Snipers should be half as fast as other infantry, but full speed when they retreat.
Boom, fixed.
This alone would do it tbh.
I'd also like to see their HP reduced back to 80. The odds of them being killed by mortars are far lower now that mortars don't do 80 damage on anything but a pinpoint direct hit, so there's no reason for them to have the extra 2 hp anymore, and it effectively allows the sniper to tank another rifle/SMG hit from most units. |
I said Td stats.....
Powerful guns that go all the way against call in heavies. What is 260 armor these days?
And yes price/popcap is a good advantage to have when their performance exceed their costs clearly
260 armor is enough to basically shrug off most of the weapons in the game about half the time or more, but sure let's just pretend it's nothing, and further pretend the boost it gets vet 2 is 'useless' as well because armor that doesn't 100% immunize the vehicle from penetrating fire is absolutely worthless in Axis UP land.
What you listed are just convenience throw out, except maybe the 960hp advantage..
We all agree panther AI is near worthless. Sure less shit than 60td none existence AI, but shit is still shit, no ways about it. And heavy infantry crush? How often you see that since it got nerf long time back?
I believe cheaper allies vehicles have infantry crush too. How is this a big deal?
I mean if panther AI and heavy crush are more effective, then i concede. But they are simply irrelevant in most if not all games. To be cited as an advantage.
Nobody agrees with you that panther AI is near worthless; it's an undeniable utility that the Panther has and TDs don't, and combined with its extremely high durability can most certainly fight off infantry units when needed to.
Heavy crush concerns crushing obstacles, not infantry. Which, coincidentally, the Panther can also do quite well. The fact you just ignore all this as 'irrelevant' doesn't help you any.
55 range is still an advantage.
Right now 60 range, besides just sitting alone safely for incoming tanks or you can move in, snipe and move out. 60Td are fast tanks, even the FF is still faster than a ATg.
It creates a solution that is lazy. The 960Hp advantage is no advantage when you get near 100% shot from safety range.
Up for more visibility from pro players comments!
What's really lazy is wanting your Panther to be a hard counter to TDs lmao.
How about you use some combined arms and screen your tanks with infantry or ATGs? All weapons that are 100% capable of penetrating allied TDs.
Save the panther for hard countering medium and premium medium tanks; you know, the exact thing the unit has as its description in its file. This is an anti-tank tank, not a TD and certainly not an anti-TD tank.
If you want to nerf TD range, the Panther (and probably every heavy tank as well) absolutely needs to lose durability, and that's a fact. This is because, although you have refused to understand this for whatever reason, TDs are the sole method of reliably fighting off high-armor axis tanks (panther included), and achieve this largely through their penetration and their range advantage. Nerfing range means these units are not as easily able to skirt the range of far more durable but equally if not more deadly heavies, and therefore brings them closer to a slugging match that TDs absolutely can not win. The tiger, for example, achieves up to 50 range with vet; those extra 5 range units are simply not enough breathing room, particularly considering the earlier accuracy drop.
You seem entirely incapable of understanding this dichotomy or else you simply want your heavy tanks and the panther to be these AT-immune vehicles that you apparently believe would only be properly balanced if the allied player musters his entire force to counter that one vehicle. I will admit I am convinced the latter is your true motivation.
But hey, in the slim event that it isn't, like I said; slash heavy tank HP values down to medium territory and you can see about killing TD range advantage, and maybe even penetration. Then maybe these 'flanking attacks' you lads like to bring up so much won't amount to flatly suicidal dives so often. |
I think a lot of folks (or Volks? Lol) give the Germans too much credit for having only the best equipment. AT rifles were used during the later part of the war by the Germans for the same reasons they used other older equipment alongside their other, newer and better, equipment: because they didn’t have enough of the good stuff.
It is totally reasonable to see AT rifles in the hands of German infantry units from 1939 all the way to 1945 because they never produced enough replacement equipment to meet the needs of their operational forces in the field. Even the US fielded M1903 Springfield bolt action rifles in some numbers in units fighting in Italy in 1945 (and not as sniper rifles, I mean as regular infantry rifles), and it is without a doubt that the US was in the best position in terms of production of war material when compared to anyone else at the time.
TL, DR: AT rifles are fine historically for the Germans to use and I do like this proposal to give a little bit of flexibility to the Ostheer, who do struggle vs light vehicles.
AT rifles were probably still being used, yes. But specifically NOT the Pzb39, which were almost entirely converted into dedicated grenade launchers.
It should also be noted this rifle had far worse anti-armor and anti-material capability than the PTRS it is being compared to, which severely limits the realistic capability of this package to be used against the T-70s, SU-76Ms, M5 Stuarts, and AECs that would seem to necessitate it (all other light vehicles the 222 is perfectly capable of countering)
On a further historical note, the Springfield was still seeing mass deployment mostly because it was the most reliable and effective platform for the firing of rifle grenades; the M7 system for the M1 Garand was never fully deployed before the Normandy landings and the Springfield (M1 grenade launcher device) and even M1 carbine (M8 grenade launcher device) were considered more reliable platforms for firing rifle grenades. For a good part of the war the grenadier in the US Army rifle squad was equipped with a Springfield bolt-action rifle.
(The Pzb39 was also a single shot weapon, but lelic seems to have forgotten about this) |
Im waiting for a fix
You used to be funny, Hitler. Now you're a hollow shell of who you once were.
You lost something when your name got changed. |
How is USF's opening worse than UKF?
USF since has last patch probably has the best allied early game and is probably pretty close to matching OKW's on the axis side.
You are literally only weaker until the third rifle squad hits the field. (Going 3 rifles into officer has better field presence for longer than going 2 into officer) |
And what exactly is your the Point. A TD that is more expensive that any medium in cost and pop does not lose 1vs1 vs them. Would be logical if a single medium would win vs Panther?
The point is literally in the passage you quote. Had you bothered to read this thread you'd realize that. A claim was made that the Panther was not as oppressive to medium tank play as the other TDs in this game, and I argued otherwise. Do not let your vendetta with me ruin another thread by (hopefully not deliberately) ignoring the posts of others.
And here it is ....
so just another "i dont want to use combiend arms... just sit back an enjoy the 60Range TD meta..."
the easy mode
why use all the tools and mabe flank (like in COH1) but ... nooo way.
The only laziness here is thinking your tanks should be immune to all but easily screened "flanking" attacks in a game with as cramped and clustered maps as this one. Literally all it takes is one mine or a volksgren squad and 25 munitions and your "flank" is now a suicide run.
As I've said before, if the presence of heavy tanks (very much including the panther) did not downright require allied TDs be deployed, we might even be able to have a productive discussion about nerfing them. Until that point it is off the table, unless said nerfs only affect their capability versus medium tanks |
Reducing 55td does not nerf them much against call in. Especially if we increase the call in fuel cost.
55td still have enough time to vet up, and still get their sweet vet bonuses
55td still outrange call in and non call in.
Su85 and ff have sight advantage too. Jackson of course mobility power. And making 5muni cheaper tracking will compensate the su85 non turret with slightly reduced range.
People make a fuss of pioneer extra 7 sight, yet mobile td have extra 10 range advantage, and at 640 hp, they are no longer squishy.
Panthers didn't kill medium plays, 60td did, imo
Outrange by 5 range, sure.
Tell you what, if the Panther loses range too, staying lesser than dedicated TDs, and the fuel price increases to heavies are considerable enough, I'd be willing to give that particular balance theory a go.
But of course I doubt you would agree to such a thing because, again, your whole mantra is that the Panther is made utterly useless somehow by the existence of 60 range TDs.
But on the topic of Panthers not killing medium plays, you are completely and totally wrong, since as has been demonstrated many times already, allied medium tanks cannot fight the Panther. You will get lucky on occasion and kill a Jackson with a Panzer IV. It is virtually guaranteed to penetrate it with every shot and will fire generally as fast. You can flank SU-85s with a Panzer IV and thusly kill them easily. You can outposition a firefly and light it up with minimal risk due to it's far slower ROF.
You can not, however, do any of these things against a Panther. Medium tanks can not penetrate it reliably, and can not win any sort of DPS or HP trade. You are required at absolute minimum to outnumber the Panther in terms of armor or support or both, essentially requiring you isolate it completely from Axis infantry given it can otherwise easily tank salvos of non-TD fire. The existence of a Panther on the field straight up necessitates an allied TD because no other unit will be able to counter it properly, period.
I mean, you are welcome to play a few games as allies and just never ever produce any 60 range TDs. I implore you to do so and to show us the results of this endeavor.
I believe the chance to pen a tiger with 60td is higher than a panther can pen a is2. Dropping to 55td won't make a losing impact
60td is simply unneeded and spoil the contest to laziness.
A pioneer needs to WALK to provide sight to mg42, a 60td simply drives about.
A 60td Jackson can 1v1 a costlier panther. The 10 range deficit is too much to take a chance since jackson can dive in an out of panther AND ATgun range. At 55td, at least allies td will have to reconsider the ATg more.
I want to see you try and kill Panthers and Tigers with only the M1 AT gun or the Zis-3 so fucking badly. Do you just assume every gun in the game is a copy of your Pak-40? TWP and all?
Alternatively, you could always nerf the range of all allied 60 range TDs, sure, to 55 or 50 or whatever, and then give them 200-something armor and 800 HP or so to compensate. Sure. I could get behind that I suppose. We could even talk price increases then - they would be as essentially impossible to kill with medium tanks as the Panther is (though you could still flank the SU-85 lol) |
Нет.
Нет.
И нет.
И пошёл нахуй бля, нечего позорить Русь Матушку этими РОА, говоря, что они-Русские!
I still can't believe lelic got away with making Vlasov's historically miniscule 'volunteer' army such a massive part of the Wehrmacht in this game. |
Panthers doesn't counter tanks, TDs do, but at least Panthers are effective and trustworthy because of their durability and armor. It's like a churchill with good AT and mediocre AI
I mean... it literally does. It will penetrate any medium tank in the game 100% of the time except for the comet, and will also out dps any medium tank in the game as well as deflect around 60% of medium tank shells (depending on range and type) while also being incredibly mobile and durable enough to dive or chase.
One can make the argument semantically that it is not a TD, but it definitely counters basically all nondoc tanks in the game.
50cal is on shermans though.
The pintle is just illustration how even with 3 mgs firing from panther, at most, it will force away an allies squad after they cap finished a point.
The real AI on tanks imo are the aoe main cannon and then the dskha/50cal. Pintles and rest are just poopoo, and not worth the cost, advantage cited. Imo those mgs on panther are more liability to hold it back.
I mean if we make the pintles slightly more powerful than 50cal with good moving accuracy, then yes i will crown panther AI ability. Now they are just bullet points on paper
And if you see a Sherman on the field with your Panther you can rest assured knowing it literally cannot fight your tank... What is that 70munition 50 cal upgrade (still not comparable to the combined DPS of upgraded Panther) going to do when it can't be anywhere near your Panther?
Tell that AOE gun schtick to the guys that play Soviets with the T-34s and KV-1s lmao.
Have you ever just considered that you are mistaken, and that the Panther is in fact not as useless as you think it is? I mean, you literally can't argue that it does not counter every stock vehicle other than allied TDs. That argument literally cannot be made. It is factually incorrect. Your absurd devotion to nerfing allied TDs directly in relation to the Panther, or buffing the Panther directly in relation to allied TDs, is based on wildly skewed presumptions on how the balance of this game works.
Sadly 60TD and heavy callins dominate by far. No place for others, no place for old panthers.
Imo as i suggested. make allies 60td to 55td. 70td call in to 60td. Perhaps make su85 tracking 5muni cheaper. Also increase the fuel of call in. And we see from here.
As vipper thinks too, instead of power creep, we lower the field. And 60td are just too good. 60td has been identified, so we should fix them firstly
How about we nerf the Panther's range to 45 while we're doing that.
How on earth is reducing TD range supposed to fix the heavy call-in meta? That's literally a direct buff to them by nerfing their only late-game counters. In that scenario, muh fuel increase, unless it's some insane number, is going to effect that dimension of gameplay exactly as much as the 5 fuel increase did for the M36 Jackson; not at all. |
I will vote in increasing moving accuracy at vet2. Remove the armor vet if you pity allies.
Vet3 is too long
Vet2 armor bonus is useless now.
The AI of panther is pathetic, dps of grens is nothing to be proud of.
As i feel, dskha and 50cap dps are way better and they are not on panther
I don't remember any patch that added 50cal and dshka to the stock allied TDs. I must have missed that one, haven't played since before the weekend. Now I have something to look forward to abusing later in the week I guess.
"DPS of a gren squad", already a rough estimate by itself, is nothing to sneeze at and more than enough to kill infantry, especially considering those same infantry can't really do shit to the sheer armor and hp wall shooting at them. I mean, I hope you realize that most of the Panther AI doesn't even come from the pintle MG, but the coaxial and hull MGs, which do something like 10 DPS* even at at max range right off the bat.
That's by no means pathetic. It's only really beaten out by the T-34s (and now the KV1) with their buffed MGs.
*(combined, obviously. Quick edit here since I know some smartass will try to "aha!" me for that number) |