Login

russian armor

su-85 needs attention.

2 Aug 2014, 00:16 AM
#21
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

Last few days of OP Katyusha actually shown that SU-85 is still fairly reliable at destroying other tanks.
Too bad everyone will go back to call ins as it's easier.

I don't think there is anything wrong with Soviet T4, well maybe SU-76 but I don't use it so don't know, it's just call ins are far better option again since Katyusha is not broken and it won't win you games single handed anymore.
2 Aug 2014, 00:34 AM
#22
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

Dunno. Yes, the Su 85 appears questionable at first: It is effectively useless against infantry, it is relatively fragile, and it requires a great deal of discipline and savoir faire. On close maps like Stalingrad it is borderline useless. Then again, once the Su 85 hits vet 2 it receives an ROF/accuracy bonus that makes it highly dangerous to every piece of armour in the German arsenal save the Elefant/Jagdtiger and enables it to deter basically any armour push that is unsupported by At guns. A Tiger for example won't ever catch up with it given you reverse in time, and even at max range you will penetrate with almost 2 out of 3 shots. In summary it is a niche unit - and it will stay one unless its design is fundamentally altered - but it clearly has its strenghts.
I think overall a bit of a decrease in the fuel price and an increase of its rotation speed would be in order.
2 Aug 2014, 01:31 AM
#23
avatar of DarthBong420

Posts: 381

Dunno. Yes, the Su 85 appears questionable at first: It is effectively useless against infantry, it is relatively fragile, and it requires a great deal of discipline and savoir faire. On close maps like Stalingrad it is borderline useless. Then again, once the Su 85 hits vet 2 it receives an ROF/accuracy bonus that makes it highly dangerous to every piece of armour in the German arsenal save the Elefant/Jagdtiger and enables it to deter basically any armour push that is unsupported by At guns. A Tiger for example won't ever catch up with it given you reverse in time, and even at max range you will penetrate with almost 2 out of 3 shots. In summary it is a niche unit - and it will stay one unless its design is fundamentally altered - but it clearly has its strenghts.
I think overall a bit of a decrease in the fuel price and an increase of its rotation speed would be in order.

+1 this is pretty much what i think of su. a small decrease in price is all i think it needs.
2 Aug 2014, 02:59 AM
#24
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

I am living in a fantasy land but I also would like to see the T70 and SU-76 swapped.
2 Aug 2014, 04:18 AM
#25
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

[code][/code]SU-85 was fine until Blitzkrieg was put back into the game, now the SU-85, a dedicated T4 immobile tank destroyer can be easily countered by an all purpose medium tank when it pops Blitzkrieg. It's ridiculous how all German tanks are strong against tanks and infantry evenly, yet the dedicated T4 immobile Soviet Tank Destroyer is barely good against tanks. It's the reason why Soviet is all about commander specific call-ins.

And the old arguement of "Just use supporting AT" doesn't work because AT grenades are too inconsistent and don't penetrate anything reliably enough, and button is a Commander specific ability that is instantly negated by pressing the smoke button which costs less than button.

To top it off Paks counter SU-85's so much harder than Pak's counter P4's, playing with the SU-85 is so rediculously hard, very unforgiving and not very rewarding since there's no kill potential since they can't chase and one very small error and you lose the tank. I think it really needs its front armour back more than anything else, so a Panzer IV and every thing else doesn't penetrate every single shot to the front armour.
2 Aug 2014, 04:19 AM
#26
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

I am living in a fantasy land but I also would like to see the T70 and SU-76 swapped.


I would use both a lot more if it were that way. I see zero reasons why this would be more bad than good.
2 Aug 2014, 04:31 AM
#27
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Just remove the movement penalty on focus forward, and it'll be fine.
2 Aug 2014, 04:57 AM
#28
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

Armour and Mobility should be inversely proportional in a Tank Destroyer.
If it lacks armour, it should have great mobility: Jackson
If it lacks mobility, it should have good armour: Jadgpanzer, Stug

Currently, SU85 doesn't have neither armour nor mobility. It only has a good shoot range which is the same role that normal ATguns occupy.

Blitzkrieg and smoke just worsens the situation for SU85, making it easy to flank and unable to pursue damaged enemy tanks.

Decreasing its cost is not a solution, because currently SU85 can't do better than a ZiS. It needs a big buff in mobility or armour.

And I join the petition to swap T70 and SU86. And even so, their cost should be revised as both units come too late to be effective.
2 Aug 2014, 05:19 AM
#29
avatar of Abdul

Posts: 896

I think of t4 in general and the su85 especially as defensive units. It's not strange that most soviet player dont like them because most favor offensive play.
2 Aug 2014, 06:24 AM
#30
avatar of _underscore
Donator 33

Posts: 322

I don't have an opinion on the unit itself, but I notice they get used more often in large team games. Similarly the Panther has a thread going at the moment but it's also already a popular choice in 4v4.

Unless there are plans to switch to a different costing system for team games I guess this means both units are roughly in a good place at the moment, overall... ?
2 Aug 2014, 08:42 AM
#31
avatar of ofield

Posts: 420

Su85 is not that much worse than the m36.

M36:

Hitpoints:
480.0
Armor:
130.0
Rear armor:
60.0
Max speed:
6.5
Pop:
14.0
Cost time:
90.0
Cost manpower:
350.0
Cost fuel:
125.0

Accuracy far:
0.035
Accuracy near:
0.05
Penetration:
200.0/180.0/160.0
Damage:
240
Average Reload time.
5.5 secs
DPS:
43

SU85:

Hitpoints:
640.0
Armor:
140.0
Rear armor:
70.0
Max speed:
5.7
Pop:
12.0
Cost time:
50.0
Cost manpower:
340.0
Cost fuel:
120.0

Accuracy far:
0.025
Accuracy near:
0.05
Penetration:
200.0/190.0/180.0
Damage:
160
Average Reload Time:
4 secs
DPS:
40

In my opinion the only real downside of the SU85 is the lack of the turret.

Overall the the DP/S is almost the same, the Jackson just trades Health for mobility.
Keep in mind that the m36, due to its low HP, gets knocked out by a single german Teller Mine.
2 Aug 2014, 10:07 AM
#32
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

I am living in a fantasy land but I also would like to see the T70 and SU-76 swapped.



thiss pleaseeeeeeeeee.
2 Aug 2014, 10:55 AM
#33
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658

T70 and Su76 swapping would be a good idea. It makes no sense making a T70 when a T34 is like 30 fuel more and is a better choice. Also T3 has access to the infantry Halftrack as well so having all Anti Infantry options together is not really a good idea.
2 Aug 2014, 11:01 AM
#34
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

I am living in a fantasy land but I also would like to see the T70 and SU-76 swapped.


So much this.
2 Aug 2014, 11:15 AM
#35
avatar of Sarantini
Honorary Member Badge
Donator 22

Posts: 2181

man t70 + su85 and su76+t34 would make such nice combinations.
Would be a very good change. At least test it in th eBEta
2 Aug 2014, 11:15 AM
#36
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

Please do swap the t-70 with an su-76
2 Aug 2014, 11:24 AM
#37
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1

While swapping SU76 and T70 seems like a good idea. The question is will Relic do it? I can't see Relic swapping them in the near future although they swapped Tiger Ace for King Tiger in COH1 before.
2 Aug 2014, 11:37 AM
#38
avatar of PanzerErotica

Posts: 135

I always find it funny how dedicated tank destroyer like su85 has to reverse away from charging enemy medium tank to be able to kill it. It is quite sad and makes no sense. I would rather like su85 having more stopping power, then maybe moving accuracy penalty or only make it able to shoot when stationary or something. My point is, if p4 and su85 meet each other somewhere, it is p4 who should be reversing, right?
2 Aug 2014, 11:46 AM
#39
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

I always find it funny how dedicated tank destroyer like su85 has to reverse away from charging enemy medium tank to be able to kill it. It is quite sad and makes no sense. I would rather like su85 having more stopping power, then maybe moving accuracy penalty or only make it able to shoot when stationary or something. My point is, if p4 and su85 meet each other somewhere, it is p4 who should be reversing, right?

Huh? No, in the context of Coh2 that makes perfect sense. If you wanna kill the SU 85 with a PIV, you ideally want to get up close and personal in order to circlestrafe it - utilizing whatever terrain features and shot/sightblockers available. If the opportunity does not present itself or you don't want to commit your P IV you have to run anyways - the SU outranges you and can push you across the map as long as it is open. Pretty straigthforward if you ask me. In a sterile environment, 1v1 meeting engagement, the SU is going to win the fight very consistently.
2 Aug 2014, 12:28 PM
#40
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

[code][/code]SU-85 was fine until Blitzkrieg was put back into the game, now the SU-85, a dedicated T4 immobile tank destroyer can be easily countered by an all purpose medium tank when it pops Blitzkrieg.


I'm still in favour of replaceing Blitzkrieg with a "Sight Main Gun" type ability that gives bonus sight and gun range (at the cost of mobility?).
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

312 users are online: 1 member and 311 guests
shinasukac
1 post in the last 24h
17 posts in the last week
133 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45019
Welcome our newest member, dsers
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM