Yes Jackson is more reliable for its penetration, and panther is a different tank, panther is the best medium tank in the game (fair enough considering its price), but it's not a proper tank destroyer like SU85,JP4, or Jackson. But SU85 is a great tank destroyer FOR ITS PRICE.
Umm, panther is tank destroyer for the last 8 years since coh1.
You can argue against that, but you won't get far that way.
SU-85 costs as much as medium generalist tank and its usefulness is as good as going against medium generalist tanks. Jackson costs exactly as much and while its worse against mediums, its incomparably better against anything over P4.
That's why you see T34/85, IS-2 and ISUs instead of it.
You can again argue against that, but that's another dead end for you. |
SU-85 penetrates quite reliably, even with KT you have to be careful against it, and is a very good tank destroyer FOR ITS PRICE.
Penetrates reliably what?
50% chance for panther.
Little over 50% for tiger.
About 43% for KT.
Coin toss is not reliable.
You want reliable penetration values, check Panther or Jackson.
Its not bad, but against heavies reliable is the last word I would describe it with.
|
That is a problem why exactly?
Its quite obvious that fire and huge cloud of black smoke would obscure your vision in a game where True Sight is quite important mechanic. |
One question allied defenders really need to ask is why soviets are the only faction that don't need to tech to EZ win.
The questions should be:
Why soviets are the only faction that needs certain doctrine to win?
Why soviets are the only faction that needs to use call-in armor to be on pair?
Just stay with zis,mines and ur 6 man infantry squads then call in iwin is2 cheatbutton in quick succession,or abuse PTRS .
Comapre this to wehrmacht teching requirements..and u dare talk abt balance.
Game has become a joke.
That is different then Ost dual pak with heavy T1 stall into a tiger or CAS abuse how?
Captain Hypocrite here just got promoted to Major Hypocrite. |
I know what kind f player Oz is, believe me, my jaw dropped after seeing the game and that surely wasn't what I expected.
Besides you've missed my point entirely, it doesn't matter who he beat or who he have lost to, Alex claims allies are easy mode, yet is completely unable to prove it without being carried hard by incomparably better then him players. He'll achieve that by himself(1v1, 2v2 at with someone on his level, playing with randumbs) then he will actually prove his argument.
If he is unable to do so, then its just another bs coming from him.
Nothing more, nothing less to it really. |
He allready earned respect answering to 2 challanges here which I didn't see you (or me) doing, so he has the right to post his opinions or write anything he wants. You don't like it, don't read it, it's simple.
Yes, kudos for him, I'm not saying word against that.
But he have also shown to everyone the level of skill he presents, he can beat a bad player who steps in his own molos and incendiary, but looses to 200-400 rank player without even contest, if that doesn't prove that he got carried hard, then I don't know what will, ESPECIALLY considering the ranks, game modes and experience with all factions of team who carried him.
He'll get to top 100 or even 200 by himself or with team mates of similar skill to his, I'll accept it.
He gets carried by players who are actually on top 100-200 level, no, that won't convince anyone who isn't axis die hard fanboy. |
It's a bit odd that there is only one new faction- will there be a new third axis faction?
Unless you wait it to not have normal tanks and instead assault guns and lightly armored TDs with P3 being heaviest normal tank, there is not much to use for axis really that wouldn't be same unit with different skin and in that case why bother with forcibly new army?
And if the brits come out, I sure hope there will be the famous "cigarette near fuel" line, THAT WAS AWESOME! |
Already done.
Yea, with Porygon and Siu-king.
I played against them multiple times, they are way above your league so...
Carried hard?
Why won't you do that for a mode where its impossible to carry you and show us how it really is instead of teaming up of d-bag but good player? |
I really could care less if someone loves axis, what annoys me is when one sided player says "allies/axis Are so EZ mode" and barely play(or in some cases,never play)the other side.
Guy number 1:"Hey man, i hate peanut butter on my sandwiches,i think it overpowers the flavor of the Jelly. I love jelly-only sandwiches."
Guy number 2:"Have you tried peanut butter on your sandwiches before?"
Guy number 1:"No,but once,I stuck my finger in a jar of peanut butter and licked my finger to taste the peanut butter,I didn't really like the peanut butter, so I've always stuck with jelly instead.,but other than that not really. I've never tasted them together on a sandwich"
I get sick of reading openly biased balance threads
^This.
Nothing more amusing and sad at the same time then one army heroes saying opposing armies are OP.
How can they know that if the unit looks is all they understand about opposing faction if they haven't played it, they don't know economy, they don't know armies game flow, they don't know weaknesses(seriously, the only truly effective way to know armies weaknesses is TO PLAY IT AND LOSE TO BETTER PLAYERS so you can check the rep and see what happened), but they act like all-knowing. |
How would you implement something like this when the core of USF and OKW's strats involve lots of a single type of unit by design.
That lots of same unit type does not have to be centered in the area of the size of capture circle you know, there is plenty of map for them to be at. |