Login

russian armor

Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta

16 Mar 2020, 17:51 PM
#21
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 11:29 AMVipper
You are trying to tackle too many issue at once.


I think it's very simple.

The Panther is a cost-effective counter to heavy tanks.

It's specifically the IS-2 it can't handle, and that's because the IS-2 can take an extra hit.

Bring the IS-2 and Tiger in line with the Pershing and you fix that without making them unviable units.

Unless anyone wants to claim the Pershing is bad?

16 Mar 2020, 17:55 PM
#22
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 17:51 PMLago


I think it's very simple.

The Panther is a cost-effective counter to heavy tanks.

It's specifically the IS-2 it can't handle, and that's because the IS-2 can take an extra hit.

Bring the IS-2 and Tiger in line with the Pershing and you fix that without making them unviable units.

Unless anyone wants to claim the Pershing is bad?


That would make sense is the Panther vs IS-2/Pershing was inline and as cost efficient at M36 and SU-85 is vs Tiger.

It is far less cost efficient and your suggestion will simply put the Tiger out of the map since it will be sniped from max range all day.

If you are suggesting such weak version of the Tiger then it should become stock and Comet equivalent...even then the M36/Su85 would still need a nerfs.

The ostheer T4 (Panther)/Tiger choice is separate issue of diversity and not balance.
16 Mar 2020, 18:16 PM
#23
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 17:55 PMVipper
The ostheer T4 (Panther)/Tiger choice is separate issue of diversity and not balance.


The heavy tank meta is a strategic diversity problem.
16 Mar 2020, 18:40 PM
#24
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 18:16 PMLago


The heavy tank meta is a strategic diversity problem.

Not really. It is balance issue because Super heavies simply become op after they got buffed.

T4/Tiger diversity is an internal Ostheer problem firstly and balance issue secondly.
16 Mar 2020, 19:13 PM
#25
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 18:40 PMVipper
Not really. It is balance issue because Super heavies simply become op after they got buffed.

T4/Tiger diversity is an internal Ostheer problem firstly and balance issue secondly.


If you define 'balance' as faction against faction (which you seem to be doing) then it isn't a balance issue. Every faction but UKF got one of those heavy tanks.

It's a balance issue within factions. The problem isn't the game being unfair, it's it being dull due to a single strategy dominating.
16 Mar 2020, 19:20 PM
#26
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 17:51 PMLago
The Panther is a cost-effective counter to heavy tanks.

It's specifically the IS-2 it can't handle, and that's because the IS-2 can take an extra hit.

Bring the IS-2 and Tiger in line with the Pershing and you fix that without making them unviable units.

Unless anyone wants to claim the Pershing is bad?


Go a bit further. Increase the close pen of all mediums to 180 and increase the reload of everything that isn't medium tank by 1s. This way the heavy tanks don't suffer too low TTK from TDs and other heavies and mediums can actually pen when they should. I just watched a game in which M4A3 AP round sherman bounced point blank 3 shots vs panther with destroyed engine when it was 1 shot from death. Sherman died and Panther survived. No shit people spam TDs in everything that is 2v2 and up.
16 Mar 2020, 19:24 PM
#27
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 10:33 AMLago


Except it does function as a heavy counter at the moment. It beats the Comet and has a slight edge over the Pershing.

It's the IS-2 specifically that beats the Panther, and that's why the IS-2's been a problem child since GCS 2.

What I'm suggesting is bumping down its health to make it equal to the new Pershing. Same with the Tiger.


I wouldn't call it a heavy counter currently. Beating a pershing isn't really warranting the "heavy counter" title. It's the lightest of all heavies in the game. As you said the IS2 is currently superior, and I agree. The panther struggles vs many other heavies currently though. Churchill variants, KV-2, ISU-152. And it's not that it can't pen them most of the time, it's that their HP pools are just so massive that the panther cannot deal with them without being in range of super TDs or AT walls. Its current design is more of a brawler tank that loses to things that outrange or outlast it.

Personally I'd say the best heavy counter would be one that could 1v1 a churchill and win within a timely manner. The way the churchill is currently though, nothing can kill it in a timely manner.
16 Mar 2020, 19:25 PM
#28
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Go a bit further. Increase the close pen of all mediums to 180 and increase the reload of everything that isn't medium tank by 1s. This way the heavy tanks don't suffer too low TTK from TDs and other heavies and mediums can actually pen when they should. I just watched a game in which M4A3 AP round sherman bounced point blank 3 shots vs panther with destroyed engine when it was 1 shot from death. Sherman died and Panther survived. No shit people spam TDs in everything that is 2v2 and up.


I made a thread suggesting doing just that (giving all vehicles a penetration spike at point blank range), but it's a far-reaching change unlikely to get tested in a patch.

Knocking 160 HP off two heavy tanks is a much more minor edit that's very easy to implement.
16 Mar 2020, 19:33 PM
#29
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I wouldn't call it a heavy counter currently. Beating a pershing isn't really warranting the "heavy counter" title. It's the lightest of all heavies in the game. As you said the IS2 is currently superior, and I agree. The panther struggles vs many other heavies currently though. Churchill variants, KV-2, ISU-152. And it's not that it can't pen them most of the time, it's that their HP pools are just so massive that the panther cannot deal with them without being in range of super TDs or AT walls. Its current design is more of a brawler tank that loses to things that outrange or outlast it.

Personally I'd say the best heavy counter would be one that could 1v1 a churchill and win within a timely manner. The way the churchill is currently though, nothing can kill it in a timely manner


By heavies, I mean the three heavy generalists that have caused all the controversy in the last patch. The problem I'm trying to solve is the dominance of commanders that include those tanks.

The KV-2 and the Churchill Crocodile haven't had the same effect on the meta.
16 Mar 2020, 19:47 PM
#30
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 19:25 PMLago


I made a thread suggesting doing just that (giving all vehicles a penetration spike at point blank range), but it's a far-reaching change unlikely to get tested in a patch.

Knocking 160 HP off two heavy tanks is a much more minor edit that's very easy to implement.

I know, I really liked your vehicle point-blank idea. I still think that by changing only the heaviest tanks HP, the main reason of vehicle balance problem isn't touched, which is the Medium-Panther-TD dynamic. Medium tanks are so bad against Panthers, that TDs have to be too good to compensate for what medium tanks lack. Instead of simply supporting tanks in AT fights, TDs take the bulk of the fight. Changing this dynamic and making TDs less frustrating to fight against while maintaining the game balance would require changes that are probably too severe at this stage of the game life.
16 Mar 2020, 20:09 PM
#31
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I know, I really liked your vehicle point-blank idea. I still think that by changing only the heaviest tanks HP, the main reason of vehicle balance problem isn't touched, which is the Medium-Panther-TD dynamic. Medium tanks are so bad against Panthers, that TDs have to be too good to compensate for what medium tanks lack. Instead of simply supporting tanks in AT fights, TDs take the bulk of the fight. Changing this dynamic and making TDs less frustrating to fight against while maintaining the game balance would require changes that are probably too severe at this stage of the game life.


Oh, you could definitely do more.

But suggestions that make it into patches need to be tame enough for the balance team to risk.

I think the IS-2 beating the Panther and the Tiger outclassing the Panther are the keystones of the heavy tank meta, and it'll fall down if you pull them out.
16 Mar 2020, 21:15 PM
#32
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 19:13 PMLago


If you define 'balance' as faction against faction (which you seem to be doing) then it isn't a balance issue. Every faction but UKF got one of those heavy tanks.

It's a balance issue within factions. The problem isn't the game being unfair, it's it being dull due to a single strategy dominating.

Balance is about Faction vs Faction yes.

Diversity has to do with in faction stuff yes.

The buff to Super heavy created both balance issues and diversity. Point is that Soviet had both the strongest Super heavy (and OKW Tiger up to an extent) and better tools to deal with super heavies (see mark target, ram/off map).

UKF had the worse Super heavy.

My point is that part off the problem is that TDs performance and one should start from there. The reason why the mod team even touched super heavies was that they where not used in 3vs3 and 4vs4 because massed TDs where OP against them. But instead of fixing the source of the problem (TDs) they try to buff the Super heavies. And now you asking to go the other way nerf which again is a step in the wrong direction. One need to fix the TDs especially since the Elephant and JT have been nerfed.
16 Mar 2020, 21:17 PM
#33
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 21:15 PMVipper

Balance is about Faction vs Faction yes.

Diversity has to do with in faction stuff yes.


Then this thread is about the strategic diversity problem. If you want to discuss tank destroyer balance in a broader context, I'd make a separate thread for it.
16 Mar 2020, 21:18 PM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 21:17 PMLago


Then this thread is about the strategic diversity problem. If you want to discuss tank destroyer balance in a broader context, I'd make a separate thread for it.

You can really talk about that Super heavies without mentioning how easy to counter them.

When Relic tried to solve the maxim spam problem that was diversity issue, they decided to buff Penal. They end up solving them maxim spam issue but crated to more in the process. The penal spam issue and balance issue where Soviet dominated the game.

This is a similar situation. Ostheer Tiger is what keep the faction from completely sinking, neft it and the faction will collapse.
16 Mar 2020, 23:32 PM
#35
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 21:18 PMVipper

You can really talk about that Super heavies without mentioning how easy to counter them.

When Relic tried to solve the maxim spam problem that was diversity issue, they decided to buff Penal. They end up solving them maxim spam issue but crated to more in the process. The penal spam issue and balance issue where Soviet dominated the game.

This is a similar situation. Ostheer Tiger is what keep the faction from completely sinking, neft it and the faction will collapse.


On teamgames. Not in 1v1. They tried to shoehorn them to be viable for a majority of the playerbase who plays mostly 4v4 when they were historically not as viable due to unit volume and super heavy TD (Tiger/IS are not super, IB4 changelog, there are contradictions in it).

Not that i necessarily agree with OP idea, but at least the faction is receiving multiple buffs while the others ones are getting nerfed.
16 Mar 2020, 23:46 PM
#36
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


On teamgames. Not in 1v1. They tried to shoehorn them to be viable for a majority of the playerbase who plays mostly 4v4 when they were historically not as viable due to unit volume and super heavy TD (Tiger/IS are not super, IB4 changelog, there are contradictions in it).

Yes that is what I said. They tried to make Super heavies (or what ever you want to call them)
more viable in team games. But the problem was not the Super heavies themselves but the effectiveness of mass vetted TDs. So buffing the Super heavies was a step in the wrong direction, nerfing the vet performances of TDs would probably had brought better result.

Especially with nerf to Ele and JT.

In 1vs1 they tried to fix the "super heavy" stalling (stockpiling resources and waiting for the CP) but instead the make it worse because the "super heavy" become available around time one would actually have fuel for it.


Not that i necessarily agree with OP idea, but at least the faction is receiving multiple buffs while the others ones are getting nerfed.

We will have to simply see where the balance will falls after the patch.

My point is that reducing the HP Tiger to 960 will make it ever weaker vs TDs especially in team games. It might help with diversity issues but it will create balance issue.
17 Mar 2020, 00:22 AM
#37
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 23:46 PMVipper

Yes that is what I said. They tried to make Super heavies (or what ever you want to call them)
more viable in team games. But the problem was not the Super heavies themselves but the effectiveness of mass vetted TDs. So buffing the Super heavies was a step in the wrong direction, nerfing the vet performances of TDs would probably had brought better result.

Especially with nerf to Ele and JT.

In 1vs1 they tried to fix the "super heavy" stalling (stockpiling resources and waiting for the CP) but instead the make it worse because the "super heavy" become available around time one would actually have fuel for it.


We will have to simply see where the balance will falls after the patch.

My point is that reducing the HP Tiger to 960 will make it ever weaker vs TDs especially in team games. It might help with diversity issues but it will create balance issue.


Performance of TDs is not directly tied to viability of heavies. We had weaker TDs with lower pen and heavies didn't dominate teamgames at all. It's tied to unit volume more than anything else.

It might cause issues on 2v2 but i don't think it will bring any issues to 3v3/4v4 balance at all where i think that Ele > Tiger doctrines nowadays.
17 Mar 2020, 07:13 AM
#38
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 378

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 21:36 PMLago
All the heavy tanks are good, but the Tiger and IS-2 are the two that really entrench the heavy tank meta. The Pershing is just as powerful (if not more so) on paper, but it's had nowhere near the same impact on the meta.

I think that's because of the matchup with the Panther.

The Panther beats the Comet (800 HP), can take on the Pershing (960 HP), and generally loses to the IS-2 (1040 HP).

This makes the IS-2 the most impactful heavy tank on the meta despite not being that much stronger than the Pershing on paper. If the opponent wants to counter it without going heavy tanks themselves they need a Panther and something else. They need to expend more resources on AT units than the generalist IS-2 costs.

Viewed that way, it's easy to see why the IS-2 is such a popular pick in 1v1: it doesn't have a nondoctrinal counter.

Then we have the Tiger. The Tiger has 1040 HP, making it better in a heavy tank slugging match than the Panther. This makes it a better pick than the Panther even against the Pershing: anything the Panther can do, the Tiger can do better.

In summary, we have these two problems:
  • The Panther cannot deal with the IS-2.
  • The Tiger is a better anti-heavy unit than the Panther.


What if we changed that?

Reduce the Tiger's HP to 960. Adjust cost or buff as necessary.
Reduce the IS-2's HP to 960, or rework it into a more expensive tank in the vein of the King Tiger.

What if we cut the IS-2 and Tiger to 960 HP, same as the Panther and Pershing? The Panther can then take on the IS-2 in a one-on-one battle, and the Tiger stops being a better pick than it.

Now that the IS-2 can be countered nondoctrinally, there's less incentive to go IS-2 every game.
Now that the Tiger isn't a better heavy counter than the Panther, there's less incentive to go Tiger every game.

Thoughts?


Axis tanks are great, as long as the enemy doesn't use armour.

I just don't build tanks, extra at guns are always better, fuel is a waste of resources to spend on AT capabilites, especially when the axis lacks in AI severely. Spend fuel to counter allied blobs and always have enough AT guns.

As axis, you should NEVER build armor, it always under performs. Stick to suppression platforms, indirect fire and anti tank guns. plug gaps with infantry. THere is not a single role axis armour performs in, that something else doesn't do better, for cheaper.
17 Mar 2020, 08:23 AM
#39
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Performance of TDs is not directly tied to viability of heavies. We had weaker TDs with lower pen and heavies didn't dominate teamgames at all. It's tied to unit volume more than anything else.

It might cause issues on 2v2 but i don't think it will bring any issues to 3v3/4v4 balance at all where i think that Ele > Tiger doctrines nowadays.


It is since any units performance is tied on how easily it is countered. M36/SU-85 can counter Tiger extremely easy once vetted since they can damage (hit and penetrate) from 60 with probabilities above 95%.
17 Mar 2020, 08:37 AM
#40
avatar of NaOCl

Posts: 378

How come you never see JPIV then?
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

unknown 12
United States 166
New Zealand 11
unknown 4

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

1038 users are online: 1038 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49129
Welcome our newest member, softhealertech
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM