Well have you played allies in 4v4? Let see how easy it is massed panthers panzer 4s vs massed Jackson,su85,FF.
I played tons of 4v4 and massed axis tanks are simply easier to win. Hence im glad their performance is left untouched for now
Yes, Yes I have.
If you're losing the armour war to axis.
You're fucking spicy hot garbage.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, beats a wall of jacksons in a 4v4. |
Panther already bullies meds and beats comets even in cqb duals. No reason to buff pen and accuracy even more on the panthers favor.
People are complaining about moving accuracy in the Jackson thread. So no it wouldn't be a popular move.
Lol, Good choice of comparison.
Comparing the Panther a dedicated Tank-Destroyer. To a medium tank.
Yes, it wins in duels, barely.
How does the Panther, which is billed as a TANK-DESTROYER, compare to other TANK-DESTROYERS?
Try for the first time on this forum ever, engaging your mental faculties, limited as they are.
INB4 - IRL PANTHER IS A TANK NOT A TD. This is COH2, we had this argument years ago. I argued for Panther to be a TANK, not a TD. We have reaped what was sown. |
Comet is not similar to panther in any other way then being late tech tanks above medium and below heavy. Its penetration is very sub par for the cost and its not primarily tank hunter. It doesn't get any defensive bonuses contrary to panther.
Are you willing to give up range, survivability or penetration for that bonus at vet2?
I don't think you understand the mechanics of this game, or how they work outside of a complete vacuum. |
But it might just show how hermetic the game has become to new players. Maybe too many things are counterintuitive. Once you get used to them you take them for granted, but initially they are frustrating.
No truer point has been spoken. I have played all relics games since DOWII. I am a fan, so I learn and play. I tried to get my friends into my favourite RTS. They refuse to play COH2, due to how unintuitive it is to the average player who like the WWII setting, yet doesn't have a degree in history (Ie, they expect Axis to be quality vs the allies quantity.
They seem to think that soviets have the numbers advantage, yet also have more elite troops and superior armour, when they ask what their advantage is, all I reply is "cleverness and combined arms".
"what range do I beat riflemen?"
You don't. Outnumber them or rifle grenade.
"as Germany?"
Yes.
"Do I beat conscripts with grenadiers?"
Only if you're in green cover and they advance and fire across open ground.
As axis, you can only wait for your opponent to make mistakes, its much harder to take the initiative. |
3 sqauds will give you 6x Shreks and 6x Stg44s plus the bundle grenade for each of them. That is not safe to approach with anything. Paratroopers can fight them at range with M1919s and Shocks might do okay because they are 6 men and have decent armor. Everything else dies. T34s, Shermans, Cromwells, Riflemen, Cons, Infantry Sections.
With Panzerfizilers for example you've got only bolt action rifles with double schreks so their AI suffers. Panzergrens start out with and retain their StGs and bundle grenades. It's like Rangers starting out with Thompsons at CP1 with every USF doctrine.
Lol, have you tried anything else besides blobbing to counter this strategy?
A single MG will do it for you. |
?
The unit has an ability called "diversion" because it is meant to fight at the front line.
Is meant to be support unit it should be cheaper have and have less pop.
"Artillery Field Officer
The AF officer has received a major overhaul to allow this unit to not only provide a potent support role, but also act as a unit that can lead an assault to help breakthrough the enemy lines and push away infantry units at close range."
Its good we have you around to state what should be completely obvious to anyone who has played this game for more than 25hrs, but seemingly is not at all obvious.
"Artillery Field Officer"
in literally every sense of the word, from all possible angles of nomenclature, is intended to be a front line combat unit.
|
All the heavy tanks are good, but the Tiger and IS-2 are the two that really entrench the heavy tank meta. The Pershing is just as powerful (if not more so) on paper, but it's had nowhere near the same impact on the meta.
I think that's because of the matchup with the Panther.
The Panther beats the Comet (800 HP), can take on the Pershing (960 HP), and generally loses to the IS-2 (1040 HP).
This makes the IS-2 the most impactful heavy tank on the meta despite not being that much stronger than the Pershing on paper. If the opponent wants to counter it without going heavy tanks themselves they need a Panther and something else. They need to expend more resources on AT units than the generalist IS-2 costs.
Viewed that way, it's easy to see why the IS-2 is such a popular pick in 1v1: it doesn't have a nondoctrinal counter.
Then we have the Tiger. The Tiger has 1040 HP, making it better in a heavy tank slugging match than the Panther. This makes it a better pick than the Panther even against the Pershing: anything the Panther can do, the Tiger can do better.
In summary, we have these two problems:
- The Panther cannot deal with the IS-2.
- The Tiger is a better anti-heavy unit than the Panther.
What if we changed that?
Reduce the Tiger's HP to 960. Adjust cost or buff as necessary.
Reduce the IS-2's HP to 960, or rework it into a more expensive tank in the vein of the King Tiger.
What if we cut the IS-2 and Tiger to 960 HP, same as the Panther and Pershing? The Panther can then take on the IS-2 in a one-on-one battle, and the Tiger stops being a better pick than it.
Now that the IS-2 can be countered nondoctrinally, there's less incentive to go IS-2 every game.
Now that the Tiger isn't a better heavy counter than the Panther, there's less incentive to go Tiger every game.
Thoughts?
Axis tanks are great, as long as the enemy doesn't use armour.
I just don't build tanks, extra at guns are always better, fuel is a waste of resources to spend on AT capabilites, especially when the axis lacks in AI severely. Spend fuel to counter allied blobs and always have enough AT guns.
As axis, you should NEVER build armor, it always under performs. Stick to suppression platforms, indirect fire and anti tank guns. plug gaps with infantry. THere is not a single role axis armour performs in, that something else doesn't do better, for cheaper. |
Revert the range buff, it didn't need it. Leave the extra man and retreat.
Then how would this AT gun function? Please answer this genuinely.
At 50 range, the only way to get it to work was to sneak it into 50 range with stealth cheese.
Stop trying to "fix" things. You're only breaking them more.
How I counter vehicles as OKW? Mines, Mines, and More Mines and with priority taking and decrewing allied AT guns for myself. How am I in a situation where it is preferable as OKW to use Pak, Zis, 57 mm M1 or 6-pdr?
Balance.
|
Those Ost T4 bonuses won't last, especially the cap/decap bonus. That thing is a nightmare to balance and has no place to be there in the first place.
Finally, someone gets it!
Seems like balance team is reaching for straws here. Do what other games do for asymmetrical balance, quality vs quantity. |
Sorry by cheap means widely available.
Even in 3v3, everyone just need a panther to deal 600 damage in 1 volley.
This is stupidest idea yet to give a stock mobile heavy armor tank free 200 damage
Bro, after reading all your comments. You're playing the wrong genre of games, if you want realism, you'd try steel division 2 or men of war 2, although they are much harder games, SD2 at least has 10v10 to satisfy your spam nothing but arty. Its a shame that based on your complaints it seems as if you struggle with the most simple RTS that currently exists, in its most simplified form, the 4v4.
You haven't worked out how to spam jacksons, SU-85's, or churchill + firefly.
I have read people give you genuinely good advice, tell you to try other factions, other units etc. You always have some answer ready to deflect responsibility from yourself.
You're completely unwilling to change yourself to suit the game, you expect the game to change itself to suit you, you're the problem here.
The similarities between your pattern of speech and katitof's is amazingly similar. |