Login

russian armor

Jagdpanzer IV Penetration

19 Oct 2015, 19:49 PM
#41
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Damage boost it gains with vet when shooting out of camo should also be removed. This unit will receive no buffs, it will only be nerfed from here.

Sorry OP your suggestion is off the mark on this one.


Not remove but tone down. 50/75% should be enough (160>240/280) rather what we have now with 150% (160>400).

Not sure if these people are serious, you nerf JP (removing in combat camo is fine) and then how is OKW ever supposed to do anything? They are already the worst faction and are being carried by ISG which are getting fixed next patch.


Damage modifiers should be removed or tone down drastically, specially on ballistic or explosives profiles. Look at how they tone down mark vehicle (you could argue PV command but that is more limited on it's use), For mother Russia, B4 veterancy, ambush camo bonus, bulletins, etc.

ATM there are other outliners such as FHQ.
19 Oct 2015, 22:08 PM
#42
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Oct 2015, 15:39 PMShanka


You know it's impossible to get historical tank combat, you know that would mean that at the first penetrating shell the tank is "dead" ?

I understand that you want the capacity of real tanks be transalted to the game but that impossible if we want to keep a viable gameplay for tanks


Yeah, I'm aware of that, there's a balancing factor called HP to moderate it.

The more hard hitting the gun, the more damage it does, the more pennetration it gets, the more pennetration it does.

It can be translated, by a scaled system of HP.

While I accept there can be a bit of artistic licence, I don't accept bullshit like a pack of SU-76s killing KTs from the front, which to me is bizarre. The JP4 pennetration less so, but it still can be tweaked in the right way so it can have improved pennetration without being OP.

IMO if you can make things "historically accurate" without breaking balance, do it. That would be my approach.
20 Oct 2015, 15:20 PM
#43
avatar of spectre645

Posts: 90

OP. Go to the coh2 workshop and try some of those realism mods that some authors have put up. You will soon see that coh2 is not about realism from it's core design point. Which is why those mods arent very good.

it's designed to mainly focus on infantry supported cqc fights, hence the reason why you can't zoom out too much.

The changes you suggest may seem localised to you but it also creates a precedent where you have to answer for all the other inconsistencies with the game's units.

Okw vehicles are tricky to balance since they cost a lot and aren't always the best out of the gate but compensate with excellent vet if you can get it.

Jp4 is one of the very few okw units that hasnt been buffed/nerfed since okw came out. It is the embodiment of okw design before things got all muddled up with subsequent patches.solid performing unit that becomes uber great with vet.

Personally,i would nerf its armour value since i find it bs that mediums deflect from the front at close range. Otherwise i'm perfectly fine with how it is.
21 Oct 2015, 05:11 AM
#44
avatar of hubewa

Posts: 928

OP. Go to the coh2 workshop and try some of those realism mods that some authors have put up. You will soon see that coh2 is not about realism from it's core design point. Which is why those mods arent very good.


I've played spearhead and thats a good mod :P Probably better than most realism mods.
21 Oct 2015, 05:37 AM
#45
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

I'm not asking for the change because of realism, although I do think there should be a bit of consistency.

I thought this might be a good change because the Jagdpanzer IV isn't cost-effective vs. well-armoured vehicles like the IS-2, Churchill, and maybe the Comet (haven't seen enough fights with that vehicle yet to comment). Its performance against medium tanks is fine, but its damage output against heavies is mediocre since its saddled with merely average penetration.

Again, the Jagdpanzer is (effectively) 180 fuel and uses up 14 popcap. That's a lot to pay for a vehicle that can't fight infantry and lacks the penetration to be really cost-effective against heavies.

Yes, the Jagdpanzer IV is performing fine in the current patch. It's not bad. But boosting its penetration to match the gun on the Panther definitely isn't going to make it overpowered. Nobody's going around saying the Panther is overpowered - and that vehicle is much, much better than the Jagdpanzer IV.

The Cautious Movement vet ability is another issue and, for the record, I agree that a tank shouldn't be able to turn invisible in combat.
21 Oct 2015, 05:48 AM
#46
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

Its performance against medium tanks is fine, but its damage output against heavies is mediocre since its saddled with merely average penetration.



Then, instead of better penetration, why are you not asking for a damage increase? Which I find more appropriate. To not penetrate with a hit it's one thing, and ok, it's frustrating. But to penetrate - let's say - one shot out of three and do juuust a little damage it's even more frustrating. My 2 cents.
21 Oct 2015, 06:10 AM
#47
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 05:48 AMJohnnyB


Then, instead of better penetration, why are you not asking for a damage increase? Which I find more appropriate. To not penetrate with a hit it's one thing, and ok, it's frustrating. But to penetrate - let's say - one shot out of three and do juuust a little damage it's even more frustrating. My 2 cents.
Damage increase would affect its performance vs. mediums too much. And besides, virtually every cannon in the game does 160 damage per-shot (Jackson does 200 and some of the really big guns do more), so I don't feel that needs to change.
21 Oct 2015, 06:48 AM
#48
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

I'm not asking for the change because of realism, although I do think there should be a bit of consistency.

I thought this might be a good change because the Jagdpanzer IV isn't cost-effective vs. well-armoured vehicles like the IS-2, Churchill, and maybe the Comet (haven't seen enough fights with that vehicle yet to comment). Its performance against medium tanks is fine, but its damage output against heavies is mediocre since its saddled with merely average penetration.

Again, the Jagdpanzer is (effectively) 180 fuel and uses up 14 popcap. That's a lot to pay for a vehicle that can't fight infantry and lacks the penetration to be really cost-effective against heavies.

Yes, the Jagdpanzer IV is performing fine in the current patch. It's not bad. But boosting its penetration to match the gun on the Panther definitely isn't going to make it overpowered. Nobody's going around saying the Panther is overpowered - and that vehicle is much, much better than the Jagdpanzer IV.

The Cautious Movement vet ability is another issue and, for the record, I agree that a tank shouldn't be able to turn invisible in combat.




the jpz4 is a td that reliably wreck medium tank due to high accuracy, fast reload, good armor, and high (enough) penetration. Even if its penetration is lower than the su-85, it's still high enoughto always penetrate most allied tank in the game.

Something's got to give. The jpz4 is already the perfect medium killer. If it is to be a heavy killer as well than it needs a nerf in some area.

Damage increase would affect its performance vs. mediums too much. And besides, virtually every cannon in the game does 160 damage per-shot (Jackson does 200 and some of the really big guns do more), so I don't feel that needs to change.


jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 05:48 AMJohnnyB


Then, instead of better penetration, why are you not asking for a damage increase? Which I find more appropriate. To not penetrate with a hit it's one thing, and ok, it's frustrating. But to penetrate - let's say - one shot out of three and do juuust a little damage it's even more frustrating. My 2 cents.


Both the jackson and the firefly had a crippling design flaw. The jackson have low HP and the firefly have long reload. The jackson's reload is also a bit lengthy at 7 seconds, compared to 4.75 seconds on the jpz4.

In fact the two 200 damage guns are inefficient against medium tank due to wastage. Both of those td need to spend an additional reload cycle to use a 200 damage gun against a 40 hp target. Even if there's another atg or tanks nearby, it still mean wasting a 160 damage shot on a 40 hp target.

By comparison the jpz4 gets a clean 160 damage gun that neatly kill off 640 hp tank without wastage. Its reload speed is also significantly faster as well. In fact the jpz4 is almost the perfect counter against the jackson, only beaten out by the pak.
21 Oct 2015, 07:08 AM
#49
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1



Both the jackson and the firefly had a crippling design flaw. The jackson have low HP and the firefly have long reload. The jackson's reload is also a bit lengthy at 7 seconds, compared to 4.75 seconds on the jpz4.

In fact the two 200 damage guns are inefficient against medium tank due to wastage. Both of those td need to spend an additional reload cycle to use a 200 damage gun against a 40 hp target. Even if there's another atg or tanks nearby, it still mean wasting a 160 damage shot on a 40 hp target.

By comparison the jpz4 gets a clean 160 damage gun that neatly kill off 640 hp tank without wastage. Its reload speed is also significantly faster as well. In fact the jpz4 is almost the perfect counter against the jackson, only beaten out by the pak.


True, but I find it close to futile against insane HP tanks like churchills. But you are right, it's okish, churchills' amount of health is broken in fact.
21 Oct 2015, 07:12 AM
#50
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Was just looking at some stats after a recent match - which involved a lot of Churchill tanks - and discovered that the Jagdpanzer IV has the same penetration as the StuG III. Since the Jagdpanzer IV is a rather expensive and very specialized vehicle - not to mention that it used the KwK42 L/70 gun in real life (the same gun the Panther tank used) rather than the StuG's less powerful StuK40 - I think its penetration should be boosted from 200.0/185.0/170.0 to 260.0/240.0/220.0 so that it matches the Panther tank.

The Jagdpanzer isn't a terrible vehicle right now, but it's not exactly great either and I think this change would make it a bit more appealing.


It could receive a buff indeed. It's not terrible but it's not that good either :)
21 Oct 2015, 07:36 AM
#51
avatar of JoeH

Posts: 88


Yeah and reduce it's anti infantry capabilites to the same degree too, uh?


Op suggested a buff for an Axis-unit, a no-go in this forum and especially for Propagandaminister Katitof who can not have that!
21 Oct 2015, 07:42 AM
#52
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 07:36 AMJoeH


Op suggested a buff for an Axis-unit, a no-go in this forum and especially for Propagandaminister Katitof who can not have that!

Thank you for the attention, lolcake sprout #24153.

But how about no buff for a unit that doesn't need it?


There is a single allied tank which JP4 have problems with.
Its well armored, decently mobile, got normal, turretless TD penetration, arrives the same time as lights for other armies, nothing compares to its scaling.

Simply put: don't try to fix what isn't broken.
Just because some random fanboy is obsessed with historical values of the guns, doesn't mean we all should be.

Vehicle with 200+ pen arriving at 8th minute doesn't really seem balanced to me.
21 Oct 2015, 07:58 AM
#53
avatar of Aladdin

Posts: 959

Was just looking at some stats after a recent match - which involved a lot of Churchill tanks - and discovered that the Jagdpanzer IV has the same penetration as the StuG III. Since the Jagdpanzer IV is a rather expensive and very specialized vehicle - not to mention that it used the KwK42 L/70 gun in real life (the same gun the Panther tank used) rather than the StuG's less powerful StuK40 - I think its penetration should be boosted from 200.0/185.0/170.0 to 260.0/240.0/220.0 so that it matches the Panther tank.

The Jagdpanzer isn't a terrible vehicle right now, but it's not exactly great either and I think this change would make it a bit more appealing.


That's the worst suggestion I've ever read on this forum! lol even the biggest axis fanboys would not make such a suggestion! jp4 is the best tank destroyer of the game and it doesn't need any buff what so ever :)

Since you have 250 hrs of play, I think u will change ur opinion later if u play this game a bit more :)
21 Oct 2015, 08:05 AM
#54
avatar of Iron Emperor

Posts: 1653

Churchills armor going down to 240 so it'll have a way better chance to penetrate now, although a bit higher pen would be lovely, but is probably not justifiable.
21 Oct 2015, 08:11 AM
#55
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 07:42 AMKatitof
Vehicle with 200+ pen arriving at 8th minute doesn't really seem balanced to me.
Yeah, because giving it 200+ penetration is really going to affect balance when the best armoured vehicle around at the eighth minute mark is a Stuart. It already penetrates everything at the eighth minute mark.

The Jagdpanzer IV can already reliably penetrate mediums, so - again - this change would only affect its performance against heavies.

Also, @ people saying the Jagdpanzer is the best TD in the game. It is. But it had better be when it costs as much as two StuGs, which have a much greater damage output and are better against infantry.
21 Oct 2015, 08:11 AM
#56
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

Kinda' agree, there is nothing jgdpz 4 needs, the problem isn't the jagdpanzer 4 itself. The problem is that, while trying to kill a churchill with it is like a Sisifus work but not because jagdpanzer is not ok, but because churchill is broken.

I remember the quote that Katitroll had in his signature once: "Every balance problem has its roots in OKW" or something like this. Well, now, every single balance problem has its roots in - guess what? - british faction.

I mean let's shortly compare a little these 2 factions (current british faction with OKW at the launch):

1. OP units both - check;
2. Expensive units both - check;
3. Normal fuel and amo income for british faction while fuel and amo penalty for OKW faction.
So the OPness of OKW was somewhat tempered by the penalties, but people allied fanboys were raging like no tomorrow on forums.
Now, that brits have also blatantly OP units but no penalty what so ever, this seems normal to them.

The irony at its best.
21 Oct 2015, 08:27 AM
#57
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 08:11 AMJohnnyB
Kinda' agree, there is nothing jgdpz 4 needs, the problem isn't the jagdpanzer 4 itself. The problem is that, while trying to kill a churchill with it is like a Sisifus work but not because jagdpanzer is not ok, but because churchill is broken.

I remember the quote that Katitroll had in his signature once: "Every balance problem has its roots in OKW" or something like this. Well, now, every single balance problem has its roots in - guess what? - british faction.

I mean let's shortly compare a little these 2 factions (current british faction with OKW at the launch):

1. OP units both - check;
2. Expensive units both - check;
3. Normal fuel and amo income for british faction while fuel and amo penalty for OKW faction.
So the OPness of OKW was somewhat tempered by the penalties, but people allied fanboys were raging like no tomorrow on forums.
Now, that brits have also blatantly OP units but no penalty what so ever, this seems normal to them.

The irony at its best.


After having been one of most valued Axis Fanboy of this forum, the 1st for sure since Alex isn't around. I think I'll see you as the 1st Brithater of the game. I have never see such hate of a faction before reading you.
21 Oct 2015, 08:36 AM
#58
avatar of AchtAchter

Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3

Don't change what is not broken. The unit is just fine as it is. Penetration increase would be only fine if it would be a t4 unit.
21 Oct 2015, 09:18 AM
#59
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Yeah, because giving it 200+ penetration is really going to affect balance when the best armoured vehicle around at the eighth minute mark is a Stuart. It already penetrates everything at the eighth minute mark.

Its going to affect every single armored unit with more then 160 armor for allies.

It'll make KV tanks even more irrelevant, it'll completely remove the only purpose of churchill MK VII, it'll dominish EZ-8 survivability.

It would also completely remove the need to tech above med truck vs heavy tanks.

All of that for no particular reason except "historical balance" jerking.

The Jagdpanzer IV can already reliably penetrate mediums, so - again - this change would only affect its performance against heavies.

Which creates cost effectiveness imbaalnce vs heaveis, resulting in great overperformance against them and the mandatory adjustment with either, reduction of fire rate to 7-9 seconds(to equalize its DPS with firefly who would still have much less pen) or to greatly increase its cost.

Also, @ people saying the Jagdpanzer is the best TD in the game. It is. But it had better be when it costs as much as two StuGs, which have a much greater damage output and are better against infantry.

It costs 15 fuel more then SU-85.
Its balanced as 135 fuel vehicle.
It performs as 135 fuel TD.

Again, don't try to fix what isn't broken.
21 Oct 2015, 10:12 AM
#60
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Oct 2015, 08:27 AMEsxile


After having been one of most valued Axis Fanboy of this forum, the 1st for sure since Alex isn't around. I think I'll see you as the 1st Brithater of the game. I have never see such hate of a faction before reading you.


Please correct my wrong sentences in my post you quoted. I hate british faction because it ruined the so hardly achieved balance that we had just before it stroke. It was so good, that for once in my coh2 play history I was playing an equal number of axis and allied games while having no complaint what so ever. Of course I am upset on Relic and british faction: because they ruined my (balanced) game.
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

732 users are online: 732 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48722
Welcome our newest member, asherllc
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM