Login

russian armor

Heavy Tank CP

18 Nov 2019, 17:15 PM
#61
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 16:48 PMVipper

It would help much as band aid.

The problems are:
Super heavy timing/efficiency
TDs efficiency at range 60

The fact that during the tournament the majority of games involved at least doctrinal 1 Super heavy should be a clear indication that these unit over-perform and the problem of "stalling" for super heavy that the previews patch aim to solve, has become even worse since it not even "stalling" now.


Not saying OKW's tech is the only problem with the current heavy meta, I do have a different view on it though. These are the changes I'd like to see currently:

- Make all the main heavies 11 CP, so it becomes advisable to get a medium first.
- Reduce armor on IS2 from 375 to 350, so non-doctrinal units work better against it.
- Reduce reload speed on Tiger slightly.
- Change OKW tech so P4 can arrive earlier, reducing the need of going Tiger to compete (post #57).

It could also help if Panther got reworked by reducing its durability while cutting cost and pop. Something like 170 fuel, 800 HP, 16 pop. That way Axis can more popcap efficiently fight against heavies while keeping enough anti-infantry on the field. The Tiger fulfills allot more roles than the Panther for just 45 more fuel and 3 more pop.
18 Nov 2019, 17:44 PM
#62
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

While we are at it, is it necessary for Tigers and IS2 to gain range at vet 2 ?
18 Nov 2019, 17:57 PM
#63
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

While we are at it, is it necessary for Tigers and IS2 to gain range at vet 2 ?


What about moving it to vet 3 with mobility increase going to vet 2?
18 Nov 2019, 17:59 PM
#64
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

Solution 1: Put heavy tanks at 25CP and Heavy TDs at 32CP. (Humour, don’t @ me)
Solution 2: Make all heavies a 1 time call in with no 2nd call in after you lose it.
Solution 3: Buff their armour and nerf their HP, so that flanks and situations where allies have a lot of pen will hurt heavies a lot more.
18 Nov 2019, 18:00 PM
#65
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

Put heavy tanks at 25CP and Heavy TDs at 32CP, the close whatever thread opens up about UP heavies.


Did you watch the tourney or do you not care about what the top players do?
18 Nov 2019, 18:00 PM
#66
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...

- Make all the main heavies 11 CP, so it becomes advisable to get a medium first.

...
Once the timing of super heavies is fixed we can check the rest of the issues :).
18 Nov 2019, 18:01 PM
#67
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3



Did you watch the tourney or do you not care about what the top players do?


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humour
18 Nov 2019, 18:01 PM
#68
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:00 PMVipper
Once the timing of super heavies is fixed we can check the rest of the issues :).


You can change the timing all you want. Until people realize giving heavies less armour and more health was a horrible idea, we’re stuck with the current damage sponges.
18 Nov 2019, 18:03 PM
#69
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

While we are at it, is it necessary for Tigers and IS2 to gain range at vet 2 ?

Tiger having a 15 range disadvantage when facing TDs that can reliable hit and penetrate it from max would be an issue.

The efficiency of TDs at range 60 would have to be decreased.
18 Nov 2019, 18:05 PM
#70
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You can change the timing all you want. Until people realize giving heavies less armour and more health was a horrible idea, we’re stuck with the current damage sponges.

Tiger and IS-2 where not changed and they are still problematic.
18 Nov 2019, 18:07 PM
#71
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:05 PMVipper

Tiger and IS-2 where not changed and they are still problematic.


My point is that all heavies have a design flaw. They should not have high amounts of HP, they should have high armour and mid level HP. That way getting a flank on an IS2/Tiger/Churchill or hitting them with AT guns up close would be a hell of a lot more lethal and a more reliable way to take them out. Their current iteration is horrible, they’re like damage sponges and often times tilt games with RNG because one good dive is invalidated thanks to the huge damage heavies can take.
18 Nov 2019, 18:12 PM
#72
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



My point is that all heavies have a design flaw. They should not have high amounts of HP, they should have high armour and mid level HP. That way getting a flank on an IS2/Tiger/Churchill or hitting them with AT guns up close would be a hell of a lot more lethal and a more reliable way to take them out. Their current iteration is horrible, they’re like damage sponges and often times tilt games with RNG because one good dive is invalidated thanks to the huge damage heavies can take.

Their armor/HP is the least of their problems especially for Tiger that can hit and penetrate reliably from range 60. With the cost of around 2 PzIV they need to be worth building.

Churchill being to bounce PzIV rear shot is an issue but a separate one.
18 Nov 2019, 18:20 PM
#73
avatar of flyingpancake

Posts: 186 | Subs: 1

Feel the current stall in meta is rather boring to play and watch and detract from possible interesting strategies that could be play. Now people just wait for pershing and tiger and ignore medium tanks. I think by moving the CP to 13 mediums get more time to shine and there will be more variation in viable commanders. Also I see no reason why ISU152 and Jagd Tiger and Elephant are Higher then other heavy tanks. These tanks are already a gamble in 1v1 to begin with, no reason to incentivize having normal heavies over them.
18 Nov 2019, 18:23 PM
#74
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794



Not saying OKW's tech is the only problem with the current heavy meta, I do have a different view on it though. These are the changes I'd like to see currently:

- Make all the main heavies 11 CP, so it becomes advisable to get a medium first.
- Reduce armor on IS2 from 375 to 350, so non-doctrinal units work better against it.
- Reduce reload speed on Tiger slightly.
- Change OKW tech so P4 can arrive earlier, reducing the need of going Tiger to compete (post #57).

It could also help if Panther got reworked by reducing its durability while cutting cost and pop. Something like 170 fuel, 800 HP, 16 pop. That way Axis can more popcap efficiently fight against heavies while keeping enough anti-infantry on the field. The Tiger fulfills allot more roles than the Panther for just 45 more fuel and 3 more pop.


I agree with your past resources change but not this.

Main heavies all at 11 CP, imo IS2 and Pershing is better than Tiger. So if we intend to keep that way, the units must be compensated with difference resources.

375 to 350, still will not give people faith in Jp4.

Reducing reload speed of Tiger is the death sentence. If you dont tweak other heavies. Even the squishy Pershing is only 80Hp less than Tiger. But it ace it in every thing else.

Panther at 800HP is also a death sentence. Panther problem is its poor vet scaling. But the biggest problem is 60TD, super cost effective, super vet scaling. There is no way making Panther 2 pop cheaper will solve this.
18 Nov 2019, 19:08 PM
#75
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:23 PMmrgame2

I agree with your past resources change but not this.

Main heavies all at 11 CP, imo IS2 and Pershing is better than Tiger. So if we intend to keep that way, the units must be compensated with difference resources.


Pershing has obvious trade-offs compared to Tiger, which you'd know if you'd take an unbiased look at the stats. I wouldn't call one clearly better than the other. IS2 is probably the best heavy - if we take its counters into account - which gets addressed below.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:23 PMmrgame2
375 to 350, still will not give people faith in Jp4.


It sounds like a small change, but it's quite significant. The only armor that really matters in endgame situations is armor above the 180-190 mark, the far penetration value of most AT guns. Reducing the big chunk the IS2 has above this value even with just 25 will make quite a big noticeable in game.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:23 PMmrgame2
Reducing reload speed of Tiger is the death sentence. If you dont tweak other heavies. Even the squishy Pershing is only 80Hp less than Tiger. But it ace it in every thing else.


The Tiger's fast rof makes it far too efficient against infantry. Its AoE is not far off from the Pershing, but it reloads much faster (5~ reload vs 6,5). If you added 0,5 more reload to Tiger, you could give it like 10-20 more penetration to compensate loss of AT power.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 18:23 PMmrgame2
Panther at 800HP is also a death sentence. Panther problem is its poor vet scaling. But the biggest problem is 60TD, super cost effective, super vet scaling. There is no way making Panther 2 pop cheaper will solve this.


How about this:
- 18 pop to 16 pop
- 50 range to 55 range
- 185 fuel to 175 fuel
- 960 hp to 800 hp
- 260 armor to 220 armor

This would put it somewhere between the current Panther and 60 range TD's in terms of role. It would not bully mediums as hard, but be a more efficient counter to heavies. It would also allow it to more easily return fire against 60 range TD's, without overly exposing itself.
18 Nov 2019, 20:31 PM
#76
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1

Increasing CP would not change anything. Before the CPs were changed it was 13 CP for the IS2. What happened in those tourneys? Yep, Soviet players stalled for the IS2.

As for the Tiger, there is simply no point in going for the Panther unless you want to lose. At best, the Panther will keep the IS2 at bay until it hits vet 2. It has an enormous cost (especially for Wehrmacht players), but doesn't deliver for its price tag.

So what are your options to reliably counter the IS2? You guessed it. The Tiger.

Sure, it helps the Tiger is a very strong unit, but the overall issue is that you simply don't have any other reliable counter.
18 Nov 2019, 20:40 PM
#77
avatar of JibberJabberJobber

Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 20:31 PMFarlion
Sure, it helps the Tiger is a very strong unit, but the overall issue is that you simply don't have any other reliable counter.


Pak43 :luvCarrot:
18 Nov 2019, 20:42 PM
#78
avatar of Sully

Posts: 390 | Subs: 2


Reducing the IS-2's armor slightly would bump the TTK of Panthers and Jagdpanzer IVs and ATGs to something more acceptable, and a cost increase on the IS-2 would make the Panther a more cost effective choice. I think both would go a long way to make the Tiger I a less mandatory response to the IS-2.


Here's a radical idea, how about we make the JP4 function like all other tank destroyers? High penetration, with lower base RoF. Crazy I know.

I hear mama JagTiger has 160 far range overkill penetration to spare, maybe borrow some from her?

18 Nov 2019, 20:48 PM
#79
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2019, 20:42 PMSully
Here's a radical idea, how about we make the JP4 function like all other tank destroyers? High penetration, with lower base RoF. Crazy I know.


And strip OKW of their best counter to tank destroyer and medium spam? I'd rather not. The current Jagdpanzer IV has a clearly defined role, and it excels at it. The only problem is that nothing except the Tiger I has high enough DPM to fight against the IS-2, but that's no reason to change the JP4 entirely. JP4s do good enough against all other heavies due to their excellent DPM.

(fun fact: at max range and vet 0 a JP4 actually has a lower TTK against an IS-2 than a Jackson or a Firefly has against a Tiger; only the SU-85 is slightly better)

Besides that, I do consider the Allied TD profile to be a bad design (even though we're stuck with it now), that I definitely wouldn't want to spread to even more units.
18 Nov 2019, 20:50 PM
#80
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1



Pak43 :luvCarrot:


Festung Armor meta in WCS2 :sibTux:
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

942 users are online: 1 member and 941 guests
PatFenis
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49072
Welcome our newest member, Durddcdy23
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM