Profile of Sander93

More curious about the brum shot where he gave an attack ground order through shotblockers, never seeing the ATG, but reversing when he realized he was about to give up the ghost.

You can see in the replay that OKW puts Artillery Flares in that area barely 1 second after he tries to attack ground. Might be some kind of sync error where in the real game the flares were put down a bit earlier. If not, then yes I agree that clip is very suspicious.

Spec flares have been OP since forever and your last comment about it was "yeah but that what keep the commander useful so we don't nerf it". What would you do to keep KV1 commander relevant if you nerf those?

We didn't want to nerf/remove the flares because at the time the commander already took some hits, mostly with the Command Panther nerfs. I learned from the past and I'm always against more than 2 changes (nerfs) to any unit or commander at once, and then I'd rather wait for the results before changing more.

By now we know that SpecOps is still pretty good, especially with the recent rise in popularity of Radio Silence, so it's safe to have a look at the flares. They will very likely get changed next patch.


As for the KV-1, the damage reduction removal (and increasing stock health accordingly) should be enough of a small adjustment to make it a bit less oppressive. I think that's all it needs and it should still be competitive afterwards. In any case, all commanders are going to be looked at in the upcoming patch so if they need something in return, the door is open.

Is it just me or are some of the clips just not suspicious at all? Like the countersnipe in the middle of Faymo vs Devm? I also feel like there's a bit of a confirmation bias going on. Sometimes unlikely shit happens, if you look for it you'll find it

In essence I agree with this. Many clips are circumstantial or can be attributed to good and lucky guess work. On AoD he fires the Brummbar into a chokepoint that is the only spot ATGs can position themselves in order to fire on the fuel area. That could just be a calculated guess shot. Directly hitting the ATG can be sheer luck. In other games good players learn standard positions and blind fire too.

However some clips are very suspicious like the Brummbar trying to attack the UKF ATGs in the FOW in the middle of a field (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgd_BxcO8q0) or the one where he (both assuming he is playing as Deadbolt) chases a fresh (?) ATG to the corner of the map (https://youtu.be/X5HG5gH5psg) without having spotted it.


So a lot of things could be explained away by good game sense and lucky guessing or gambling. Many other top players do this too. What I found suspicious however is the frequency of these situations: multiple lucky guesses in one game where other top players might have them 1 in every 5 games or whatever. Otherwise we would see these kind of plays in nearly every tournament match.

Though personally I didn't find the evidence convincing enough to safely conclude he was cheating with all the consequences that that would have. I understand the opinion of the others though.

Penetration:
T-34/76 80->120 a x150% increase in penetration
(for comparison PzIV 110->125 x113% increase

Why would you calculate it like this? Relic clearly didn't use a percental increase formula for establishing penetration values, but a simple -/+10 to -/+20 per distance for most units. Otherwise we would have different sets of penetration values (like 80/96/115 with a 1.2 increase, etc).

The T-34/76 just happens to have a high percental increase because it has the lowest base value that gets disproportionally multiplied by the standard +20/+20 pen increase compared to other vehicles, but there is nothing to conclude from this and it makes no sense to compare vehicles like this.


How does high near penetration prove the vehicle has a flanking role anyway? If a vehicle is supposed to flank, it should be able to get to the rear armor of enemies relatively easily, and then they do not need high penetration. 110 would be enough for quaranteed pens against the rear armor of nearly every unit. There is no logical correlation that high near penetration values indicate a flanking purpose. Penetration decrease over distance is just a natural phenomenon.

Did they also give it an ability called "flanking speed" by accident?

I said flanking is optional? The Panther and the Jackson have the mobility to flank too, the Panther even has an ability for it, but that doesn't mean it's always a good idea to do that or that it's their primary role.

They originally had Flanking Speed at vet 2, which does not really point towards the unit primarily being a flanking unit, but as a way to let it scale against heavier targets that it could no longer effectively engage frontally.

Did they also a profile with higher close penetration similar to T-34/76 and Puma by accident? It far penetration is actually 140 which lower even form the SU-76 with 165 at the same range so not that great for a TD.

It has an x/-20/-20 penetration profile that is completely natural for tanks.
Totally not comparable to the Puma's profile that doubles from 80 far to 160 close. Not that the Puma is primarily a flanker either.
The T-34/76 has a regular x/-20/-20 penetration profile too, with worse close range pen than any other tank. I don't see how that has anything to do with the M10/Achilles.

The SU-76 simply has higher penetration because it's a casemate with low mobility.

Did they describe as:
"The M10 ‘Wolverine’ Tank Destroyer’s 3” gun has decent armor penetration and its mobility allows it to flank the most heavily armored enemy vehicles." by accident?

Yes it has the mobility to flank if it needs to, that doesn't mean that that's its primary role. This description does not suggest that or it would've said something along the lines "best used to flank enemy vehicles". Not that Relic descriptions are anything to go by anyway, most of them are faulty.


The M10/Achilles is a very good medium counter because it's cheap and it can outrange them. It can flank heavies too if need be, but that's not its primary or only role.

And that is why it's a good addition to the UKF stock roster, because they didn't have a cheap medium TD to fill the gap between a Centaur/Cromwell and the much more expensive and more geared to towards anti-heavy Firefly or the even more expensive Comet.