Is Tiger/Ace an AI or AT tank?
Posts: 785
Posts: 1794
The last thing we need to be doing right now is buffing heavy tanks
I call it a fix in making tiger turret tracking more in line with its level
Posts: 1794
The tiger is probably the most consistent heavy tank. It has stead damage output, good armour and great health. But at the heart its an overgrown p4, use it like one and profit. You still need to support your armour, no matter what the armour is.
Axis stock armour is more durable than allied stock armour and allied doctrinal meat shields are more durable that their axis counterparts. It's not rocket science. The allied players are dedicating their doctrine to having something that can take punishment while the axis factions have that luxury by default.
In your comparison of jackson/ Pershing vs panther/ tiger did you happen to factor in health? Or just offensive stats? What about armour?
I disagree its a p4. I guess here lies in old/misjudged mindset. I would love if it has the same vet bonus p4 gets though.
I stand by my brumba-fant example. Painfully slow turret is not supporting for its level.
Like i said, tigers seen a long period of unused, and it dropped back to under used in last week games and i wonder if this week games we see more tigers again.
Yes i consider everything from range, pen, speed, crew repairs, abilities, vet bonus, target size. It just felt usf combo is clearly better
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
I disagree its a p4. I guess here lies in old/misjudged mindset. I would love if it has the same vet bonus p4 gets though.
I stand by my brumba-fant example. Painfully slow turret is not supporting for its level.
Like i said, tigers seen a long period of unused, and it dropped back to under used in last week games and i wonder if this week games we see more tigers again.
Yes i consider everything from range, pen, speed, crew repairs, abilities, vet bonus, target size. It just felt usf combo is clearly better
Are you sure you're playing the same game?
Posts: 1794
In fact i rather lose its rof vet and distribute them to turret and pen, making it more comprehensive package.
Rof seems a liability now, something like armor vet.
I mean it's mostly cited hp armor etc, these exists on allies heavy too. Pershing is just 1 less hit off, but much harder to hit and better in AI and AT.
And allies we know, counter the armorhp stats better.
Posts: 1794
Are you sure you're playing the same game?
Yes, why you say that?
Brumbafant sounds fair, and if we use tiger as such, i guess it works. But allies do have good AI heavy
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Yes, why you say that?
Brumbafant sounds fair, and if we use tiger as such, i guess it works. But allies do have good AI heavy
Historically, in game sense, heavies were always the most useful in 1v1, depending on meta on 2v2 and less useful on 4v4. It's just a matter of unit volume, timing, counters available, etc.
Which is totally inverse to super heavies. Asking for any buffs or adjustments to heavies for teamgames atm, is like asking for buffs on super heavies because they are harder to use in 1v1.
Posts: 1794
But since looking at tiger, i felt its underpowered, just cost ineffective now..a theme of wehr units now, no?
I just compare Pershing stats, and imo it is simply superior to tiger. Even its rof started slower but at vet, beats out tiger.
Add to usf having better counter to tiger than wehr..
Hence we have a problem.
Posts: 5279
To compare to a Pershing the tiger is basicly the same thing but with more points in durability than mobility and I see far more tigers in team games than I do Pershings because of that.
Posts: 1794
Tiger may look bigger graphically, but tiny Pershing is a clearly better unit, can we agre here?
Posts: 1794
Pershing has less health than a Tiger and doesn't get any ROF buffs till vet 3(where it gets a huge 50%)
To compare to a Pershing the tiger is basicly the same thing but with more points in durability than mobility and I see far more tigers in team games than I do Pershings because of that.
Tiger can last 1 more hit. i don't think it is considered that durable. When you think how slow, how large target size, how more popcap, how wehr don't have 60td...it just can't reconcile Wehr unit cost effective issues.
Imo why more tiger than Pershing? Cost effective problems for Wehr. And tiger looks cooler. A lot of usf players underestimated the pershing. Even i did, before looking deeper. Now i will use more Pershing.
To think i practice so much baby sit my tiger, i can do better easier with Pershing when i play usf, and i expect to get better results with it.
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
Posts: 5279
Tiger can last 1 more hit. i don't think it is considered that durable. When you think how slow, how large target size, how more popcap, how wehr don't have 60td...it just can't reconcile Wehr unit cost effective issues.
Imo why more tiger than Pershing? Cost effective problems for Wehr. And tiger looks cooler. A lot of usf players underestimated the pershing. Even i did, before looking deeper. Now i will use more Pershing.
To think i practice so much baby sit my tiger, i can do better easier with Pershing when i play usf, and i expect to get better results with it.
1 hit is a substantial bonus. What would kill a Pershing the tiger can limp away from.
Pershing RoF bonus at vet 3 got reduced to 30% if I'm not mistaken.
did it? Thanks for the correction. Isn't that about the same bonus all tanks get then at that point only later?
Posts: 1794
Glad we are getting somewhere with this digging. It is easy to wave off using old mindset and even visual misperceptions.
Tiger needs help for its cost. Wehr needs help for their late game cost efficiency. Same theme we are seeing
Posts: 1794
1 hit is a substantial bonus. What would kill a Pershing the tiger can limp away from.
If it can hit a Pershing. Tiger is simply too slow to compensate for that 1 hit, imo. Especially against 60TD and large target size.
I believe even with blitz, Pershing is still faster. Lol.
I mean i like to accept the old armorhp design, but reality they matter little now.
Another example, if you say panther is compensated from 60td by its hp,i cannot argue that specifically.
But for Tiger hp, its not a strong standings. Im thinking maybe we standardized all Tiger to 1280hp, that will make durability more true
Posts: 789
Mr Game: Yes yes you are right buff Tiger!
Ok
Posts: 66
Posts: 1289
Jezus christ, whats mrgame2 the gonna post tomorrow? Maxim>MG42 OP pls nerf or Cromwell to OP?
Dont give him inspiration. He will probably doe just that.
Posts: 1794
It seems hard to fathom that those big impressive looking axis tanks, could just be inadequate in games now..
Posts: 5279
Livestreams
10 | |||||
27 | |||||
6 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Goynet40
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM