Cons cost you 240MP, Volks 260 = 20 MP difference, pose threat. Grens cost 240+100MP for T1, Rifles cost 280 (40MP difference), Tommies cost 270 (30MP difference), vannila grens pose 0 threat what so ever to them, aside from grenade.
Can we stop with this BS with cheapest mainline and cheapest upgrades.
When your LMG are essential invesment, when support units are essential investment, when using nades essential investment in most of the fighing scenarious, that doesnt make them cheapest mainline to maintain.
Only the fact that you need 500MP or 480MP to fight off one rifle already doesnt make them cheapest.
what about reinforcement costs? u must take those into account also
oh my lord, how can someone think spec ops flares is OP and not the UKF one, srsly what the hell, they both need to be removed.
JibberJabberJobber and elchino7, have a really good solution though!
This will bring VSL in 99% of the games. If VSL get nerfed, then hell I wont be surprised to see Ass.grens into T2.
Problem is not with skipping, problem is that grens overall suck ass. This is the single reason of all this BS that is happening.
Osttroopens at this point showing better combat perfomance vs UFS\UKF then grenadiers, while on paper they should be worst and cheaper.
As a raw stats bag, they are fine, in actuall gameplay they objectively suck. Input requared to make them work is just so much highter then the output you get from them, that its just pointless to chose them over litteraly any other option avaible.
Hell, I belive we even saw during one of the tournaments, Osttroppen WITH T1 build for sniper, but even in this case no grens were thrown into the mix.
But I left wondering why according to ppl like Stormjaeger, who shouts that everyone are noobs and grens (with LMG) are good option, but still in a competitive play noone bothering getting them.
Probably because Ost+T1 skip is IWIN always
but how would u go on about buffing grens without upsetting the balance even more?, it will just be power creep all over again and dont forget about volks. I personally, think Infantry sections needs to have some of ther stats reverted, volks MP/build time nerfs reverted, keep riflemen as they are (usf are more reliant on main line inf then anyone else), maybe give grens slightly less reinforce then nerf ostruppen and VSL. i think grens with lmg are pretty good, they just suck with kar98's
You have claimed:
Pg where put in T0 in May 2019. As false as the earth is flat.
Pg where "megabuf" before put in T0. As false as the earth is flat.
Care to provide any prof for you claims?
The proof is that the MOD team moved PG to to T0 you on the other hand have not provided anything to back up you own claim.
And since you are not a moderator PLS stop telling others to "shut up".
his proof is that he is in the top 100 therefore, anything he says is automatically factual and he is above everyone else.
If/when ostruppen get nerfed, this will deal with any pgrens hitting the field too early
We have lost a lot of flavour and uniqueness between armies, and endless incremental community patches lost sight of the big picture.
We even had people who "didn't believe in asymmetrical balance" or that factions should have unique and different approaches. That sucked.
On the other hand some things like shrecks on Volks was unplayable and the game is still alive now so...
if volks got ther shreks back right now, they would be nothing like the volk shreks of the past, when volks had much better VET (also shreks speeded up vet, so you would reach vet 5 fast). But certain members of the community will just cry regardless of ther performance and thats where i think OP has a point. I do prefer flavour over balance as long as it doesn't become too imbalanced.
No worries about misunderstanding friend. Considering your post:
JP4 with 60 range from OKW is more than enough to deal with Pershing.
Considering the Pershing itself. You keep saying "The best AI" but not saying best by how much. Unless this is athletics and winning by 0.01 seconds is still considered a gold medal and the silver person won't be remembered much... the Pershing, having slightly (minimal advantage) better AI doesn't justify lower HP, frontal/rear armour, bad ROF, pretty much useless ability, whilst costing 230 fuel. It USED to have the best AI by a larger margin that scared away blobs. Right now it's lackluster in every compartment.
OKW can easily counter Pershing with raketen and JP4.
OST can easily counter it with pak40 and 2x stugs.
OST doesn't have 60 range TD because they have the fast firing, high penetrating pak40 which fits much better in the OST defensive idea. And stugs are cheap, easily vet and fire really fast. Vs Pershing, that's more than enough.
Of course, you have the Panther TD which counters Pershing hard with superior range and agility on both axis teams.
As in countless other posts, allies have 60 range TDs because Axis has non doctrinally the following tanks: Panther (960hp, 260 armour, great agility), King Tiger, Brummbar (800 hp, 260 armour, bad agility), JP4 (230 armour, lowest target size, also 60 range). On top of that you have plenty of doctrines with Tiger VI heavy tank. Don't know the exact number of doctrines but both OKW and OST have it in more than 3 I believe. Pershing is in only one doctrine, IS-2 in 2.
Not gonna talk about ISU152/elefant/jagdtiger since it's a special kind of tank. This thread is not about 60 range TDs so I would hope this is the last post arguing ally 60 range TDs justify lackluster stats of Pershing.
i said 60 range, high pen TD's, jadpanzer is not high pen, infact its worst in pen out of all 60 range TD's. srsly you telling me 1 jadpazner is enough to deal with 1 perishing (if it had 300 armour), my friend what game are you playing
And now you bring other units into the conversation, which makes discussions endless and purposely derailing the issue but lets do it. srsly x2 pack + 2 stugs to counter 1 tank while my outnumbered inf get rolled? compare the cost and manpower, popcap and come back to me and still tell me that's balanced. pak40 fast firing? what you talking about, USF has the fastest firing AT gun, brits and pak40 are practically the same and zis practically identical (not sure about reketan).
Regarding docs yes tiger is in 3, but allies have NON DOC 60 Range HIGH PEN
TD's so they can always RELIABLY
counter axis heavies.
yes, ofc you want to ditch talking about 60 range high pen TD's because its a very valid point when it comes to axis countering heavies and you have no answer to it.
You misunderstood. Panther should and will always win vs Pershing.
Comparing Panther to a Jackson is pointless. Panther has exponentially better AI, hugely better defensive stats and 10 less range than Jackson. Jackson on the other hand is better suited for combined arms plays, especially in 1v1 and 2v2.
On the topic of pershing having the best AI (True statement)
Pershing has the "best" AI by a margin. Let's say, for simplicity-sake that a Tiger has an AI value of 10. Pershing does not have an AI value of 20 (100% more) but a value of 11 or 12. If you would look at the pure stats of the cannon (not taking into account pintle MG on Tiger), it would work out something like that, around 20% better. How that translates onto the battlefield conditions? Pershing will maybe kill one more model on average in an average length firefight vs infantry. Why shouldn't they have a heavy tank for late game team games? Right now in team games, USF mostly relies on calliope or a fast game lockdown (due to superior early game from USF). Buffing pershing armour to 300 and ever-so-slightly buffing AI would actually make it viable in teamgames. People keep saying AI is the best, and it is, but it's the best only by a small margin, not the "game changing AI"
Ok sorry for misunderstanding. but if you want to buff its armour, then reduce its hp back to 800, it cant have the best of both worlds, whilst still having the best AI, amazing AT and speed. explain to me what's BAD about the tank? . The reason you dont see it built because USF has much better alternatives. USF dont rely on calliope, people go calliope in team games cuz ther OP in team games as you can spam them with less risk (due to HP and armour) compared to other rocket artilleries.
" Why shouldn't they have a heavy tank for late game team games" because axis don't have non-doc 60 range high pen TD's hence why they struggle more vs heavy tanks.
Are you daft? Panther should win vs Pershing and it does. The problem is not panther winning the problem is pershing is mediocre in offense and less than mediocre in defense. The stats on it are piss poor
you clearly said ". The problem is not Panther killing a Pershing, the problem
is it requiring 0 micro"
you have a problem woth panther beating a perishing with 0 micro (when u sit with both next to each other i presume) and that should absolutely be won by the panther
No, he is saying the PV should be killing the PV, but the way it does is too simplistic compared to other TDs (slugging it out) and that the Pershing (his opinion) AI has been basically overnerfed.
I think this the situation is kinda similar to that of the Tiger (people considered it overnerfed as well).
In regards to the Pershing, i would bring a different PoV. Disregarding if it's performance is fine or not, maybe adjusting the performance to it's cost would be a better approach.
yeah and the reason for that is the cost, please remind me how much a panther costs and how much a Jackson costs. Panther HAS to slug it out. it does not have 60 range and most importantly does not have the moving accuracy of jacksons. all heavies had ther AI nerfed, perishing still has the BEST ai. The problem with the perishing is not its performance, it just doesn't fit in your build. Its a unit that should have never be in the game and doesn't fit the faction. If you want AT, you have the best TD in the game and AI well, thers a whole bloody list
A Panther should be able to kill Pershing. The problem is not Panther killing a Pershing, the problem is it requiring 0 micro (you can put Panther 1v1 in front of a pershing) because Pershing is really weak in defensive stats while not offering much in offensive (ROF and AI capability). If Pershing had the older AI power, then by all regards it can stay weak defensively cause it has the offensive. Right now it feels like a mediocre premium medium, not a heavy tank (Eg. if USF had Comet in the roster, I'd always choose it over Pershing). Jackson can kill a Tiger but you will constantly need to micro it to avoid the tiger closing in. Panther kills the Pershing by coming to it and saying "you want some mate?". Jackson kills the Tiger by saying "Stay there away from me". It's all legit. Doesn't make Panther, nor the Jackson, OP. Pershing needs either a buff to AI or a buff to armour/HP. Or something else. It's vet1 and vet2 are piss poor so you could also figure something out there. Don't know. I'd let the more experienced people that put out patches figure it out
what? so the panther SHOULDNT be able to 1v1 the perishing??? I'm confused, if the panther cant beat the perishing 1v1, you saying the perishing should win then? that would make the perishing incredibly OP as a panther is considered its counter. if you want the panther to do what the Jackson does to the tiger, then you OK with giving the panther 60 range?
secondly, the perishing does have excellent AI power, very good penetration above average armour and 960HP
ostruppen is only viable in 1v1 early game, they drop off hard in mid to late game and completely suck at all stages in team games. The problem is and will always be sh!ty 4 man grens, hence why every 1v1 ost player is crutching on ostruppen or 5 man grens