Re-balance Allied TDs penetration values

Sure, just nerf PaK and Raketens to not have 100% pen against everything allied have too.

Comet? IS2? KV2? Churchill and its variants?

At least we all agree that firefly is bad..

Actually it is good. Here we all agree that others are “tooooo good”

Doesn't the Jackson need HVAP to be viable against elefants and Jagdtigers? The way I saw it was it's normal gun dealt with heavies like Tiger and panther, and you spent muni to deal with superheavies like KT, JagdT, Elefant, SturmT.

SU-85 seems to be okay but not as strong because the ISU-152 is in the game, and there's no reason to use it if the SU-85 solved everything. I agree the firefly needs to be looked at though, as it used to be a tulip rocket carrier and now seems to be a panther without the armor or the blitz ability.

Doesn't the Jackson need HVAP to be viable against elefants and Jagdtigers? The way I saw it was it's normal gun dealt with heavies like Tiger and panther, and you spent muni to deal with superheavies like KT, JagdT, Elefant, SturmT

All super-heavies are countered by flanking, it's even mentioned in most (or all?) super-heavy descriptions. It's only an issue on specific maps in larger team games, such as red-ball, where flanking a JT/Ele becomes an issue. Flanking a KT or ST shouldn't be much of a problem, though, since they have less range than the M36.

JagdTiger tooltip, in game:

The Jagdtiger or 'Hunting Tiger' is one of the most powerful tank destroyers on any battlefield. Its extremely potent 128mm PaK 44 main gun can destroy any enemy tank while armor up to 250mm thick keeps the Jagdtiger on the front lines. Its poor maneuverability is its Achilles' heel. Effective against all vehicles, defenses and structures.

Elefant tooltip, in game:

Allows the Elefant Tank Destroyer to be called onto the battlefield. This behemoth has devastating range, firepower, and virtually impenetrable front armor. However, it’s lack of turret and slow speed make it vulnerable to flanking maneuvers.

KingTiger tooltip, in game:

The "King Tiger" is a massive Heavy Tank with unparalleled armor and firepower. It requires all sWs Half-tracks be deployed into structures. An option to deploy it will then become available. Like all Heavy Tanks, it is susceptible to flanking due to slow turn speed and turret rotation.

Here we all agree that others are “tooooo good”

Imma have to stop you right there.

Comet? IS2? KV2? Churchill and its variants?

still get easily penned by AT and shreks. Also PaK has too good RoF and aimtimes meaning even more damage.

Meanwhile Pz4s can dive double ATs and still walk out.

All super-heavies are countered by flanking

I understand. however there are times when this is not expressly an option. Team games where 4 superheavies are lined up come to mind, or if the superheavy is supported with ATguns watching the flank, getting one shot in that doesn't bounce is needed to eventually whittle down the position. Bear in mind Flanking only works when you can get rear armor, as side armor is still likely to count as front armor. I'm not saying jacksons should trade evenly with superheavies, rather, they should be the one unit in the USF roster that doesn't have to drive all the way around the enemy to deal damage. The jackson can still get messed up if the superheavy fires back, I should add.

still get easily penned by AT and shreks. Also PaK has too good RoF and aimtimes meaning even more damage.

Meanwhile Pz4s can dive double ATs and still walk out.

Name : pen close/med/far, aim time/ ready fire, reload

Pak 40: 210/200/190, aim 0.13-0.25 all range, reload 3.5-4.1
6lb : 210/200/190, aim 0.13-0.25 all range, reload 3.5-4.1
raket : 200/190/180, aim 0.13, 0.25-0.38 fire, reload 3.8-43 (and less range)
Zis-3 : 200/190/180, aim 0.13-0.25 all range, reload 4.43
M1 57mm: 150/140/130, aim 0.13 all range, reload 2.1-2.4

schrek: 180/170/160, aim 0.63 all range, reload 7.75
zook : 130/120/110, aim 0.63 all range, reload 5.75


Pak vs...
name : armour, pen chance at close/med/far
churchill: 240armour 87.5/83.3/79.16
Comet: 290armour 72.4/68.9/65.5
IS-2: 375armour 56.0/53.3/50.6
KV-2: 300armour 70.0/66.7/63.3


So the 6lb is a literal clone of the Pak, and the other ATGs aren't too far off. And while Shrecks are good, their pen is less than ATGs, so their percentage chance to pen vs. those tanks is lower than my above chart. Also, the P4s (OKW) front armor of 234 means that even at max range, you're looking at an 81% pen chance with a 6lb, 77% chance with a Zis3 and 55% with a vet 0 57mm.

I understand. however there are times when this is not expressly an option. Team games where 4 superheavies are lined up come to mind, or if the superheavy is supported with ATguns watching the flank, getting one shot in that doesn't bounce is needed to eventually whittle down the position. Bear in mind Flanking only works when you can get rear armor, as side armor is still likely to count as front armor. I'm not saying jacksons should trade evenly with superheavies, rather, they should be the one unit in the USF roster that doesn't have to drive all the way around the enemy to deal damage. The jackson can still get messed up if the superheavy fires back, I should add.

I would consider that more of a map than a balance issue, though. The game is designed around flanking, so when a map is designed to not allow for that, it's kind of on the map rather than the balance.

I'd add other mechanics of how tank destroyers work.

Diagnosis: tank destroyers should counter very heavy tanks. They do - ok. The problem starts when they start shooting at mediums. They are too effective here.
Solution: Make every tank destroyer deal damage as a fraction of target vehicle's health. It would need the same number of shots to kill a medium and a heavy. It would lead to a great gameplay with a tank that can kill heavies and mediums in the same number of shots. Lots of interesting mouse cat situations.

Actually it is good. Here we all agree that others are “tooooo good”

Good as in easy to deal with by axis..

Firefly is a relic of an old design. Offering no distinct advantage with low mobility, slow damage that works only on careless players and lack of self sppoting that stems from ukf low inherent vehicle vision in fog of war after delivering damage that is only rectified with hammer tactics. Maybe make tulips super cheap and nerf their power to a few seconds stun similar to aec threadbreak or make it a vision tool simmilar to mark vehicle and buff the tank itself.

Jackson is legit the definition of td - fast, powerful and easy to use. Could use a downgrade.

Su85 is strong and has a good role that rewards good play. However its balanced with having a glaring weaknesses that allows it to be basically two shotted by some units with minimal risk. So the tank is where it should be power wise just some people dont know how to deal with it.

Firefly is bad because brits can't have nice things reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

To be fair they had some pretty cancerous BS for a while so I can see why people are leery of the faction still but brits really are the worst now lol.

...
Su85 is strong and has a good role that rewards good play. However its balanced with having a glaring weaknesses that allows it to be basically two shotted by some units with minimal risk. So the tank is where it should be power wise just some people dont know how to deal with it.

Care to share what these unit are at create a glaring weakness for the SU-85?

I'd add other mechanics of how tank destroyers work.

The problem starts when they start shooting at mediums. They are too effective here.

Based on what?
A specialist unit that costs MORE then generalist unit it counters SHOULD be extremely effective against it.

Solution: Make every tank destroyer deal damage as a fraction of target vehicle's health. It would need the same number of shots to kill a medium and a heavy. It would lead to a great gameplay with a tank that can kill heavies and mediums in the same number of shots. Lots of interesting mouse cat situations.

Now that's one stupid suggestion that doesn't make any sense.

Based on what?
A specialist unit that costs MORE then generalist unit it counters SHOULD be extremely effective against it.

Based on the watched tournament matches where allies m36s act like more efficient cheaper Panthers. Their impact on heavies seems ok. How they shut panthers and pz4 or ostwind is just too much looking at their cost.

Now that's one stupid suggestion that doesn't make any sense.

IMHO it would solve the problem. Tank destroyers would just calculate their damage differently. Depending on how strong a TD would be it would take away 1/4, 1/5, or any other given fraction of a target vehicle health. They would be much cheaper than heavies but they would be a serious threat to them. Mediums would fight them on more equal terms. Heavies would be very resistant to mediums. Mediums would be good against infantry. Tank destroyers would not be good against infantry. Great cat and mouse tank gameplay guaranteed.

%damage is not a solution. If anything it makes the game more arcadey.

One thing that would definitely help mediums would be smaller target sizes so they don’t get obliterated very time a TD/AT gun spots them at max range.

you guys keep talking "but at 60 range blablabla" as if EVERY engagement happens at max range, coh2 has true LoS and most maps are filled with shotblockers which makes most engagements happen at lesses ranges, this is why stugs and panthers overperform so much when used right, if you nerf allied pen then you won't even need to use these units the right way anymore.

I think you guys have really short memory, cause I remember when you needed 4 SU85s to just have a chance of killing a heavy tank. Even nowadays jacksons need to have vet to effectively fight KT or tiger, and jackson is pretty much the only thing USF has to counter heavies.

Nobody is disputing that medium TDs need to fight heavy tanks. The problem is medium tanks which get wrecked in the process, hence why I proposed target size as a means to make them more competitive.

but mediums need to get rekt, so you won't keep charging them into the frontlines, mediums are infantry support tanks they aren't meant to stand on the front lines for long.

The Pz4 already overperform as it is, if you nerf the allied counters it will break late game balance.

but mediums need to get rekt, so you won't keep charging them into the frontlines, mediums are infantry support tanks they aren't meant to stand on the front lines for long.

The Pz4 already overperform as it is, if you nerf the allied counters it will break late game balance.

Wrecking a PZ4 with a Jackson with max range shots on the move isn’t balance, it’s garbage. At max range TDs/AT guns should’t have as much accuracy vs mediums, thus it would require you to either get a lot of shots in quickly, vet up your units or get closer, which would get rid of the current stagnant TD meta.

%damage is not a solution. If anything it makes the game more arcadey.

True. I'm aware. I don't see any better solution. Imo it's not bad. It would be clear and very different vehicle category. Target size seems okish but would be too rng dependent.