Tank hunter doctrine underpowered

Im fine with the artillery, just the camo needs to be changed or removed. Its a disadvantage

Tank Hunters is much worse than Guard Motor or Mechanized for Tank Hunting - no Mark Target, no advanced medium or heavy TD. It doesn't have tank traps which makes it more difficult to use mines effectively, stun mines aren't anywhere near as good as Tellers. The camo is great for Cons but not good for Su85's.

IMHO i used this doc some time and it just need:
1. Rework of ptabs - give engine damage like regular snare works, it will help to chase enemy armor.
2. Replace ML-20 to another ability - mark target could be very good, but it also can make balance issues when used togetger with ptabs. More better give some specific ability: like "Smell of prey" (sounds stupid, but good reflect identity) passive ability for all your light and medium tanks, they will get speed bonus when to them near enemy armor with crippled engine or with shocked crew (after hit on light AT-mine or after ptabing).

The main power of this ability are at-cons, they are very powerful, but...hunter is someone who chasing his prey, while in this doc...you don't have anything for chasing. All abilities are very static and it always meaning that you must wait your enemy to catch him in trap. It's very close to brits sim-city, OKW and OST defense doctrines, in terms of gameplay. More proper to call it "Advanced anti-tank defense". But while other doctrine gives you not only AT defense, but AI also, in this doctrine you have all abilities works only against armor.

Add tank traps to the mine laying ability, fix the cluster bombs, and I think the doctrine will be fine. It's not meant to be a normal doctrine, more of an ultra specialized one to fulfill a specific purpose.

I personally would rather see the B4 in the doctrine than the ML-20 for thematic purposes, but it is not really necessary.

TBH it does have a vet1 one shot Tank ability so it would be perfect. And we need the meme canonin more commanders man.

Add a mortar pit barrage to Pyro Tommies so they can be used even beyond their own range and it would probably be fine

It was being called a liar about it in numerous threads and the shout box that got annoying.

Then can you imagine how annoying it is to be called a liar when there's absolutely no evidence of it at all? I gave correct facts and tests and you still called me a liar... I only bring up your mistakes because I didn't make any on this topic yet you still accuse me....

It's analogous to taking a math test in the first grade, answering that 2+2=6, then having your elementary school teacher shout "Liar" at you every time they see you. I do understand what you're saying though, and will try to be less thin-skinned.

WTF??? There are so many things wrong with this analogy. First of all, you are always allowed to go look up the correct answer. You literally admitted to being too lazy to check it yourself, so I had to provide it for you

Second, I'm not your fucking elementary school teacher. I have no responsibility towards you whatsoever, and you're not a child. And it's not just that you got the cost wrong. You got the cost wrong while saying the ability wasn't worth the cost....

The Commander is not bad by any definition. Just because it's not the very top of the meta doesn't mean it's bad

1. Rework of ptabs - give engine damage like regular snare works, it will help to chase enemy armor.

That would be way too strong. Commander gives you enough ways to slow down tanks

stuff
The Commander is not bad by any definition. Just because it's not the very top of the meta doesn't mean it's bad

Just out of curiosity, is this the first time you've caught someone being incorrect about something? I see people like Vipper do it all the time. What I don't see people Vipper do is take it to the shout box, calling the person a liar, then bringing it up in every thread about the subject. Also, when you back up the obsessive, insulting behavior with angry demands for respect, you're probably not going to get what you want.

Also, no matter how much you insist, this commander isn't competitive. I've never seen it in a tournament or even any high-level replays. If you're that convinced it's good and I'm a lying troll, put out a poll on it.

If you're that convinced it's good and I'm a lying troll, put out a poll on it.

Dude did you even read my post? I don't think you're a lying troll. Okay you made a mistake, no problem with that, I've done it on several other topics

The problem is you asserting the same argument even after realizing you had multiple details wrong. And accusing me of lying when I have had my facts straight the entire time

Do you really not think you've been equally/more insulting to me? Have you read your own posts? Only one of us has been saying the other is stupid, and that's you. I never said anything about your intelligence, I just said you were wrong about specifics...

I dont think we should get rid of the ML-20 because static play completely shuts down this doctrine.

I'm not sure Tank Hunter is underpowered, just out of meta, but it's definitely good enough.

stuff

Now its a mistake and not a shout-box worthy lie? Okay.

Redo your bombing run tests with a PIV with the bombing run parallel to the axis of the tank like people would use it in game. Then come back here and post the best and worst results, instead of just saying that it does 960 damage (or whatever number you claimed). The on-axis results that I got were usually in the 160-320 range, which isn't good for 180 munitions. You had to have ran the tests a bunch of times and know when it doesn't work well, so, IMO, you were misleading when you said it's great. It would be like taking a couple of UKF or OST victories from the WCS tournament and then saying there was nothing wrong with the faction, because somebody won with those.

Then run that same test with the strafe from the new airborne doctrine that costs about the same.

Now its a mistake and not a shout-box worthy lie? Okay.

What are you talking about? And you've been calling me stupid the entire time, so what's your point???

I have explained multiple times that the ability is not good against smaller targets. I don't know why you're asking me to test it against things I already said it's not good against. Mediums are fast enough to dodge any bombing run if you're paying attention

No one is demanding respect btw... Asking you to stop calling me stupid =\= "demanding respect". I bring up your mistakes because you're calling me dumb...

Then run that same test with the strafe from the new airborne doctrine that costs about the same.

You're comparing a super precise ability to one that is meant to cover a larger area. The rockets don't stun/blind either, and they are much easier to dodge imo

And I already posted a test with a parallel run in the last thread, it can still do good damage on that angle on heavies

I noticed how when conscripts try to snare enemy tanks the animation stops as soon as the tank moves a little. That needs to be fixed!

IMHO i used this doc some time and it just need:
1. Rework of ptabs - give engine damage like regular snare works, it will help to chase enemy armor.
2. Replace ML-20 to another ability - mark target could be very good, but it also can make balance issues when used togetger with ptabs. More better give some specific ability: like "Smell of prey" (sounds stupid, but good reflect identity) passive ability for all your light and medium tanks, they will get speed bonus when to them near enemy armor with crippled engine or with shocked crew (after hit on light AT-mine or after ptabing).

The main power of this ability are at-cons, they are very powerful, but...hunter is someone who chasing his prey, while in this doc...you don't have anything for chasing. All abilities are very static and it always meaning that you must wait your enemy to catch him in trap. It's very close to brits sim-city, OKW and OST defense doctrines, in terms of gameplay. More proper to call it "Advanced anti-tank defense". But while other doctrine gives you not only AT defense, but AI also, in this doctrine you have all abilities works only against armor.

It will not cause a balance issue as mark target and il2 co exist in isu guard commander.
I think to make this commander replace tank camo with recon and ml20 with b4.
I don't know about you guys but soviets have limited commanders with recon. Not even airborne commander has recon.

I prefer ml20 over b4.
The real issue is a useless camo

The useless increased pen, accuracy and ROF camo... Yes quite useless indeed.

What are you talking about? And you've been calling me stupid the entire time, so what's your point???

.

Well, I was thinking that you may be done with your fantasy world where I, for some nefarious reason, am making up many lies about one of the best Soviet commanders, and you are here to save the ignorant masses from my evil machinations. I was clearly mistaken.

One of your favorites is how lied about the timing. In parts of your fantasy, you said that I came up with such a crazy amount of time that even I admitted I lied. Here's what I said about PTAB timing.

The PTAB will kill a few models but doesn't normally wipe squads or anything. I can post a replay of that if you want to see it but its over an hour. I tried it a bunch of different ways to see if there was some way that it wasn't pathetic, but after trying all different sorts of targeting, couldn't find a way that it wasn't pathetic. I tested it on Minsk pocket and was getting about 9 seconds from smoke to impact if the bombing runs went along the long axis of the map.

•  
  

  0

  VS

  Grumpy

  Lunchbox

  3

  fragmentation vs butterfly test

  by: Grumpy map: Unknown

  1

  -

You could've watched it or ran the test yourself and saw that I wasn't lying about the timing. Instead, you invented your fantasy world. Are you going to call yourself lazy for not checking?

For everybody else, here is a video where you can see the delay. The only thing that I would agree with Sky about is that it does work better against Panthers and Ele's (which I didn't check originally). My testing was originally against PIV's, where Sky later admitted that it doesn't work well.



IMO, the timing on this is slow for something that is intended for anti-armor. I'd rather have the rocket strafe or the anti-tank overwatch, both of which are good as is.

I'd like something like this for a revised commander:

2cp - PTRS Cons (give them tank traps and maybe tellers in addition to ATG's, take away armor detection and give back molo's)
2cp - Camouflage (needs a little rework)
8cp - B4 (bait - something to dive at (shamelessly borrowed from Wingzero and others))
9cp - Command T-34/85 (set limit to 2, give mark target and same recon as UKF command, maybe reload aura, standard stats but slight increase in cost, becomes standard T34/85 if abandoned)
9cp - anti-tank overwatch or maybe IL2 rocket strafe

This probably wouldn't displace any of the heavy tank meta commanders but would be a solid commander that you could use in any game mode.

You could've watched it or ran the test yourself and saw that I wasn't lying about the timing. Instead, you invented your fantasy world. Are you going to call yourself lazy for not checking?

My favorite part of that video was where you specifically called it in at the longest possible angle for the plane to fly

It's slower than the IL2 precision strike I believe, but saying it's always 9 seconds is absolute nonsense. Like every bombing run in the game, it depends on position of the target and your angle...

My testing was originally against PIV's, where Sky later admitted that it doesn't work well.

Nope I have said this from the very beginning:

The PTAB airstrike is very good. If you can get engine damage or a ram, its really easy to get good hits on the larger targets.

And again:

Yup. Frag bomb did slightly more damage but only cause it's way more concentrated. You can see PTAB covers a WAY larger area, which is why it's easier to hit with in actual in-game scenarios where tanks move

It's also why it's much better against KTs, Jagdtiger, elefant, than regular tiger. More surface area to hit

You literally complain about me calling you a liar while you lie about what I've said. It's honestly entertaining at this point, so go ahead and continue if you want

The "sky later admitted" part is just a treat. You care more about fighting me than just discussing the game.

You're literally going to more effort to insult me than you do to look up correct stats for your argument. Incredible