps at AI and AT would somehow compensate for low armor and health.

I respect your right to your opinion but your opinion needs some consistency, unfortunately I have to point that you are contradicting your previews post.



jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2021, 13:19 PMVipper

I am not sure why you want to argue semantic here, things are pretty simple if 76mm had both HAVP and HE shell it would be simply be OP and it would be able to perform as one of the best AI/AT medium tanks in both roles.


Op is defined by performance in comparison to cost. If a unit is too cost efficient it is op. Having HE and AP shell simply has to be taken into account if you calculate cost. So as I said two times already in this thread a cost adjustment has to be made in that case.

According to your own posts, a 76mm with HE/HAVP at current price the 76mm would be too cost efficient and thus OP.

I have point out my point of view on this matter and now it is time to move on.
23 Nov 2021, 22:10 PM
#109
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Nov 2021, 20:30 PMVipper

I respect your right to your opinion but your opinion needs some consistency, unfortunately I have to point that you are contradicting your previews post.

According to your own posts, a 76mm with HE/HAVP at current price the 76mm would be too cost efficient and thus OP.

I have point out my point of view on this matter and now it is time to move on.


I do say in both posts that 76mm would be op without a price adjustment. So why I'am contradicting myself? I'm literally saying the same thing in both posts...
23 Nov 2021, 22:19 PM
#110
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



I do say in both posts that 76mm would be op without a price adjustment. So why I'am contradicting myself? I'm literally saying the same thing in both posts...

Ok then nice to see that you agree, I suggest thou that next time you should point that to Easy ♠, instead of disagreeing with my post saying that it would be OP at that price. Moving on.
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
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

481 users are online: 2 members and 479 guests
mmp, Protos Angelus
17 posts in the last 24h
43 posts in the last week
97 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44644
Welcome our newest member, felayo364
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM