Login

russian armor

Panther

15 Apr 2020, 17:16 PM
#41
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 956

I was allways waiting for the time Tiger becomes a non-doc for Ostheer instead of Panther. :P


Ahhh yes, I can already hear the Allies mains screeching about multiple Tigers in every game. Wait, that was last week!
15 Apr 2020, 17:44 PM
#42
avatar of Farlion

Posts: 379 | Subs: 1



Well the Panther has 260-240-220 penetration. I don't see how that is not enough after the IS2 armour nerf.

Comet/AVRE/Croc has 290 armour so it will pen them at a very high % already.

KV1 has 270, KV2 has 300, ISU and IS2 have 340.

Pershing has 270 armour.

The Panther feels a bit lacking I agree but not because of penetration. It's more because it's somewhat difficult to use the mobility to full effect because you always need to micro every shot on the move by ordering stop shortly before you expect the shot to go off. If the Panther had more accuracy on the move it would be pretty good. This or slightly lower reload so it shoots a bit faster.

Obviously the Panther could also get 200 DPS with a reload nerf but I am not really sure if that is a good idea because it would make it worse against Allied 640 HP TDs. You will still need 4 shots to kill them but it will take you more time to do so. That's why I don't really like the 200 DPS suggestion. Also not sure if a Panther 4 shotting a Comet is such a good idea. It would be fine vs T34/85 but against Comet? Comet costs 175 fuel and 500+ MP. It would make Comets pretty much useless as soon as a Panther shows up. Comet already doesn't have the range, reload speed and penetration to fight Panthers as it is so the balance in that regard is fine. Panther has more AT capability and will 1v1 the Comet but the Comet is better vs infantry because of main-gun AOE, grenades and the phosphor round.


Penetration isn't the issue, firepower is. And Mirage's idea would fix that.

As for TDs, I don't think you ever want to get the Panther to deal with Allied TDs. Especially with the known issue of Panther moving accuracy.

As for the Comet, I mean the role of the Panther is to destroy premium mediums/heavy. And with the reload nerf, I think it would probably be an identical TTK to what we have atm. Only that it removes the frustration of using the Panther in it's current format.

The problem with the Panther is that there's virtually no reason to get it over Stugs, unless the map is severely unfriendly towards them (like Elst). You have this pseudo tank destroyer that has no better performance than Stugs. The only reason you'd ever get it is to counter super heavies, but those were nerfed recently so odds are, you won't need the Panther. As mentioned above, diving with the Panther is absolutely not an option due to its unreliability or you having to stop in the middle of enemy territory and taking the risk of being snared.

KVs, Crocs, Churchills, you're probably better off with multiple Stugs due to firepower.
15 Apr 2020, 18:08 PM
#43
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

Big team games always result in needing different strategy, ESPECIALLY Red Ball's super laniness. "Just flank" is the poor man's "just use AT guns, you don't need REAL Anti Tank" (that cuts both ways depending on timing).

I think its been discussed over and over, heavy(-er) tanks should have a size increase, Heavy TDs then can have some accuracy cut, and then the Stug would be able to do budget-Jadgpanzer duty (which it kind of did in real life, a nice bonus).

Might need to further improve the Stug against Heavy TDs... And give USF Non-doc Medium TD or balance around Medium Tanks + AT Gun. There's design space. It's "just" a really massive overhaul and a pile of work.
15 Apr 2020, 18:34 PM
#44
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2020, 17:14 PMVipper
Ant yet Panther gets a vet 2 9 rear armor bonus that stills allow the majority of AT weapons to penetrate it.


That's just because as far as I know an armor bonus from vet increases all armor values and can't distinguish between front and rear armor. The increased front armor still helps against medium tanks, bazookas and vet 0 ATGs. It's not supposed to become invincible against TDs.
15 Apr 2020, 18:45 PM
#45
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Panther should be the most premium medium and stug should have stock scopes after last battle phase to buy increasing range to 60. Panther should be a main battle tank with characteristic in between medium and heavy. Its armour should be lower.
15 Apr 2020, 19:14 PM
#46
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



That's just because as far as I know an armor bonus from vet increases all armor values and can't distinguish between front and rear armor. The increased front armor still helps against medium tanks, bazookas and vet 0 ATGs. It's not supposed to become invincible against TDs.

That can be fixed by changing the bonus from x10% to +26. The frontal armor would remain 286 bu the rear would become 116. Imo that change should be made for most units (exception being those with already high rear armor.)
15 Apr 2020, 19:41 PM
#47
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

I think its been discussed over and over, heavy(-er) tanks should have a size increase, Heavy TDs then can have some accuracy cut, and then the Stug would be able to do budget-Jadgpanzer duty (which it kind of did in real life, a nice bonus).


I was thinking about this the other day; what if we doubled vehicle sizes, but halved accuracy values? On paper, what this does is massively increase the range of target sizes and accuracy values we can play with, while not actually changing performance between specific match-ups (at least, initially). Additionally, what if we scaled units non-linearly? We could really a difference between "big" and "small" units, while keeping interaction between similar units the same.

This is going to seem really strange at first, and it might even have some flaws; but let me explain. If you want to skip ahead, my idea is about halfway down (and in bold).

Let's take, for example, the IS-2, Panther, M36, Cromwell, Puma, and Pak40. I think that's a pretty good spread in terms of AT and vehicle 'classes' (and an ATG for reference). Here are those unit's current stats:







UnitSizeAcc max range
IS-2260.035
Panther240.035
M36240.035
Cromwell200.025
Puma180.025
Pak40N/A0.04


In terms of interaction between units:
The M36 has a 91% chance to hit the IS-2, 84% chance to hit the Panther, and a 63% chance to hit the Puma.
The Cromwell has a 65% chance to hit the IS-2, 60% for the Panther, and 45% for the Puma.
The Pak40 has a 100% chance to hit the IS2, 96% for the M36, 80% for the Cromwell, and 72% for the puma.

Now let's double the Target sizes, and halve the accuracy.






UnitSizeAcc max range
IS-2520.0175
Panther480.0175
M36480.0175
Cromwell400.0125
Puma360.0125
Pak40N/A0.02


In terms of interaction between units, nothing has changed:
The M36 has a 91% chance to hit the IS-2, 84% chance to hit the Panther, and a 63% chance to hit the Puma.
The Cromwell has a 65% chance to hit the IS-2, 60% for the Panther, and 45% for the Puma.
The Pak40 has a 100% chance to hit the IS2, 96% for the M36, 80% for the Cromwell, and 72% for the puma.

Now, here's my idea: we don't linearly scale the unit sizes; we want unit interactions between "heavy TDs" and "heavies" to be the same, but we don't want "heavy TDs" to interact the same with smaller targets. So let's instead scale the unit sizes by 2x(size/26). What this does, is scale the sizes for very large units by 2x (or close to that), but it scales the smaller ones by much less; the IS-2 increases by 2x, the Panther/M36 by 1.85x, the Cromwell by 1.54x, and the Puma by 1.38x.

Our sizes are now:






UnitSizeAcc max range
IS-2520.0175
Panther440.0175
M36440.0175
Cromwell310.0125
Puma250.0125
Pak40N/A0.02


So what does this do? In terms of interaction between units:
The M36 has a 91% chance to hit the IS-2, 77% chance to hit the Panther, and a 44% chance to hit the Puma.
The Cromwell has a 65% chance to hit the IS-2, 55% for the Panther, and 31% for the Puma.
The Pak40 has a 100% chance to hit the IS2, 88% for the M36, 62% for the Cromwell, and 50% for the puma.

Now, you might look at those new values and think; "some of those seem ok, but the Pak40 chance to hit is awful against small targets". Well, that's the fun part; our value ranges are much larger here, and we've scaled sizes non-linearly - we can now do some really interesting changes. Let's say we want to keep the Pak40's chance to hit about the same as it is in the 'live' version (see first set of results); so let's increase the accuracy to 0.027 (from 0.02).

Now the Pak40 has a 100% chance to hit the IS2, 100% for the M36, 84% for the Cromwell, and 68% for the puma. No change/+4%/+4%/-2% compared to the current 'live' version.

Now let's say we want to the M36 to still eat Panthers/Heavies, but be somewhat mediocre against Mediums: so let's increase it's accuracy slightly to 0.019 (from 0.0175).

Now the M36 has a 99% chance to hit the IS-2, 84% chance to hit the Panther, and a 48% chance to hit the Puma. +8%/No change/-15% compared to the current 'live' version; the M36 has actually been buffed against heavies, but it's received a large nerf against mediums.

This is the advantage of a much larger 'range' of values; we can fine-tune stat changes to hit on almost a per-class basis, with very little (or no) changes to other situations. We simply can't get that with the current target sizes; there isn't enough difference between a heavy (26) premium medium (24) and regular medium (22-ish).

To demonstrated the advantages with this larger, non-linearly scaled, range; here's what happens if we take the new values and "compress" them to the current ranges. I've hidden the results:


Thoughts?

TL;DR
Scale the target sizes on everything by 2x(size/26) (non-linear scaling) and halve vehicle accuracy (and then slightly buff/nerf where needed). A larger range of values lets us do some really interesting adjustments, while letting us keep what we want the same (or very similar).

/edit

I just noticed that the formula 2x(size/26) actually causes units to get smaller if they're under a size of '13'. Conveniently, the smallest vehicle is the Kubel at a size of 14, meaning that it increases by 1.07x (so it would just stay at 14).
15 Apr 2020, 19:51 PM
#48
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2020, 19:14 PMVipper
That can be fixed by changing the bonus from x10% to +26


First of all I don't think that could be done because the editor almost exclusively works with multipliers for vet bonuses. Second of all the Panther's rear armor is low on purpose as I've already explained.
15 Apr 2020, 20:00 PM
#49
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954

Panther should be the most premium medium and stug should have stock scopes after last battle phase to buy increasing range to 60. Panther should be a main battle tank with characteristic in between medium and heavy. Its armour should be lower.


Because a 60 range MBT/TD that self-spots over 360 degrees won't be broken? It will be completely awesome for A-movers because it will stop to fire at max range at AT guns.

A slight increase to moving accuracy would help. There has been times when I couldn't finish a IS2 because 4-5 shots would either miss or bounce. The armor nerf on the IS2 will help. Either the moving accuracy should go up or the IS2's target size should go up.
15 Apr 2020, 20:03 PM
#50
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Panther should be the most premium medium and stug should have stock scopes after last battle phase to buy increasing range to 60. Panther should be a main battle tank with characteristic in between medium and heavy. Its armour should be lower.

We can only be thankful that closest you'll get to balancing games is putting cases on two arm weight.
15 Apr 2020, 20:19 PM
#51
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



...

I have made a similar suggestions and half made mod for it.

It break down like this Super heavies get bigger size so most things can hit them but not penetrate them.

"super heavy" TDs get a 2 separate types of rounds. One vs vehicles and an AP one with high penetration and low accuracy (can also have different damage an reload) so that can hit penetrate the Super heavies but the same this type of munition are not really good vs anything else.

Now the different type units can be balanced separately.
https://www.coh2.org/topic/68297/super-heavies-td-overhaul-mod
15 Apr 2020, 20:21 PM
#52
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



First of all I don't think that could be done because the editor almost exclusively works with multipliers for vet bonuses. Second of all the Panther's rear armor is low on purpose as I've already explained.

And my point is that the vet 2 bonus is not worth it XP values at all and panther would be better of with different bonus.
15 Apr 2020, 20:31 PM
#53
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

The Panther is balanced but it isn't exactly your first choice.

For OKW the Panzer IV is almost a no brainer offering way higher damage output in total.

The Ostheer meta seems to evolve into Brummbär rushes. Then the Panther becomes a choice lategame. Not because it is such a great unit but because it is available in the same tier as the Brummbär.

I think the best way to adjust the Panther is to fiddle with its veterancy. The concept of a diving tank hunter with Blitz is strange to balance. Using it "correctly" (aka diving in) means using it "wrong" at the same time (aka exposing your weak rear armor).

Give it another vet 1 ability instead of Blitz that increases the damage output for some time (rate of fire or maingun damage) so it can hit hard. It wouldn't have to dive as far and expose the weakspot since it could deliver the damage faster. This way you would keep the nature of the Panther as a shorter range heavy hitter without mirror balancing it towards other tds.
15 Apr 2020, 23:44 PM
#54
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Apr 2020, 20:00 PMGrumpy


Because a 60 range MBT/TD that self-spots over 360 degrees won't be broken? It will be completely awesome for A-movers because it will stop to fire at max range at AT guns.

A slight increase to moving accuracy would help. There has been times when I couldn't finish a IS2 because 4-5 shots would either miss or bounce. The armor nerf on the IS2 will help. Either the moving accuracy should go up or the IS2's target size should go up.


You are right with the self spotting. It shouldn't spot for itself. I wrote scopes but I meant an upgrade that can be purchased in a similar way to lmgs for osttruppen - after the last battlephase is researched but for stugs. It would give extra range but not self spotting. Alternatively just scopes but stock that could be added after the last battlephase. This would make stug a better TD. At the same time I would see the panther with regular range on its cannon, a more or less comet level armour and just premium medium characteristics. Basically, I know maybe it is just me, but I just hate the concept of panther pushing infantry units around - it should be a main battle tank with a cannon that deals with infantry too. I am not a fan of pz4 type J. Instead of making panther a natural tech continuation of a heavier p4, the game overbuffed the tank that should be on the sherman level. Ost p4 is max that panzer 4 should deliver. Next should come the panther. Stugs should be a cheaper counter to armour.
16 Apr 2020, 00:06 AM
#55
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

it should be a main battle tank with a cannon that deals with infantry too.

Not sure if this helps you or not, but with pintle MG upgraded close and mid range static Panther deals some convincing damage to infantry, we are not talking about P4 level of AI damage of course, but it sure can force home a squad that is trying to cap a point. What I noticed is that some players get too impatient and try to drive very close to deal AI damage and they lose more damage by being mobile than they gain from getting closer. Bunch of machineguns on a tank can substitute main gun in AI department at times.
16 Apr 2020, 04:38 AM
#56
avatar of Jilet

Posts: 556



-


This post deserves its own tread.
16 Apr 2020, 09:10 AM
#57
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351


Not sure if this helps you or not, but with pintle MG upgraded close and mid range static Panther deals some convincing damage to infantry, we are not talking about P4 level of AI damage of course, but it sure can force home a squad that is trying to cap a point. What I noticed is that some players get too impatient and try to drive very close to deal AI damage and they lose more damage by being mobile than they gain from getting closer. Bunch of machineguns on a tank can substitute main gun in AI department at times.


It is not about heping me, but thanks :). Just food for thought, you know. I'm really a fan of not only trying to balance the game but also give it a more 'natural' feel (of course as much as reasonably possible). To me, the situation when a big cannon makes so little dmg to infantry is not a big problem balancewise - just like you write it can be made up for with mgs to some degree. It is just a problem in the game perception (especially by new players who are not used to certain 'funny/strange/completely unexpected' things such as small arms shooting at heavy tanks, AT guns shooting at infantry instead of tanks, some tank cannons dealing dmg to infantry and some not without any relation to their calliber, etc.) Whenever possible I would like to see balancing always together with making it also as 'expected' as possible. To me, all tank guns should deal dmg to infantry. I would see tanks destroyers do it too but with switchable ammo and not powerful he shells (and imo they should be the only vehicles to switch ammo between at and he - sherman, for example, should be universal). Panther in this context should either have switchable ammo or be universal (my prefercence). The switchable ammo should have relatively long (4-5 seconds) delay. Imo such things can be balanced easily and at the same time would make the game less 'funny'. My pet sort of game oddity is that the more you play the game the more you stop realising how funny certain gamemechanics is (fro example, I had a had a game when kubel survived two jackson shots recently :). Anyway - I like the game the way it is but somehow panther using only mgs to deal infantry dmg is just odd to me.
16 Apr 2020, 13:37 PM
#58
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500





This forum doesn't deserve you man
16 Apr 2020, 14:23 PM
#59
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 956

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2020, 13:37 PMDomine



This forum doesn't deserve you man

I am inclined to agree with this sentiment......
16 Apr 2020, 17:41 PM
#60
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Apr 2020, 04:38 AMJilet


This post deserves its own tread.


...


Whether this ends up been implemented or been a good idea at all, it's worth discussing. The people has spoken, make a thread.

I give you 24hs before i copy your post and make a thread :hijack:


1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

895 users are online: 895 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM