Login

russian armor

OKW armors cost should be reverted

23 Jun 2016, 10:46 AM
#21
avatar of Carlos Danger

Posts: 362

Eh, Panzer IV is fine-ish I think. Jagdpanzer IV and Panther are good units in a bubble but don't really have much of an impact on the battlefield. I mean, yeah, a Panther beats a Pershing, but I think the arrival of a Pershing has a more significant impact on the dynamics of a match. The Jagdpanzer, for instance, is basically useless in any offensive context.

Also, I think Katitof is right about OKW being intended to have a smaller armour presence than other factions, although that's 2014 logic and I don't know if it holds true any longer.
23 Jun 2016, 10:59 AM
#22
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Eh, Panzer IV is fine-ish I think. Jagdpanzer IV and Panther are good units in a bubble but don't really have much of an impact on the battlefield. I mean, yeah, a Panther beats a Pershing, but I think the arrival of a Pershing has a more significant impact on the dynamics of a match. The Jagdpanzer, for instance, is basically useless in any offensive context.

Also, I think Katitof is right about OKW being intended to have a smaller armour presence than other factions, although that's 2014 logic and I don't know if it holds true any longer.


The powerful units Katikof is talking about have long since been nerfed. Now that OKW needs to spend 70 fuel to even get healing (truck, truck setup, side upgrade), a 150 fuel medium tank is a bit of a high price if you ask me. The original 135-140 would be better.
23 Jun 2016, 11:07 AM
#23
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665

People bring in arguments that no longer apply.

The reason the cost was increase was because volks shrek + quick teching nullified allied armour. the shrek is gone and the ostheer has even a quicker tech then the okw.

Vet 4 and 5 is impossible to attain in normal situations. The so called superiority of these units is minor and not worth the rather massive fuel increase.

People that say that the okw should have less armour presence because they are biased as shit , then i will say let the old obers return. the same obers that could smash 3 allied squads single handedly.

Their is no good reason for the okw to have more expensive stuff then the ostheer.
23 Jun 2016, 11:40 AM
#24
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 10:35 AMKatitof

And 135 fuel SU-85 loses to 90 fuel StuG.


If you're retarded that is. Your SU-85 has significantly more range and can spot for itself. If you manage to lose that against a StuG, I wouldn't be surprised if you had "failed" as the result of an IQ check...

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 10:35 AMKatitof

You can't look at OKW med and heavy armor costs the same way as you can at other factions, OKW was supposed to have lesser armor presence in comparison to other armies, the extra 25 fuel on T4 and call-ins was to keep that goal as december revamp have proved that OKW without that pumps armor way too fast.


I don't know if you realised that, but those changes did happen a lot earlier than December. Not to mention that some of them were outright stupid, considering the placement of the Jagdpanzer IV/70. Whoever thought that to be a good idea probably still believes that the T-70 placement in the Soviet tech-tree is the smartest thing since sliced bread.

Now, I don't think that OKW tanks need reduced fuel costs (they are pretty fine for the most part), but I think Relic needs to take a minute and look at what comes out when from which faction. That may not result in reduced costs for the OKW, but it will surely and finally bring Brits en par with all the other factions, who right now enjoy everything for cheaper than any equivalent on the field, while still having an edge somehow.
23 Jun 2016, 12:41 PM
#26
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 665

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 11:52 AMKatitof



READ FUCKING PATCH NOTES.
Resource revamp removed penalties, it proved to be batshit OP in december and 25 fuel cost was added for med stock armor. Again, get your facts straight, because you're talking out of your ass again.
And yeah, I do indeed wonder, who in his right mind would prevent one of strongest TDs in game to arrive in 8th minute of the game, delaying it was indeed retarded move :snfBarton:



But this situation is no longer relevant so why bring it up?
23 Jun 2016, 13:43 PM
#27
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13674 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 12:41 PMZyllen


But this situation is no longer relevant so why bring it up?


Why you think so?

Resources penalties are back in the game now? :snfBarton:

You can pump the armor exactly as fast as you could before the patch, December proved that without that extra 25 fuel OKW armor rushes are op.

Now, you have actual CHOICE, you either rush for med armor or progress more slowly and steadily, with side upgrades, like UKF for example.
23 Jun 2016, 14:37 PM
#28
avatar of $nuffy

Posts: 129

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 11:52 AMKatitof

Ok, so 10 range advantage for allied unit is "significantly more range" but when we're talking panther or stug vs mediums its suddenly "barely more range". Got it.

You're an idiot if you believe you can't lose 85 to stug now that 85 got 50% slower RoF.
You can bumrush 85 and destroy it with stug, you don't need extra sight for that.
For the same reason Jackson as well as Firefly lose to Stug.

Get yourself an IQ check instead and couple it with some facts check.




lol someone got all stressed up on the IQ check remark !? jackitoff is there a personal story behind this ? ;) or you just lost dozen of new SU's to the sinister Stug predator and there fore you're so touchy ? :lolol: I see that your forumwars frustration is gettin' the best of you, the same as my own gameplay woes go wrecking my nerves, so maybe we're not so different afterall, you in your 10K ultimate bias hub, and me in my okw broken bubble ? :wub:

p.s. yeah, 10 range is very significant, you'd actually know that, if you've seen the gui, the map and the units themself outside of the imaginery forum/number margins.
23 Jun 2016, 14:51 PM
#29
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13674 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 14:37 PM$nuffy


lol someone got all stressed up on the IQ check remark !? jackitoff is there a personal story behind this ? ;) or you just lost dozen of new SU's to the sinister Stug predator and there fore you're so touchy ?

I'm getting worked up over ignorance and stupidity of certain posters, insults directed at me, well, I don't give a shit(no one really should), but ignorance and stupidity...

:lolol: I see that your forumwars frustration is gettin' the best of you, the same as my own gameplay woes go wrecking my nerves, so maybe we're not so different afterall, you in your 10K ultimate bias hub, and me in my okw broken bubble ? :wub:

Believe me, we are.
I have a very blunt way of posting, I'm not half as angry as I seem.
Its the forums that bring out my intolerant inner kluge as well as the tone of someone addressing me will be reflected in my reply. You can be most clueless, fanboying nublet around, but as long as you're not going personal and aren't completely ignorant, neither will I.

p.s. yeah, 10 range is very significant, you'd actually know that, if you've seen the gui, the map and the units themself outside of the imaginery forum/number margins.

So is the 50% longer reload.

If StuG can close this gap, which he will if SU is on spotting, then SU won't stand a chance.
Just because unit of same role is cheaper, does not mean it won't perform well as a counter to the more expensive and potentially stronger unit.

The only TD that actually might beat StuG on allied side is the USF one and exclusively due to mobility.
In slugfests, StuG beats them all. RoF>penetration more often then you thing, for this reason we had panthers losing(sometimes) to old SU-85 in slugfest.

Hell, certain top 50 player lost multiple SU-85s to StuGs last night during a single game, because the range advantage isn't really as significant as people think it is and RoF difference is much more influential on this MU.
23 Jun 2016, 15:08 PM
#30
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 2

Katitof is known as a reckless forumwarrior with, probably, highest [forum posts]/[games played] ratio among all living beings, but at least he does it with style :romeoPro:
23 Jun 2016, 15:16 PM
#31
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4315 | Subs: 7



OKW p4 is better than ost, therefore it costs more

OKW panther is better than ost, therefore it costs more

OKW p4 is significantly better than the t-34/76


and also get 5 levels of veterancy and that allow mid game armor to GREATLY scale into lategame ;)
23 Jun 2016, 15:20 PM
#32
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1072

Please... don´t even bother answering Katitofs posts. This draws too much attention to his bullshit. You can´t argue with him at all. Ignore him and he will go away... or spread more of his shit like a tumor. Who knows? I´m done with the insults in the majority of his posts.
23 Jun 2016, 15:33 PM
#33
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 18

In order to compare P4 and P5 between OST and OKW, you need to have a look at all following aspects:
- Base stats of P4, P5 (stat.coh2.hu is your friend)
- Veterancy of P4, P5 (coh2.org is your friend)
- The DPS of MGs mounted on these vehicles (Firesparks' DPS spreadsheet is your friend)
- The worlds-apart differences between OST and OKW combat blitz / blitzkrieg (coh2.org ability guide is your friend)

Now, if I wanted to argument that P4 and P5 price should change I would go as following:
- I would make a comparison to OSTheer equivalents
- If Ostheer vehicles are inefficient for their cost I would state that
- I would also state what I would consider a fair cost for OST vehicles*

* This part is crucial if you want to engage in a constructive conversation. Otherwise be prepared for a dead-end "yes it is!", "no it isn't" kind of argumentation.

Now, once you have set the "fair-OST price aside", you can go ahead and propose modifications.

My personal take:
- OKW Combat Blitz should be taken down a peg (either lose received accuracy or offensive accuracy. Panther should also lose some of the speed bonus to be in-line with other abilities)
- Fuel price can definitely go down
- MP price and popcap should be higher than the "fair-price" OSTheer versions (OKW versions are more versatile).
- We should either adjust the MP-to-FU ratio for either all OKW vehicles or no OKW vehicles

But let's wait a week or two until after the bugs settle and everyone has gathered more experience playing OKW 3.0.
23 Jun 2016, 15:56 PM
#34
avatar of empyriumm

Posts: 51

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 11:52 AMKatitof


First medium tank hits the field in relatively THE SAME time for every army.


Cromwell says hi !
23 Jun 2016, 16:27 PM
#35
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13674 | Subs: 7



Cromwell says hi !

If you survive without bofors or AEC or at least one of HQ upgrades you mean?
23 Jun 2016, 17:24 PM
#36
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 6241 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 16:27 PMKatitof

If you survive without bofors or AEC or at least one of HQ upgrades you mean?


Totally possible on 2v2 and up, specially if paired with USF.

Ontopic: Smith summarize it pretty well. I'll be happier on a world on which i have a JPIV on either Mech or Medic HQ but i don't think they are performing bad for cost. If you want them cheaper, then just play OH cause bullshit abilities (combat blitz and phasing shield) and veterancy is not going away*

23 Jun 2016, 17:26 PM
#37
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 10:35 AMKatitof

And 135 fuel SU-85 loses to 90 fuel StuG.


Not entirely true. SU-85s have range and can self spot. That can just as easily translate to an SU-85 killing a StuG and taking 0 damage.

230 fuel Pershing loses to 175/200 fuel panther.


This isn't exactly a good thing. The Pershing has been a lame duck since it was implemented. It's one of, if not the, least cost efficient tank for fighting other tanks. But at least it hurts infantry well and it's still got the range and damage per shot. I don't think that reality gives much weight to the argument.

AEC loses to a pair of 222, which cost over 50% less fuel and similar menpower.


The 222s are problematic indeed. They got too much health for also getting their 2mm gun. And again, this is a problem in and of itself, which doesn't lend itself well to addressing why or why not OKW fuel costs could/should be adjusted.

Your point?


I think it is that there's been plenty of adjustments to OKW that their unit costs might warrant a looking at. I think it is a valid point, at least as far as the P4 is concerned. However, it's also worth knowing that all the factions could use a bit of continued adjustments given the amount and kinds of changes this game as seen. (I'm looking at you Ostheer.)
23 Jun 2016, 17:33 PM
#38
avatar of GenObi

Posts: 522

Okay..... You relize the previous prices where reflected of the low income OKW and the new prices are for full resources OKW
23 Jun 2016, 18:06 PM
#39
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 6241 | Subs: 1

Not entirely true. SU-85s have range and can self spot. That can just as easily translate to an SU-85 killing a StuG and taking 0 damage.

If it can self spot, it can't outpace a Stug. Even if both units have sight on each other, the Stug is still faster. You can win if you have LOS AND you back up prior to the Stug starts moving up. Overall it's a match up decided by RNG mostly (whoever miss probably losses).

Penetration means shit, and hits to kill are equal although the Stug has less health. On the same time it takes for the Su85 to do 4 reloads, a Stug makes 5. I'll gladly trade a Stug for an Su85. Most people are scared to do that kind of push.
Any kind of veterancy puts the edge on the Stug (TWP, vet2 no longer offers RoF for Su85 and it does on the Stug, vet3 RoF vet is higher on the Stug).
23 Jun 2016, 20:42 PM
#40
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 961 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 07:48 AMatouba


OKW p4 has the same stats with the ost one except the front armor. 235 vs 180.But 150 fuel still is too much for a medium tank.Especially when relic decrease the fuel cost of the Churchill.The churchill has 1400HP 290 front armor but only cost 160 fuel. 1400VS 640 HP!

The OKW panther has the very same stats with the ost one except small accurate.


235 vs 180 is a pretty significant difference.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
World Champ '19 - GRAND FINALS!
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Soviets flag Lucky - Cable Sup-port
  • Soviets flag T.R. Olvadi
  • Ostheer flag ZodiAK!
  • Oberkommando West flag CrossFire
uploaded by Olvadi

Board Info

225 users are online: 5 members and 220 guests
bulatcr, Ritter, ddd, Vipper, Stug life
135 posts in the last 24h
1571 posts in the last week
7291 posts in the last month
Registered members: 65134
Welcome our newest member, byrontmyers
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM