Profile of SkysTheLimit

Someone may have already made this point, as I have only skimmed this thread, but the side-techs that the allies need for their nades and such isn't always a bad thing. Soviets are the easiest example but getting molotov tech after you opened with say 3-4 cons means you'll have good garrison clearing long before anyone can usually afford a flamethrower.

With the Brits there's no argument. Their side-techs are practically never a vice, as most of them give you access to very unique and powerful options. They don't even need their grenades but now that they're only 10 fuel I can't imagine a reason not to get them.

"I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at."
"Much worse might be an exaggeration"

Of course you weren't agreeing when you said jp4 has an edge against basically everything but heavies and that jp4 being much better may be an exaggeration

Yeah of course.
Backpedaling against your own previous posts followed by a cheap get away seems the best solution.
Going on would actually mean you have to go through the process of debeating against legit arguments taking the discussion outside the "muh armor and target size advantage" (kinda ironical since you were crying over Vipper focus on TTK and penetration) and bring arguments on your side, and you definetly seem unable to do it (with me or Vipper).

Hell you can't even google basic stuff and start a post without an ad hom.. i was definetly asking too much..

Kinda sad how happy you get from winning arguments with strangers online. Can't even post without taunting. I can backpedal AND choose not to waste my time with the forum troll. Too things can be true at once. Sayonara

It got pulled from 2v2 automatch so I haven't played it since the patch. IMO it was already an unbalanced map, the south side was way easier than the top.

Actually it is also about time to kill (T.T.K.) since you clearly wrote that

It's also about? What does that even mean? To me they are one in the same. I certainly said TTK was stupid, but the main point is that the results of a "test" with two units in a vacuum cannot be helpfully applied to a balance discussion without a whole lot of context. Your initial post included nothing but TTK.

Now TTK is used for ballistic weapons the same way DPS is used as for small arms fire.

And when was the last time you compared two units on dps alone? Most people calculate dps with a standard target size. You choose 2 different arbitrary targets and posted the the different times. The SU85 fights a KT astronomically more often than the Jp4 fights an IS2. OKW happens to have the panther to fight heavies.

So it is personal?

Only in this case the data does not come from me, I am only using them. They come from Mr.Smith if you do no not agree with his method feel free to debate the issue with him.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/56469/tank-destroyer-time-to-kill-stats

The numbers come from MR Smith. He did not select the Su85 vs KT and Tiger to compare to Jp4 vs IS2, he just posted a table full of numbers. I'd be willing to bet he looks at a great deal more than TTK when balancing these units.

There is little point in playing word games.

Then don't put words in "quotes" when it didn't say them? That's an easy fix.

ferwiner wrote:

To which I responded that SU-85 is not "much worse"(or that JP is "far superior" than SU-85).

So do you agree with ferwiner that Su-85 is much worse than JP or not and you arguing with me is simply personal?

I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at because of its survivability. Much worse might be an exaggeration, but I think your comparison completely ignores the entire context of the actual game these units are a part of. The actual topic here is whether or not OKW needs more infantry AT. My point is no, because they already have more vehicle AT options than everyone else.

JP has a penetration 200/185/170
and
Su-85 has penetration of 240/230/220

In other word SU-85 has more penetration far than JP has close.

Good for the Su85, how many allied factions have the Panther stock? All those stock units the allies have with 200+ armor (brits are the only ones) must give the Jp4 such a headache.

(It also gets more accuracy and better reload modifiers than the JP)

No it does not. The Jp4 gets more accuracy (+35% total from vets 2 and 4) and more reload (-25% total from vets 3 and 4). It also gets 800 health at vet 2, only further separating its survivability from the Su85.

Armour hardly matters since a) allied at has high pen anyways, b) it only really counts vs mediums and if the jp4 is getting hit by those, you've already made a mistake and will soon be out maneuvered.

I don't agree entirely there. So many people say that taking a single shot as a TD is a "mistake" when half the time you need to do it to get a shot off on another target. Having one volks squad in the area means you can easily get the jp4 away by snaring the medium if its rushes.

Same goes for Jackson or SU85, but the Jp4 has that extra protection. Having stealth at all is still nice, and it gets 800 health at vet 2 as well. It has plenty of its own advantages.

And while I'm ranting, they nerfed it's vet 5 so that it's ambush (a one time) bonus only does 200 damage, which is incredibly insignificant. Compare that to the m36s hvap which does bonus damage and pen and the firefly's vet 3 which is perminant.

It's old ambush damage was OP (400?), but I agree 100% the current is lackluster. Should at least have a pen buff too on ambush if not more damage too.