Login

russian armor

Brit tank scatter

19 Jul 2018, 16:43 PM
#61
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Small thing but worth pointing out: the comet always has access to blitz and benefits from tracking as well, so IT DOES have those advantages over the panther. It was over nerfed but that's relics jam. Make a broken unit to sell then nerf it beyond belief. I mean who in their right mind says "let's give it WP, that out ranges AT guns and unlike the other WP in the game actually kills models instead of leaving them at 1hp. That's balanced right?"
20 Jul 2018, 01:11 AM
#62
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

Small thing but worth pointing out: the comet always has access to blitz and benefits from tracking as well, so IT DOES have those advantages over the panther. It was over nerfed but that's relics jam. Make a broken unit to sell then nerf it beyond belief. I mean who in their right mind says "let's give it WP, that out ranges AT guns and unlike the other WP in the game actually kills models instead of leaving them at 1hp. That's balanced right?"


better reload

lower pop.

20 Jul 2018, 06:54 AM
#63
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

Small thing but worth pointing out: the comet always has access to blitz and benefits from tracking as well, so IT DOES have those advantages over the panther. It was over nerfed but that's relics jam. Make a broken unit to sell then nerf it beyond belief. I mean who in their right mind says "let's give it WP, that out ranges AT guns and unlike the other WP in the game actually kills models instead of leaving them at 1hp. That's balanced right?"


The Comet used to be godlike, just like a lot of newly introduced units, but what it is now is a pile of garbage. The 'novel features' that the Comet has does not justify the resource and CP cost nor the utterly worthless vet.

I don't consider Comet's warspeed an advantage over Panther as the Panther does get combat blitz, albeit at vet 1.

I haven't used hammer doctrine in ages, so I can't provide a comment about tracking and how useful it really is.

WP shell used to be insanely OP, but they got nerfed and now its just ok. Its cheap to use but its a double edged sword, as while it does damage the squad its fired at, it also provides smoke cover for that squad which makes it difficult to actually kill the squad or any models for that matter. Its basically forces a squad to retreat without loses. Its also been fixed to behave like normal WP, so reduces the model's to 1 hp, however a single WP shell only reduces the health to about 1/5 health due to a very short DOT duration (I suspect).
IE a WP shell from a Comet is not nearly as bad as WP from other sources.

With the Bren gun and Centuar nerf, the Brits do need a vehicle with decent AI but the Comet can't even outperform a Panther in that regard - which is just a sad state of affairs.
20 Jul 2018, 09:00 AM
#64
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1

...
With the Bren gun and Centuar nerf, the Brits do need a vehicle with decent AI but the Comet can't even outperform a Panther in that regard - which is just a sad state of affairs.

Actually Centaur remains one of the most cost efficient AI tanks.
20 Jul 2018, 09:12 AM
#65
avatar of August1996

Posts: 223

Actually I would advocate for giving Brits snares first to fix them being bullied by literally any LV. Tank wise the Comet is pretty bad but I would like to give Brits snares first and see how the faction fares. Currently tank battles are pretty one sided as Germans can chase with no worry of snares(mines withholding) but cannot chase other faction tanks when Cons/Rifles are available to snare.
20 Jul 2018, 09:42 AM
#66
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 09:00 AMVipper

Actually Centaur remains one of the most cost efficient AI tanks.


Centaur is still decent and a must have for every game but not nearly as terrifying as the Brumbar.

It would be interesting to test the AI performance of Centaur against Ostwind and other dedicated AI platforms.
20 Jul 2018, 09:47 AM
#67
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1



Centaur is still decent and a must have for every game but not nearly as terrifying as the Brumbar.

It would be interesting to test the AI performance of Centaur against Ostwind and other dedicated AI platforms.

Centaur is superior to Ostwind and not just damage, the units has high armor and small size (the stats of a pre-nerfed Cromwell if I remember correctly).

The cover penalties of the unit are a bit low.

Brumbar is not in the same league as Centaur and delivers damage in different way so they should not really be compared.

Finally Centaur damage vs light vehicles should have penalties the same way Luch has since it can destroy them in seconds.
20 Jul 2018, 09:52 AM
#68
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 09:47 AMVipper

Centaur is superior to Ostwind and not just damage, the units has high armor and small size (the stats of a pre-nerfed Cromwell if I remember correctly).

Brumbar is not in the same league as Centaur and delivers damage in different way so they should not really be compared.

Finally Centaur damage vs light vehicles should have penalties the same way Luch has since it can destroy them in seconds.


What are the numbers for the armour and size of the Centaur and Ostwind?

I can't find an up-to-date source for stats theses days
20 Jul 2018, 09:56 AM
#69
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1



What are the numbers for the armour and size of the Centaur and Ostwind?

I can't find an up-to-date source for stats theses days

you can find them in cruzz's calculator maybe in firesparks file also.

ostwind
Target size: 22 Sight: 35 Speed: 6.3 Accel: 2.1 Rotate: 32 Armor: 110/55 Health: 640

Centaur
Target size: 18 Sight: 35 Speed: 5.2 Accel: 1.8 Rotate: 28 Armor: 160/80 Health: 640

The combination of "medium armor" and small size and lots of AI make very few unit good in countering the Centaur.
20 Jul 2018, 09:59 AM
#70
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 09:56 AMVipper

you can find them in cruzz's calculator maybe in firesparks file also.

ostwind
Target size: 22 Sight: 35 Speed: 6.3 Accel: 2.1 Rotate: 32 Armor: 110/55 Health: 640

Centaur
Target size: 18 Sight: 35 Speed: 5.2 Accel: 1.8 Rotate: 28 Armor: 160/80 Health: 640

The combination of "medium armor" and small size and lots of AI make very few unit good in countering the Centaur.


Thanks for that!
20 Jul 2018, 10:04 AM
#71
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1



Thanks for that!

You are welcomed. The forums should be a place where we can all learn something (instead of trying to "bash noobs").
20 Jul 2018, 10:17 AM
#72
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 10:04 AMVipper

You are welcomed. The forums should be a place where people can learn something (instead of trying to "bash noobs").


Hope springs eternal!
20 Jul 2018, 12:31 PM
#73
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 09:00 AMVipper

Actually Centaur remains one of the most cost efficient AI tanks.

You need to play with the unit, because something tells me you have not seen it in a single game post nerfs and instead rely exclusively on stat sheets. Again.

Its better AI then cromwell, but again, what isn't?
20 Jul 2018, 12:47 PM
#74
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13290 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 12:31 PMKatitof

You need to play with the unit, because something tells me you have not seen it in a single game post nerfs and instead rely exclusively on stat sheets. Again.

Its better AI then cromwell, but again, what isn't?

And once more the voices "telling" you things are wrong. I would suggest that you stop listening to them.

I have used the unit and I have played against the unit post patch, it remains a very cost efficient AI medium tanks.

You have not backed up your claim that Centaur "has not seen in single game post patch" in anyway, it just you personal opinion presented as a fact, when it simply wrong (in other words it is your usual BS). The numbers tell quite a different story. In GCS2 Centaur was used in 28% of the UKF of games and it was actually the second most frequently used tank in a game.

For comparison reason, Ostwind was only used in 5% of the Ostheer and below 1% for OKW making far less rare vehicle than Centaur.

The simple fact remain that Centaur is cost efficient unit that is used often.

Once more I have suggest to you to stop obsessing with what I do or not do and stop trying to turn every thread into a personal flame war.

Finally this thread is about Brit tank scatter so I would also suggest that if you want to debate the centaur or any other personal issue you might have, to do it in another thread.

Have a nice day.
20 Jul 2018, 16:13 PM
#75
avatar of FelixTHM

Posts: 503 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 12:31 PMKatitof

You need to play with the unit, because something tells me you have not seen it in a single game post nerfs and instead rely exclusively on stat sheets. Again.

Its better AI then cromwell, but again, what isn't?




It's still very good. It's just the comparison effect, when a wipe-a-squad-instantly unit becomes a very good unit, the nerf is very noticeable.

The faction not having indirect fire and snares make it hard for the faction - just like it always has. You can't rely on ridiculous Centaurs and IS terminators anymore, and that's a good thing. I don't think that's healthy faction design.

I would give Brits an ISG equivalent, the ability to build AT boys non-doctrinally, remove emplacements, and call it a day.
20 Jul 2018, 16:20 PM
#76
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
The centaur is hands down better than the Ostwind due to it's better damage profile as it doesn't need the axis squads to bunch up to get decent damage and I believe it's still better on the move, the armor is SIGNIFICANTLY better and it is no longer a slow tank.

BTW Katitof, when was the last time u won a debate?
20 Jul 2018, 19:06 PM
#77
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Alright lads keep it productive.
20 Jul 2018, 19:45 PM
#78
avatar of Mongal

Posts: 102

The centaur is hands down better than the Ostwind due to it's better damage profile as it doesn't need the axis squads to bunch up to get decent damage and I believe it's still better on the move, the armor is SIGNIFICANTLY better and it is no longer a slow tank.

BTW Katitof, when was the last time u won a debate?


From my experience the centaur seems to kill 1 model every couple of bursts unless the squad is low health. The vet 1 ability is really good if you dont hit retreat. In larger team game you dont see the ostwind as most Ost players rush t4 and the brumbar which is devestating for a stock unit.

I guess it would be pretty dumb if the ostwind and brumbar were better than the centaur. The centaur should be somewhere in between the two of them.
20 Jul 2018, 23:20 PM
#79
avatar of Mongal

Posts: 102

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2018, 12:47 PMVipper

And once more the voices "telling" you things are wrong. I would suggest that you stop listening to them.

I have used the unit and I have played against the unit post patch, it remains a very cost efficient AI medium tanks.

You have not backed up your claim that Centaur "has not seen in single game post patch" in anyway, it just you personal opinion presented as a fact, when it simply wrong (in other words it is your usual BS). The numbers tell quite a different story. In GCS2 Centaur was used in 28% of the UKF of games and it was actually the second most frequently used tank in a game.

For comparison reason, Ostwind was only used in 5% of the Ostheer and below 1% for OKW making far less rare vehicle than Centaur.

The simple fact remain that Centaur is cost efficient unit that is used often.

Once more I have suggest to you to stop obsessing with what I do or not do and stop trying to turn every thread into a personal flame war.

Finally this thread is about Brit tank scatter so I would also suggest that if you want to debate the centaur or any other personal issue you might have, to do it in another thread.

Have a nice day.


Who cares if the centaur was used in 28% of the matches UKF played in GCS2. Considering UKF lost over 80% of the games in GSC2 your logic is completely flawed.

UKF win raito is 2:13. As you said the numbers tells quite a different story indeed.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/81188/gcs2-citadel-faction-win-rate
20 Jul 2018, 23:44 PM
#80
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

How did we get onto the centaur anyways?
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 shadics ARG.
  • U.S. Forces flag TüMe
  • Ostheer flag The101stAirBorne
  • Ostheer flag Clororaa
uploaded by TüMe

Board Info

241 users are online: 1 member and 240 guests
jamesjamozo
17 posts in the last 24h
107 posts in the last week
491 posts in the last month
Registered members: 36501
Welcome our newest member, meliodas7
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM