What is the REAL problem with Ost T4?

Relevance?

That OST is lucky to even have a T4 when their T3 is capable of handling the other factions all on it's own. Basically you're complaining about a luxury other factions don't even have.

OST is the 2nd worst faction in tournament level 1v1, ahead of only UKF (partly because no one played them).

I think stalling Tiger and under using t3 is their self made down fall

Faction is great, ost players just trying their luck. Top players do, noob players follow. Tiger stalling noobs vs noobs lead to op ost. While top players played well to counter.

Less t3 allows t70 to roam and you get whiney complaints about t70 when no one think so before tiger stalling

Ost players must be the most self entitled cry babies

I think stalling Tiger and under using t3 is their self made down fall

Faction is great, ost players just trying their luck. Top players do, noob players follow. Tiger stalling noobs vs noobs lead to op ost. While top players played well to counter.

Less t3 allows t70 to roam and you get whiney complaints about t70 when no one think so before tiger stalling

Ost players must be the most self entitled cry babies

Those are stats from the recent 2019 World Cup Series, which (in terms of unit stats) was played on the current patch of the game. The WCS had the top players in the world playing for the biggest prize pool in CoH-series history ($20,000 pool), and they achieved a 37% win rate, compared to other factions which won 49-59% of their games.

There is no way that "Ost is fine" at top-tier levels of play; they're getting stomped by USF and Sov by ~22%.

Those are stats from the recent 2019 World Cup Series, which (in terms of unit stats) was played on the current patch of the game. The WCS had the top players in the world playing for the biggest prize pool in CoH-series history ($20,000 pool), and they achieved a 37% win rate, compared to other factions which won 49-59% of their games.

There is no way that "Ost is fine" at top-tier levels of play; they're getting stomped by USF and Sov by ~22%.

That's what im saying. Top players took a chance to stall for Tigers, which causes a hole in ost mid game. Ost is the easiest progressive faction but also dependent on not leaving a hole. So that explains the wc19 result for them. If they had played the ost way, perhaps and very likely % will be close to allies

Of course noobs like me, follow with heavy stalling in our random games.

I think stalling Tiger and under using t3 is their self made down fall

Faction is great, ost players just trying their luck. Top players do, noob players follow. Tiger stalling noobs vs noobs lead to op ost. While top players played well to counter.

Less t3 allows t70 to roam and you get whiney complaints about t70 when no one think so before tiger stalling

Ost players must be the most self entitled cry babies

Tigers were picked half of the time. Just over, 22 out of 43 games. In those 22 games, they won 11 times. In the other 21 games, without a tiger, they won 4.

Maybe they needed to t3 harder.

Tigers were picked half of the time. Just over, 22 out of 43 games. In those 22 games, they won 11 times. In the other 21 games, without a tiger, they won 4.

Maybe they needed to t3 harder.

Yep self entitled ost whiney:

During GCS2 the Panzer IV was the most commonly build OH vehicle. But this time around it was the 222. Tigers did appear more often, relatively speaking, as did StuG Gs (1:2 vs. 1:6 for GCS2). This is probably related to the players stalling for a Tiger more often than they did in GCS2, where Tiger doctrines were not commonly used. Similarily, only one Panther was build.

StuG-III Es where build in only one out of the eight Mechanized Assault games, so this unit is clearly not the selling point of the doctrine.

Yep self entitled ost whiney:

During GCS2 the Panzer IV was the most commonly build OH vehicle. But this time around it was the 222. Tigers did appear more often, relatively speaking, as did StuG Gs (1:2 vs. 1:6 for GCS2). This is probably related to the players stalling for a Tiger more often than they did in GCS2, where Tiger doctrines were not commonly used. Similarily, only one Panther was build.

StuG-III Es where build in only one out of the eight Mechanized Assault games, so this unit is clearly not the selling point of the doctrine.

Hm. Not sure how I'm whining. Just pointing out a fact.

I personally always build a t3 unit.

Hm. Not sure how I'm whining. Just pointing out a fact.

I personally always build a t3 unit.

Nein, i was referring to other ost players, not you

That OST is lucky to even have a T4 when their T3 is capable of handling the other factions all on it's own. Basically you're complaining about a luxury other factions don't even have.

Lol what t3 ost unit can handle the Jackson? Stug is your best chance and the Jackson outranges and outmaneuvers it

The panther often cant even fight the Jackson, but has the durability to not get spanked at least

That's what im saying. Top players took a chance to stall for Tigers, which causes a hole in ost mid game. Ost is the easiest progressive faction but also dependent on not leaving a hole. So that explains the wc19 result for them. If they had played the ost way, perhaps and very likely % will be close to allies

Of course noobs like me, follow with heavy stalling in our random games.

This is provably false, using the stats I linked before.

In total, there were 40 games with OST played. Of those 40 games, only 24 games had the OST player picking a doc with a Tiger in it, 4 games had no doc picked, and the remaining 12 games had docs picked without Tigers. That gives us a 60% "Tiger Pick" rate. However, there's much more to this.

From there, we can look at other information from the "teching" section of the stats page. Firstly, we need to acknowledge that for a player to "skip" a tier, they need to build a tier after it. If it's NOT built, then they can't be considered to have skipped the preceding tier, since the game had ended. This is important, because we can now see at what points in time OST games ended in.

T1 Built: 78% (31)
T1 Successfully Skipped: 15% (6)
T1 Failed to skip (3)
T2 Built: 80% (32)
This means 13% of all OST games (8) ended before building T2.
Remaining games: 32

T2 built: 80% (32)
T2 Skipped: 0% (0)
T2 Built + Skip = 80% (32)
T3 built: 68% (27)
T3 Skipped for T4: 5% (2)
T3 Built + T3 Skipped: 73% (29)
This means that 7% of all OST games(3) ended between T2 and their next building (t3 or t4).
Remaining games: 29

So that means, out of the 40 total OST games, 29 were still active after building T3 (or skipping to T4) - or 73%. Since we're only interested in T3, as your hypothesis is an under-utilization of it, we can then remove all the "skipped T3 for T4" games (2). That gives us 67.5% of OST games (27 out of 40) with T3 being built.

However, it also gives us the statistic that when OST players are given the opportunity to build T3, 84.4% (27 out of 32) did so.

Ok, but what was the actual utilization of T3?
Out of 30 games, the P4 was built in 20 of them (28 times)
Out of 30 games, the STuG G was built in 10 of them (22 times)
Out of 30 games, the Ostwind was built in 3 of them (6 times)

I'm going to assume that the Ostwind wasn't built as a vehicle counter, so I'm going to ignore it. That leaves us with 20 P4 games and 10 StuG games. Unfortunately, I don't have the numbers from individual games, so I can't say what the overlap was between those two units (i.e. how often they were both built in the same game). However, we know that the minimum is 20 games (entirely overlapped) and the maximum is 30 games (no overlap) - so let's take the average: 25 games. Similarly, we don't know the overlap between STuGs and P4s, but we know that a total of 50 were built.

So what's the conclusion?

Out of the 40 games played, OST players only had the opportunity to build T3 in 32 games (80%).
Out of those 32 games where OST players could build T3, they did so in 27 (84.4%).
On average, out of the 27 games where OST players did build T3, they built unit(s) from it in 25 games (92.6%).
On average, in those 25 games with T3 units, OST players built two tanks (P4s or STuGs, or a mix).

84.4% of players building two tanks from T3 is not taking a "chance to stall for Tigers, which causes a hole in ost mid game."

There was no hole.

Tigers were picked half of the time. Just over, 22 out of 43 games. In those 22 games, they won 11 times. In the other 21 games, without a tiger, they won 4.

Maybe they needed to t3 harder.

Evidently, they "T3'd pretty hard". It might be that T3 isn't all that great in late game (60 range TDs), and the Tiger is a strong crutch unit for the faction.

From memory, a lot of p4 came after tigers, or had to go emergency p4 since stalling isnt working out well enough..

I believe p4 timings are much longer in wc19 than before, and that's the hole im seeing

Cheers love, the cavalry’s here!
Thanks mrgame2

So the fact Ost lost 81% of their games without the tiger at high level play makes Ost fine.

From memory, a lot of p4 came after tigers, or had to go emergency p4 since stalling isnt working out well enough..

I believe p4 timings are much longer in wc19 than before, and that's the hole im seeing

I'd need to see some stats to believe it.

As-is, Tigers were only built in 14 times in 12 games, leaving 13 games without Tigers, but with around two T3 tanks (P4/Stug) per game.

I feel like one t3 unit bridging into a Tiger works relatively efficiently, and any further over investment leaves you that much further behind in countering a highly likely enemy heavy.

I'd need to see some stats to believe it.

As-is, Tigers were only built in 14 times in 12 games, leaving 13 games without Tigers, but with around two T3 tanks (P4/Stug) per game.

I didn't view all games, but whatever i saw, p4 came much later than usual, of ost and okw too. I remember clearly a few games when the commentators questioning p4 back tech.

14 times tiger stalling, if they had gone more conventional p4 build,that may have increase the win rates to gcs level or even 2v2 championship level.

PD: T4 is no longer a bonus tier, the moment the Stug was tailored to be a medium tank killer and nerfed. The same way Su76 spam was nerfed when they put a munition cost to barrage and nerfed the penetration.
If you want for T4 to be an "optional" tier in a similar way as UKF, then redesign the Stug G to be equally to all other 60 range TDs (note: i don't want this).
Stug as a heavy counter, only works against Churchills.

But Ostheer isn't facing any stock heavy in the game except for the churchill. Allied heavies are all doctrinal thus when you see them you built your T4 for Panther.

You want to improve Ostheer T4, I say its already fine as it is. It was a problem because too expensive so it has been made cheaper in exchange of seeing panther and brumbar less powerful. That's fine there is no need to give more advantage to it.

Even if the Tiger is nerfed alongside with all other heavies (Pershing included), that will be a major buff to them, allowing the player to field one or two extra unit with it.

But Ostheer isn't facing any stock heavy in the game except for the churchill. Allied heavies are all doctrinal thus when you see them you built your T4 for Panther.

You want to improve Ostheer T4, I say its already fine as it is. It was a problem because too expensive so it has been made cheaper in exchange of seeing panther and brumbar less powerful. That's fine there is no need to give more advantage to it.

Even if the Tiger is nerfed alongside with all other heavies (Pershing included), that will be a major buff to them, allowing the player to field one or two extra unit with it.

OST t4 isn't better than t3. The units are more expensive than they are better. Two stugs will do better than a panther while costing about the same.

The only benefit to t4 is that it's less micro.

OST t4 isn't better than t3. The units are more expensive than they are better. Two stugs will do better than a panther while costing about the same.

Against churchill, yes.
Against IS-2 or KV-1/2, no.

Same with brummbar vs ostwind vs single squads and blobs.

14 times tiger stalling, if they had gone more conventional p4 build,that may have increase the win rates to gcs level or even 2v2 championship level.

The numbers don't support this - in fact they support the exact opposite conclusion (i.e. "Tiger Stalling" is good).

In total, there were 40 OST games played, of which OST won 15 (it turns out, Siphon X missed one game, which was a loss, in the detailed stats - It's really 41/15). Of those games, 24 games had players selecting "Tiger" docs, with 12 of those games resulting in a win (50%). A 50% win rate is the ideal "balanced" win rate, so I'd consider this a good outcome. Note that "Tiger Stalling" was only possible in these 24 games, as by selecting a non-tiger doc, you can't "stall" for one.

The remaining 16 games were ones in which a "Tiger" docwas not picked. Out of those 16 games, OST won only 3 (18.75%). These are the games which completely tanked OST's over-all win/loss ratio, but they're also the in which it was explicitly impossible to "Tiger Stall".

If your assumption that "if they had gone more conventional p4 build,that may have increase the win rates" was true, then those non-Tiger (i.e. standard) builds should have resulted in reasonable win/loss ratios - instead, they provided terrible win rates.

Additionally, as I showed earlier, the vast majority of players were doing normal builds; 84.4% players who could tech to T3 did, and built 2 tanks on average.

The discrepancy is simply massive between the Tiger and Non-Tiger games; it points towards the conclusion that not going for a Tiger is a poor choice. This strongly implies that OST's T3 or T4 is too weak, as it needs to be bolstered by doc call-ins.

Against churchill, yes.
Against IS-2 or KV-1/2, no.

Same with brummbar vs ostwind vs single squads and blobs.

In 5 duels with IS2 vs double stugs or panther:

Stugs win 4 out of 5 fights
Panther wins 1 out of 5 fights

In a series of 5 duels with 2 stugs vs kv-1 and panther vs kv-1

Stugs win all 5 fights, KV-1 manages to kill 2 stugs in different duels
Panther wins only 4 fights


In a trial of 2 brumbar vs 5 guards squads, and 3 ostwinds vs 5 guards squads

7 guards models remain from fighting 2 brumbars
6 guards models remain from fighting 3 ostwinds



In short t3 is the most cost effective vehicle tier for OST. It is at a minimum equal which means teching to t4 is a waste of resources and time.