(as Faust only snares with a chance, unlike Allied ones which are 100%)
???
3) Faust only has 15 range. Ram can start from easily triple that range.
Just a small clarification but that's OKW faust. Gren faust has more range than other snares.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
(as Faust only snares with a chance, unlike Allied ones which are 100%)
3) Faust only has 15 range. Ram can start from easily triple that range.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Indeed, but the effectiveness (cost ratio) and execution is not equal with the IL2 bombing strike or OW AT arty.
IL2 AT strafe: 100 muni
IL2 Bombing: 200mu
AT OW: 200mu
Time to hit.
IL2 AT strafe: from border of the map 4s. Because the plane seems to track and shoot from far away.
From the longest possible time on test range map 10s.
IL2 Bombing: at same point around 9s. The plane has to get closer and the bombs take longer to hit. Longest time 15s.
AT OW: for the first shell i seems to take variable times which is around 5s. To receive a similar amount of damage as the IL2 AT strafe, it needs to stay for ±23s on the area without moving. If the heavy tank (i was using Tiger as reference) is neither engine damage or if the ability is casted on dead center around the tank, the Tiger just survives find taking minimal damage at times.
Closest comparison should be the (extinct) single AT Stuka Strafe. Cost 110 muni, takes 2s longer compared to IL2 AT strafe but it can randomly produced different criticals. On 10 attempts i got 3 engine damage and 2 vehicle crew injured. Damage varies heavily depending on hitting angle.
What we could try is giving it lower penetration (around 90) and adding deflection damage of something like 50%. That way it will still be lethal to snared/rammed mediums and Panthers (guaranteed rear armor pens and even with deflection damage when hitting the front armor the rockets should do enough damage to kill a 50-75% hp medium tank) while reducing the effectiveness against heavies by around 33-50% as most have around 150 rear armor. Essentially the same was done for AT Overwatch.
But the commander will already take quite a hit with the increased SVT cost, so it's probably better to wait and see if it'll still be needed to go after the AT strafe too.
Posts: 1289
U just dont get it or ?
its in a VERY STRONG doctrin
it take 0 risk
U can trade ur T34 with already does alot dmg to inf earlier ... for an axis heavy !
its like "here is an ability that puts an 88 on a 222" just for 200mun.
and thats not all. The doctrin u pick to counter the ISU has this combo... which counters his counter
Think of a immobilisation shot on the Stug ... just to ALWAYS Stuka it into dust with 0%chance to counter it.
Posts: 2358
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
The T-34 ram + off map is rather easy combo to pull to and it also rather cheesy.
So I would suggested some of following changes:
T-34/85
Ram removed, cap territory replaced by a more interesting ability like a smoke round or a round similar to Pershing.
T-34/76
Ram moved to vet 1 cap territory removed or move to vet 0.
Ability now scale with veterancy.
Possible bonuses, reducing engine overheat chance, immobilize critical replaced with engine damage at vet 3, increase penetration.
Other possible changes:
Stun enemy vehicle only on penetration, timed weapon disable on deflection
Ram replaced with "flank" speed an ability that increases sped of the vehicle on straight line more like a skill shot. At vet 1 replaced by a similar ability that can also ram.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
all the while having a considerably worse snare than the allied counterparts(as Faust only snares with a chance, unlike Allied ones which are 100%),
T34 ram + IL2 rocket/bombs is horrible and needs to be nerfed somehow. At least the the IL2 bombs it costs a lot and only works on heavy tanks but the IL2 rockets arrive so fast most of the time not even a Panther or P4 gets out alive.
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
What on Earth are you talking about?
Then isn't the rocket strike clearly the issue? Not ram?
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Ram+Il2 bombs would be fine if they didnt come in a doctrine with ISU and making the only counters to ISU cancer very vulnerable to getting two clicked.
Posts: 682
The stug immobilisation shot does not cost you the stug 100% of the time or immobilize the stug itself. So comparing them directly is grasping at straws. Please stop.
Posts: 1289
Do you actually know what it does?
Posts: 1515
It doesn't stop Axis players to build heavy tanks every single game. Is it OP or simply frustrating to be outplayed on one move that can seal the game?
I don't know why Heavy tanks shouldn't share the same mechanism as any other unit in game. Because they are expensive? Well that is your problem if you lose such expensive unit like that.
Mines win game we all say, but mines are one of the cheapest artefact in game and we all seem fine with it. And in this particular case mines can save your heavy tanks from raming.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Posts: 960
See the issue is you keep trying to stop it when it has already begun. Try stopping it BEFORE. You can do this by spotting for your tank (as in not having it the front line unit) and having literally any for of AT nearby and a snare nearby. These are super simply things you should be doing ANYWAYS but doing these now will help prevent ram. You only need 1 hit to get the t34 in snare levels.
Well said. It's a toxic combination, but an effective one. OKW has non doctrinal heavies and soviets, unless they take a heavy tank commander, have no heavies or anything that can reliably win vs a heavy. This combination is a good one (and is commander specific). Don't complain about it.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
This is an incredibly dangerous argument to make, as it opens the door to a lot of overpowered nonsense.
Posts: 2358
Its only dangerous if you take one sentence from his post and drag it out of context.
In the context of an ability that essentially sacrifices the tank, asking someone to scout ahead for that is not exactly asking a lot
Comparing it to when the JT firing 320 damage shots at 85 range is pretty ridiculous
Comparing it to when the JT firing 320 damage shots at 85 range is pretty ridiculous
...
Posts: 960
Its only dangerous if you take one sentence from his post and drag it out of context. In the context of an ability that essentially sacrifices the tank, asking someone to scout ahead for that is not exactly asking a lot
Comparing it to when the JT firing 320 damage shots at 85 range is pretty ridiculous
The rocket strike on airborne is the issue here, not ram
Posts: 682
Yes i do. I responded to some one who compared stug twp and stuka bomb to t34 ram and il2.
Right now it makes the tank blind and prevents it from shooting. But because it doesnt stun lock anymore (almost 100% garanteing a kill on a med or below) very few people use it.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
How is it out of context? The premise of thedarkarmadillo's argument is that the ability (Ram) is fine, since it can be countered by not allowing the opponent the opportunity to use it. It shifts the focus of the entire discussion from the ability itself, to countering the unit.
As a comparison (and yes, it's supposed to be extreme), we can shift the focus from the JT's past absurd damage (in this context, its attack was the ability) to simply not allowing the JT to use this ability.
It's the same argument.
As for the rocket strike being the problem; how so? It follows all of the rules of off-map abilities; it drops red smoke, it has a delay, the plane itself can be countered (although it is a bit fast). By itself, the rocket strike is essentially 'on the curve' in comparison to other abilities.
You are taking doomlord52 out of context aswell...
3 | |||||
38 | |||||
12 |