Login

russian armor

Give USF an intermediate AT

7 Nov 2019, 15:34 PM
#41
avatar of oootto92

Posts: 177

instead of a rework how about a gun upgrade that increase at but lowers ai?


I think something like this would be a great choice.

Implementing an unlock system on major like the ones on LT and CPT would be a great step. You could have modular sherman upgrades behind this, like upgrading the sherman with long barrel 76mm gun. It would also be nice historical touch as shermans were so modular and upgradable.

This sort of solution could also work as a bridge to fixing the ostheer t4 viability issue by putting some upgrades like sideskirts in t4.
7 Nov 2019, 15:45 PM
#42
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 15:26 PMLago


The Command Panther was tied to tech because it allowed you to completely skip 300 MP 135 FU of teching costs.

How much earlier the M10 and Scott hit depends on how you split that 120 FU. It doesn't have to be 60/60.

If M8s and M10s are enough to carry a game themselves, why does USF need the Jackson in the first place?


It’s not about carrying the game, it’s about rushing them in 1v1 when you’re ahead by skipping the last tier and saving 40-80 fuel. Teching up shouldn’t be punished like this. The okw tech split didn’t have the JP4 at the 1st half for this very reason.
7 Nov 2019, 15:49 PM
#43
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



I think something like this would be a great choice.

Implementing an unlock system on major like the ones on LT and CPT would be a great step. You could have modular sherman upgrades behind this, like upgrading the sherman with long barrel 76mm gun. It would also be nice historical touch as shermans were so modular and upgradable.

This sort of solution could also work as a bridge to fixing the ostheer t4 viability issue by putting some upgrades like sideskirts in t4.


This system would be a really good idea.
7 Nov 2019, 15:58 PM
#44
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Can we leave this game as it is now? Creating new problems and new rework threads like this is just annoying. Like vipper who thinks major and off map is not cool but elefant with recon and stuka its ok somehow "balanced" double standards? This is proof that people just desperate looking for something to "balance" to keep this forum alife. ambulance rework when?

If you want to complain about my post at least have decency to complain about things I have posted and not about fictional post.

I have posted multiple times that commanders with super heavies imo should not have access to powerful off map and I have actually used the Elephant/Reckon/diving bomb as an example. Even made a freaking thread about.

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Jul 2018, 09:05 AMVipper
2) Balance commander themselves by removing abilities combination that are simply too strong.

Generally avoid combination of premium mediums, Super heavies and powerful off maps.

Here is list of commander that imo should change:

Wehrmacht Doctrines

1) Jaeger Armour Doctrine
The combo of elefant and Stuka Bombing Strike should be removed so that both abilities can better be balanced. Stuka could easily be replaced by less powerful attacks like Incendiary Bombing Run or even strafing run

2) Assault Support Doctrine/Spearhead Doctrine
Tiger and fragmentation bombing. Fragmentation bombing could be replaced by light artillery barrage or incendiary bombing.


3) Lightning War Doctrine
The combo of Jaeger Light Infantry, Stuka Close Air Support, Tiger Tank is simply too much.
Replace Jaeger Light Infantry with things like smoke bombs, Model 24 stun Grenade, assault grenadiers, artillery officer.

Replace Stuka Close Air Support with think like Light Artillery Barrage, Incendiary Bombing Run, Strafing Run.

4) Mobile Defense Doctrine
Puma and Command tank.

Replace Command tank with sector artillery (an ability that needs to be looked at)

By separating super heavies like the Tiger and Elefant from strong off maps and g43 one could better balance all these abilities.

In the case of G43 my suggestion would be (as for other weapon upgrades) that they get a tech cost and become more powerful so that the player need to decide when to invest in them instead of being able to spam infantry until he can reach the required CP.

For instance g43 could be change to be near M1s in DPS but provide 4+1 increasing the member of PG (or even grenadiers to 5).


Now pls instead of trying to smear me, try to get back on topic which is USF intermediate AT


7 Nov 2019, 16:05 PM
#45
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

One has to ask does the USF actually require stock AT options that shut down PzIV?

USF currently have top of the line infatry, top of the line light vehicles, top of the line TD. Would giving the faction top of the line mediums an overkill?
7 Nov 2019, 16:12 PM
#46
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 16:05 PMVipper
One has to ask does the USF actually require stock AT options that shut down PzIV?

USF currently have top of the line infatry, top of the line light vehicles, top of the line TD. Would giving the faction top of the line mediums an overkill?


The whole discussion is there so when the Jackson gets the nerf it needs, USF can still function. Top ideas so far:

1) Stock M10 at Major tier with better pen
2) Stock 76mm gun upgrade for M4A3
3) M1 becoming a Pak clone
7 Nov 2019, 16:18 PM
#47
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

The Jackson doesn't need nerfs, though. Not in any meaningful way

Its position is purely because of the game's pacing and meta, not because it is in any way 'too good'

Want the jackson to not be an auto pick every single game? Give light vehicles a much bigger window and massively delay Panthers and heavy tanks. A Jackson delay can be considered as a part of that, not as a solo endeavour.
7 Nov 2019, 16:21 PM
#48
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

I think the 'problem' is jackson is so much better AT and not much later than regular sherman, usf can afford to wait out.

The Sherman is your intermediate AT you asking but why build that in 2v2 and above. It is a comfortable decision to skip

I think this way too.

But a stuart AT buff sounds interesting
7 Nov 2019, 16:32 PM
#49
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



The whole discussion is there so when the Jackson gets the nerf it needs, USF can still function. Top ideas so far:

1) Stock M10 at Major tier with better pen
2) Stock 76mm gun upgrade for M4A3
3) M1 becoming a Pak clone

One can simply test it see what happens, if USF really have problem vs PzIV one can adjust. My point is that their might even be a need for an "intermediate AT".

M10 does not need better penetration since it designed to flank and has access to HVAP. If one want to increase the penetration one has to redesign the unit.

76mm sherman is simply OP especially its vet bonuses, if it become a stock upgrade one has to redesign the stats and probably removed the HE shells.

And no M1 does not need be a Pak clone, USF team weapon should be inferior to Ostheer ones. If it has to clone something it can be a zis or RW clone.


7 Nov 2019, 16:34 PM
#50
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

The Jackson doesn't need nerfs, though. Not in any meaningful way

Its position is purely because of the game's pacing and meta, not because it is in any way 'too good'

Want the jackson to not be an auto pick every single game? Give light vehicles a much bigger window and massively delay Panthers and heavy tanks. A Jackson delay can be considered as a part of that, not as a solo endeavour.



There are other issues as well. The Jacksons power results in the at focused doctrinal vehicles M10, M4(76) and e8 being passed over. It also creates a situation where in the late game the US can fall back solely on the M36.
Other factions are forced to use combined arms because their late game AT options are handicapped in different ways- Su85 with a lack of a turret and poor rotation, panther's shorter range and higher supply/fuel/tech requirements, firefly with bad mobility and mediocre dps.
7 Nov 2019, 16:40 PM
#51
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1



3) M1 becoming a Pak clone


This is a terrible idea, the m1 is already better than the pak when you use AP rounds. Even without AP rounds it's better against mediums due to ROF and cone. Making it a clone would make it worse

Reworking the Stuart is better than all 3 of those ideas. Doesn't screw with doctrines like adding m10 and 76mm upgrade would

7 Nov 2019, 16:43 PM
#52
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1




There are other issues as well. The Jacksons power results in the at focused doctrinal vehicles M10, M4(76) and e8 being passed over. It also creates a situation where in the late game the US can fall back solely on the M36.
Other factions are forced to use combined arms because their late game AT options are handicapped in different ways- Su85 with a lack of a turret and poor rotation, panther's shorter range and higher supply/fuel/tech requirements, firefly with bad mobility and mediocre dps.


I agree that the M10 is mostly a waste, but the other points I disagree with.

The M36 is paper thin and has zero anti infantry. Panthers, on the other hand, are durable and have a pair of MGs that are now actually a decent threat to infantry. Late okw and ost can absolutely rely on them as their only vehicle after managing to get one out. Combined arms is a better plan, but mono builds are as viable as ever.
7 Nov 2019, 16:43 PM
#53
avatar of CreativeName

Posts: 281

I dont really see any issues with usf anti tank, sure the M1 doesnt have the best pen but a great rate of fire, amazing vet, armor piercing rounds, extended range ability and is the cheapest at gun.

And i dont really get whats wrong about usf players need to build a tank destroyer to counter everything above medium tanks, like... isnt that the point of a tank destroyer?
If you want other options, go ranger or paratroopers and put zooks on them. 76mm Shermans are insane with armor piercing rounds vs every tank btw.

Non-doc m10s are a really bad idea imo, that would make ostheer t3 basically useless in 1v1.
USF anti tank doesnt need a buff imo, they have plenty of options.
7 Nov 2019, 16:45 PM
#54
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



This is a terrible idea, the m1 is already better than the pak when you use AP rounds. Even without AP rounds it's better against mediums due to ROF and cone. Making it a clone would make it worse

Reworking the Stuart is better than all 3 of those ideas. Doesn't screw with doctrines like adding m10 and 76mm upgrade would



Pak clone would mean no sabot rounds.
7 Nov 2019, 17:03 PM
#55
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1



Pak clone would mean no sabot rounds.


I'm aware. The pak default performance is worse than m1 w/ sabot rounds. The pak also has a narrower cone than the m1. So this would be a nerf on almost all accounts. You're just saving the US player a little Muni while nerfing their AT gun

You don't even need the sabot rounds against Ost t3. Yes against OKW p4, but against most mediums it's fine without it
7 Nov 2019, 17:16 PM
#56
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783



I agree that the M10 is mostly a waste, but the other points I disagree with.

The M36 is paper thin and has zero anti infantry. Panthers, on the other hand, are durable and have a pair of MGs that are now actually a decent threat to infantry. Late okw and ost can absolutely rely on them as their only vehicle after managing to get one out. Combined arms is a better plan, but mono builds are as viable as ever.



The SU85 is paper thin and has zero anti infantry. It also lacks a turret, has terrible rotation speed, has more expensive tech requirements and lacks self repair. Not only that, but the soviets are stuck with the PTRS while USF gets the zook, the AT gun is in a non meta side tech, and the stock supporting generalist medium has the worst AT capability of all generalist mediums.
You'd think with all these factors working against Soviets, they would be quite a bit worse off.

As for combined arms, with 2 M36, you don't need more zooks, you don't need AT guns. As long as you have vetted rifles for an emergency snare if that, Jacksons are all you need for AT-and that's the issue.

Regarding ost only building panthers as their sole vehicle, it just doesn't work that way. Ost heavily relies on vehicles to do a large portion of their AI damage- which is just as well since they have a decent lineup of AI vehicles-and this is why a brumbar rush is far far far more common than a panther rush.
7 Nov 2019, 19:01 PM
#57
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

The Jackson doesn't need nerfs, though. Not in any meaningful way

Its position is purely because of the game's pacing and meta, not because it is in any way 'too good'

Want the jackson to not be an auto pick every single game? Give light vehicles a much bigger window and massively delay Panthers and heavy tanks. A Jackson delay can be considered as a part of that, not as a solo endeavour.


That's part of my suggestion; by putting the M36 behind another tech, and adding an intermediate AT source for USF, the Panther can be more easily adjusted.

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 09:00 AMddd
1. If jackson gets price and pop reduction after getting locked behind sidegrade, than TD spam will be even more of an issue in team games.

2. If jackson gets locked behind sidegrade than why should anyone pick any different doctrine than heavy cav?

3. If jackson gets locked behind sidegrade than okw panther should too. Its even more of an issue.


1. If anything, it's price and/or pop would be increased, since it no longer needs to massively over-perform to keep USF viable (since there would be another intermediate AT)

2. This is a valid concern, but I think commander reworks could fix this.

3. Preferably in the same patch, the M36 would be locked behind an upgrade (or a different solution) and the Panther would also be delayed by a fair bit. Currently the two are "tied" together, since delaying one would make the other far too powerful. By fixing the USF's lack of intermediate AT, we can increase the price / delay the M36, which in turn means we can increase the price / delay the panther.


3rd option, absolutely nothing will change and it'll just arrive a bit later, just like wehraboos completely ignore their intermediate AT vehicles and tunnelvision on panther, having raging wehraboos back to forums, crying their eyes out.


This is because currently mediums have a tiny window of viability; meaning that the panther is the optimal choice. By delaying both, mediums become more viable.



I've updated the chart with Vet 0 / Vet 3 pen, and Vet 0 / Vet 3 (or 5) armor values. I've also added non-doc pen increasing abilities (USF M1 AP, M36 HVAP), and fixed a few minor errors. While it does lessen the need for a USF intermediate AT, I think relying on Muni/cooldown abilities to fill that gap is a bit excessive. It also shows how far ahead the M36 is, especially at vet with HVAP.

No m-42 in the Soviet tree? 0/10 I uninstalled CoH2.

(The AT rifles on tank hunter sections and the brit sniper are also missing. Remember when relic told us the brit sniper was a LV counter? I do. Lawdy.)


The chart focuses on non-doc infantry AT, ATG, Light AV, Medium AV, Heavy AV. I could add more, but it might become unreadable.

That leaves out the m1 57mm AP rounds. Those pen values do fall in between 150 and 260.


Added!
7 Nov 2019, 20:19 PM
#58
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Might be interesting if officers got the super zook (they are limited to 1 each so over use wouldn't really be an issue) also since they lack a snare that would help keep them from being excessive but still bridge the gap.

Alao thanks for the updated graph, it does paint a better picture
7 Nov 2019, 22:52 PM
#59
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

A lot of people in this thread are looking at the M10, and 2 things would have to happen for the m10 to be nondoc. 1st you'd have to have a replacement ability for armor co obviously, and 2nd you'd have to nerf the m10 ALOT.
7 Nov 2019, 23:11 PM
#60
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I think reworking the Stuart is the way to go. It's a really odd unit that utterly dumpsters T2 Ostheer but is pretty much useless against anything bigger.

Making it fill a niche like the SU-76 (good against mediums in pairs or with a Sherman, doesn't utterly dumpster LVs) would then give you some space to specialise the Jackson.
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

925 users are online: 925 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
32 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50069
Welcome our newest member, king88reisen
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM