umm..aaaannnd why have the church EXACTLY THIS smoke to run away..while have even nearly the similary surviving stats like a kt?
It doesn't.
That smoke is supposed to cover infantry following church.
You have that in the very description of the ability.
It even gave damage reduction when you used it to SPEARHEAD with it, not sure if it still does, not keeping up with brit nerfs, that horse is so beat dead you can't even make a stew out of remains.
And if Church has similar durability to KT, then I suppose T34/76 has similar durability to OKW P4 eh? Lets ignore MASSIVE armor difference and pretend they are similar. |
High risk, high reward. The vet buff only applies if the HT is not upgraded. We're talking about the flame HT. Just like how the T70 got its lethality nerfed. So if the flamer HT is getting another nerf, T70 should too.
For risk to be high, there needs to be risk.
Its not anymore fragile then any other unit around that time and there is no unit that has even remotely comparable firepower.
You want to know what is high risk high reward unit?
M3 with flame engies. Becauase if you lose M3, you may lose whole flamer squad with it, its also very fragile and has short range, FHT doesn't.
Your logic is also completely flawed.
Nerfs to one unit never are justification of nerfs to any other unit, especially on the other side, all cases are individual.
Yes you hardcounter with Puma when you don't even have a choice for puma. It's not like Soviets don't have every single tool in core choices to counter flame HT and it's not like it doesn't die super easily.
You talk about ATGs, which FHT roasts in seconds?
Or PTRS squads, which also happen to lose life to FHT faster then the other way around due to need to be completely immobile to deal said damage? |
The funny thing is: they let it be by the same cost, while nerfing this unit in some seriuos way. Brummbar wasnt outstandig OP ..it was very good in good hands. It doesnt much better than a HE sherman while expansiver...and dont forget that the new Bulldozer will HAVE THE SAME Stats like the OLD brummbar...while have a turrent, can make green cover, smoke, etc...
You are the ONLY player in game who says it wasn't outstanding OP.
Everyone else, including ost mains agreed universally it was.
It was very good in good hands, it was very good in bad hands, it was no brainer noob proof unit, as long as your micro was intense enough to use a-move around infantry, you have won.
Its vet1 was pinpoint accurate barrage that annihilated ATGs without any effort.
It IS much better then HE sherman as its AoE is much larger and its damage falloff is much lower.
Comparisons to dozer are pointless, dozer isn't as good and dozer is in bad doctrine that no one ever uses. |
Thread: Stug4 Dec 2018, 00:12 AM
When did OST get access to the stock 234 armour p4?
Axis isn't a single faction so saying that ost have access to a 234 armour medium tank by default is as dumb as saying allies have access to the 300 armour comet.
(that is why I gave 2 values, it might completely blow your mind off, but soviets do not really have comet either, also since you seem to struggle, I will help you here a bit with a quote)
Axis* stock meds have 234 and 180 armor.
*Axis means more then 1, therefore not only ost, you know, SU-76 do not shoots as ost P4s exclusively, OKW has them too if you look hard enough! |
120to 90 munis to nerf the performance, 2nd nerf would be another nerf to garrison dmg, I forgot the 3rd nerf, something to do with armor last nerf is vet gain.
So, since the cost of upgrade got lowered AND performance was lowered, the overall cost effectiveness remained the same, therefore it was not a nerf, but a plain adjustment. It would be a nerf if cost remained at 120.
And are you insane to even mention garrison dmg nerf?
Are you so far detached from reality that you thought FHT killing everything in the building within HALF of the burst was fine and balanced?
And no, its armor was never lowered, its vet is mobility only and you aren't really supposed to be at vet3 after single engagement, so that's well warranted one as well.
On the other hand, it got buffed by having a shared vet as well without the upgrade. |
Thread: Stug3 Dec 2018, 23:42 PM
Do your math again since you are comparing different ranges or apples and oranges as you would like to say.
Ok.
180-170 is 10, which is pen difference at far range.
190-185 is 5, which is pen difference at mid range.
Allied stock meds have 160 armor.
Axis stock meds have 234 and 180 armor.
KV series can be roughly compared to Panther and.... ohhhhh riiiiight, your smugness was right! Comet still has 300 armor! That makes it TWO allied units that have more armor then their axis counterparts as Panther is roughly T4 stock medium, same as panther!
Your high-horsiness were right again!
I shall order peeling another potato medal right away! |
Thread: Stug3 Dec 2018, 23:34 PM
Luckily, all allied armor units have lower armor then any of their axis equivalent, IS-2 being only exception, so that 10 pen at far and 5 at mid is completely irrelevant. |
Thread: Stug3 Dec 2018, 20:59 PM
Why is the stug AT only? It has the same gun as pz IV and should be able to deal the same anti infantry damage.
Why SU-85 is AT only?
It has the same gun as T34/85 and should be able to deal the same anti infantry damage.
(psst, its because tank destroyers are meant to be strong against tanks and weak against infantry)
I'd love to see the stug as it is supposed to be. As a handicapped tank without the moving turret for cheaper cost. I mean its 90 fuel vs 120 fuel to get the same AT capability but it has 0 anti infantry efficiency.
Then you should definitely play CoH1.
|
It might look strange if you simply compared then 2 units, it might stop looking strange once you factor in that one has high tech cost and other does not have any tech cost, and the available counters to high armor available to each side.
Cost doesn't cause casualties.
Armor doesn't cause casualties.
Speed, acceleration and rotation doesn't cause casualties(on heabvies).
Being in tech or doctrinal doesn't cause casualties.
The fact that high armor actually can be countered is irrelevant, its meant to be.
Reliable gun causes casualties.
IS-2 does not have reliable gun.
KT does not have reliable gun.
Both guns are fine vs armor, but if you wanted something to kill armor, both sides have cheaper and more efficient alternatives. |
Ostwind can not kill a model with one shot no matter which side of shotblocker they are. It does 40 damage so that is simply incorrect.
Have you checked for criticals?
T-70 also always dealt 40 dmg and it was perfectly fine OHK-ing models up until 2016. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
