Profile of Vipper

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

General Information


Thread: OST penetration poll17 Oct 2019, 17:52 PM This is a troll thread/pole made to troll a specific user. One should take it seriously. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 17:47 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 17:39 PMMr.Flush I like how all the comparisons leave out the extra hp/armor and stealth the jagpanzer gets. With these biased arguments you can make anything look up. Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2019, 16:52 PMSander93 Jagdpanzer IV/70 (V) 1) Unlocks the 'Cautious Movement' ability 2) +25% HP +20% accuracy (Unit does not get extra armor as a vet bonus) Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 11:08 AMgbem Armor: 230/80 vs 140/70 Health: 640 vs 640 I like how people are more interest in proving that people who provide the stat are biased than actually contributing something useful to the debate. What I like even more is that the same people seem to have REAL trouble in READING the stats before starting ACCUSING others of being biased. For me that is clear indication that they themselves are actually biased toward the other side and eager to shout biased when the stat they read does not go well their own bias. In the end of the day if someone is not pleased with stat provided he should any stat he feels is relevant. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Stug Vet17 Oct 2019, 17:39 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 17:27 PMJibberJabberJobber Swapping vet 2 and 3 is a good idea. Don't feel armor bonus should be replaced with lower target size or extra health, it already got buffed in both those aspects in recent patches. Furthermore, it would make the skirt bonus inconsistent with other tanks. It's not like 182 armor (skirt bonus) and 17 target size aren't enough survivability for a 90 fuel tank. "Skirt bonus consistency" has little bearing on a balance issues like vet bonuses. One can completely remove them or have the unit start with them or turn into a doctrinal ability. Vet bonuses consistency across units with different roles is also flawed concept. Vet bonus should help a unit fulfill the role it has been designed for and thus custom made for each unit individually. Actually the game desperately needs an veterancy overhaul including XP values, vet 1 abilities and vet bonuses. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 16:43 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:38 PMgbem your suggestions are a mixed bag imo... giving it more anti medium potential means allied heavy TDs would be punished more severely which would prevent them from countering panthers... which would then allow panthers to run amok killing infantry and tanks with machineguns and 75mm rounds.... I am starting to feel that you are arguing for the point of arguing to be honest, since you are contradicting yourself. According to you: Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem ... its not meant to hard counter allied TDs.... its meant to scare them away... ... and making cheaper will not change its performance vs allied TDs. Actually my suggestion would make it less attractive than a JP4 that can fight all enemy armor from mediums to Super heavies as you propose. As for your scenario of building both JP4 and Panther I sincerely doubt that unless trolling in 4vs4. The picture of Panther "running amok killing infantry and tanks with machineguns and 75mm rounds" is probably from another game... One could argue about the Tiger/JP4 combo but I am not sure how problematic that might since one can already use a Pershing M36 combo. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:38 PMgbem giving it more anti heavy potential seems more sensible as it widens the utility of this niche unit without oppressing the sole allied counter to pantherspam Again an exaggeration as allied TDs are NOT the "sole" counter to Panthers, the same things that counter JP4 can also counter Panther like ATGs and AT infatry especially one with elite bazookas. Panther "spam" is not really an option unless again in 4vs4. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:38 PMgbem the issue is turning it to a dedicated heavy TD would make it even worse than it was before...especially since the allies mostly field mediums over heavies and superheavies... id like it alot less than its current model or the newly proposed model... We might be playing a different game since in the game I play I see allot mote Pershings, IS-2, Churhcills, Comets than I do Sherman, T-34/76 or Cromwell. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:38 PMgbem the panther is a premium medium... and is widely considered a premium medium by alot of people... The Panther is not a premium medium tank, it Role is that of countering heavy tanks and thus it has an AT main gun. You can call it a hybrid if you like but it is not a main battle tank. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:38 PMgbem we are in agreement here then Finally... I have clearly presented my point of view, back it up with stat and have little to add. You are entitled to your opinion. Lets agree to disagree (not sure on what we disagree on) and lets pls move on. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 16:25 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:49 PMLago OKW has a stock premium medium. That is simply semantics and I am not going to derail a thread on that. One could argue thou that PzIV J it is not a premium medium since it is the only medium available to the faction and Panther is not main battle tank but a TD.... In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 14:27 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:06 PMgbem yeah but an outright penetration buff isnt the way to go... Again I have not suggested a Penetration. If the unit is to be redesigned as a heavy then it will higher penetration and lower ROF. 5.6% target size does not really make much of difference especially if one factor collision hits If you want to read and comment my suggestion read this: look no suggestion in increasing penetration.... Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:06 PMgbem no but it shoots faster than the SU-85 and has lower target sizes... its advantages cannot be ignored... ROF make slightly better vs mediums allot worse vs Super heavies as I pointed countless times 5.6% target size hardly makes a difference especially if you factor in collision hits. I am not sure what you point is. As I have said again and again JP4 compared to SU-85 more expensive while being slightly better vs mediums and allot worse vs super heavies. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:06 PMgbem the OP didnt mention 500/175 price for the JP4 afaik... Yes he has: Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2019, 16:28 PMLago Its gun is superior to Allied TDs against anything with less armour than a Churchill. Survivability is a good point though. Maybe it'd be worth making the sidegrade cost 100 MP 40 FU instead. Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2019, 16:38 PMVipper That would make the JP4 cost (400/135 and 15 pop) 500/175 and I doubt it would be worth it. Keep in mind that the cost for the dozer upgrade is 50/20 I am not sure why I have to point that to you for a second time. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:06 PMgbem you did "If it a counter to enemy heavies/super heavies it need more penetration" Now check the big "IF" in-front of my sentence. And yes if JP4 is redesigned in a new role of heavy tank counter it would need more penetration and other changes like slower ROF....But I have made no such suggestion. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 14:06 PMgbem it doesnt have to be cost efficient at a role... since making it cheaper would break the dynamic between allied TDs and axis premium mediums and mediums... instead you can just give it switchable rounds to allow it to engage heavy tanks better to widen its utility without making it the "panther" of heavy tank destroyers Axis do not have premium mediums...unless you want to count Ostheer doctrinal Panzer H. Giving switchable AP round would make efficient as heavy TD. If you want to do theory crafting yes one can make the units average in more than one role instead of cost efficient in just one. Once more I have little idea what we are debating here, I have post that JP sucks or that it needs a penetration buff and I have not disagreed to the suggestion by OP. I suggest we move on. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 13:56 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 13:30 PMgbem then the suggestion of switchable round types/heavyAP round upgrade fits your objectives @vipper I have actually suggested switchable rounds for all "heavy" TDs a long time ago (even made a mod) since that would open the way for separate balancing of medium tanks and Super heavy tanks. The idea is that Super heavies get bigger size. Then one could have AP rounds with low accuracy, high penetration maybe low ROF high damage vs Super heavies. And High accuracy low penetration, standard damage, high ROF maybe lower Range vs mediums. One could also have ROF change with range so that long range units are better balanced. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Wehr weak penetration17 Oct 2019, 13:50 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 13:45 PMSerrith I think an argument could be made for the Panthers veterancy which is somewhat lackluster after the HP was shifted to being stock and the armor was nerfed resulting in a lower overall increase at vet 2. Perhaps a +10% top speed bonus at vet 2 or a slightly bigger armor increase. I digress, if there is an issue with Wehr anti vehicle capabilities it cant be found in the penetration values of their units. I agree that the armor bonuses of axis vehicles including the panther are a bit lackluster. Generally I would try replacing x % armor bonuses with + armor since the low rear armor values of vehicles make the bonus almost useless for half the vehicle. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 13:43 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem youre leaving out the pros of the SU-85 and forgetting to draw a comparison .... overall the JP4 has higher quality advantages while the SU-85 has more advantages... id say theyre roughly comparable of course the main problem of the JP4 is its niche role as anti medium and a TD frightener... hence why i am in support of the new "high penetration low DPS" round type... "Higher quality advantage" in your opinion. Point is that JP only slightly better vs meduim and far worse vs heavies. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem its called assymetric balance... you cant have your cake and eat it too Asymmetric balance is completely irrelevant. M-36 has around half the armor of Panther yet is more cost efficient heavy counter. JP4 cost more for frontal armor a value that hardly help it in anything since it out-ranges mediums, can not deflect TDs, and can be flanked easier than SU-85. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem hence why im fine with switchable round types? this would at least retain its role as anti medium with an option to switch to anti heavy round types in exchange for lower DPS vs mediums Good for you, I did not objected the change I have simply objected the price of 500/175 for it. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem an outright penetration buff would simply be over the top and make the JP4 outclass all the heavy TDs just because its axis... Once more do not put words in my mouth I have not suggested that it should get a penetration buff. What I have said is that unit need a role and then it cost pop and stat should be according to that role. Currently the unit is simply not cost efficient as counter to mediums and Tds. And it seems that actually agree with my assessment. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem The first strike bonus has extremely low impact, it is only probably in 4vs4 and even it has light impact since it does not change the number of shot in most cases. correct me if im wrong... but wasnt the suggestion to add a 60 munitions upgrade for higher pen/lower DPS? Jump back to quoted post16 Oct 2019, 16:28 PMLago Survivability is a good point though. Maybe it'd be worth making the sidegrade cost 100 MP 40 FU instead. Fuel/MP cost was also suggested. Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:53 PMgbem its not meant to hard counter allied TDs.... its meant to scare them away... it counters medium armor quite effectively... but it isnt the best at its job... hence why i wish to expand its capacity to counter heavy armor aswell with "high penetration low DPS" modes... whether a switchable round or free (permanent) upgrade is up for debate And that has been my point all along. Find a role and make cost efficient at it. At this point I am not even sure in which point you are actually disagreeing with me. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jagdpanzer IV Refit17 Oct 2019, 13:28 PM Jump back to quoted post17 Oct 2019, 12:51 PMMaret I think compare 2 units in raw digits, not the wisest decision, if we forget about what kind of targets it usually aim. In SU stock armor roster, the highest armor have t-34/76 (150). In OKW it's KT(375). How are you would fight against stock heavy with low penetration? In theme about penetration we must compare not raw values of penetration, but chance to penetrate. In ally stock units, only churchill have high armor. In Axis are KT and Panther. Another theory that makes little sense, the "stock" theory hold not water at all. As I stated SU-85 can counter both mediums and heavies while the more expensive JP4 can counter medium slightly better and heavies allot worse. Once more do not put words in my mouth in this thread I have not suggested that SU-85 should have lower penetration. What I have clearly demonstrate is that JP4 is less cost efficient than SU-85. In: COH2 Balance