Pershing blows - USF Heavy Cavalry

the USF privilege of actually complaining about needing an engineer to heal the tank is unbelievable... an engineer that can get AT or BARs to support no less. most factions do that actually, and less than half the others can slap guns onto their engineers to make them more than repair bots. and as DREADFUL as it is to take 30 whole seconds to heal 320 damage, that's actually kind of the point of dealing damage...

I think the issue is that you still need 1-2 Jacksons to fill the AT department regardless of the situation because the Pershing alone won't cut it. USF also has relatively few snares (usually 3 RM but late game might need replacements due to wipes + it is by far the worst snare in the game), practically no mines or late game stun abilities plus a ATG that does not help much against late game armor (unless you spend all your munis on it). USF is prone to being pushed and overrun because there is not much back up.

Your build for team games at least would likely consist of 2 Jacksons + Pershing + 2 RET for repairs. That was possible when the Pershing carried the AI department so the remaining 40 POP of Riflemen and team weapons don't have to do all the lifting. With the AI nerfs though I feel the Pershing is incredibly hard to fit into the build. Better just get a Sherman on HE shells and PaK Howie/Calliope instead. Saves resources, population and micro since your Sherman can crew repair. That's why it dropped out of favor in my opinion.

Regarding a similar Axis setup with Tiger, P4, 2 ATGs and 2 Pios (1pio plus base repair for OKW) it is slightly heavier on MP I think, but way better on fuel and especially popcap.

I think the issue is that you still need 1-2 Jacksons to fill the AT department regardless of the situation because the Pershing alone won't cut it. USF also has relatively few snares (usually 3 RM but late game might need replacements due to wipes + it is by far the worst snare in the game), practically no mines or late game stun abilities plus a ATG that does not help much against late game armor (unless you spend all your munis on it). USF is prone to being pushed and overrun because there is not much back up.

Your build for team games at least would likely consist of 2 Jacksons + Pershing + 2 RET for repairs. That was possible when the Pershing carried the AI department so the remaining 40 POP of Riflemen and team weapons don't have to do all the lifting. With the AI nerfs though I feel the Pershing is incredibly hard to fit into the build. Better just get a Sherman on HE shells and PaK Howie/Calliope instead. Saves resources, population and micro since your Sherman can crew repair. That's why it dropped out of favor in my opinion.

Regarding a similar Axis setup with Tiger, P4, 2 ATGs and 2 Pios (1pio plus base repair for OKW) it is slightly heavier on MP I think, but way better on fuel and especially popcap.

Yeah, Pershing used to carry the AI department. I still play it regularly, but now it's just meh. It does more consistent dmg to infantry than an opposing tiger does to mine, but it's not by a much. 1 shot more consistently I would say. I don't mind getting 2 REs to repair it but the durability on it, HP pool are piss poor. It does have slightly better agility than a Tiger but not "80hp/30armour/better ROF" better. Definitely does not substitute it.
I usually don't get 2x jacksons in teamgames, I get zook rangers and 1 jackson along with the pershing so that extra 6 pop cap is used on something that I need. You could pop cap cheat with the jackson, but that is just micro hell, especially when you need to reinforce and the enemy might push. Micro hell. Pershing is in dire need of slight buffs.

Bruh what's with this glorious suggestion thread again?

snip

Arguably some of this is the fault of the somewhat flawed USF design document. Hiding AT snares behind vet is silly, they should instead be unlocked permanently along with Grenades (And/or for free with the second tier Captain/Lieutenant upgrade). Isnt the USF ATG the best in the game though, assuming you spend the muni it craves? It has a higher firerate and arc, so it begins being very good against Light Vehicles, and retains this arc and firerate when you use the HVAP ammo, while having superior penetration to all the other ATGs. It's admittedly not much higher pen, and is diluted when you consider OST and OKW have higher Armour values across the board, but the increased firerate, self-spotting, and increased arc helps alleviate this.

Popcap especially is a hard thing to argue regarding USF, due to their inbuilt (And in my opinion terribly designed) ability to circumvent popcap restrictions. If this could be done away with somehow then I think this would leave room for further changes.

Ideally, vehicle crews would share the population space of their parent vehicles (Unless the vehicle is destroyed/captured), at which point the crew's population would revert to the current "Crew Pop". A side benefit of this would be, if implemented correctly, that the Pershing might be able to have a crew without causing issues with allowing you to double up on Pershings. Honestly in an ideal world USF would be able to call in replacement Vehicle Crews, and empty vehicles for crews they salvaged to occupy.

I'm really not sure how feasible this is though, it would be a very complex thing to implement, and likely cause unfortunate bugs,

Arguably some of this is the fault of the somewhat flawed USF design document. Hiding AT snares behind vet is silly, they should instead be unlocked permanently along with Grenades (And/or for free with the second tier Captain/Lieutenant upgrade). Isnt the USF ATG the best in the game though, assuming you spend the muni it craves? It has a higher firerate and arc, so it begins being very good against Light Vehicles, and retains this arc and firerate when you use the HVAP ammo, while having superior penetration to all the other ATGs. It's admittedly not much higher pen, and is diluted when you consider OST and OKW have higher Armour values across the board, but the increased firerate, self-spotting, and increased arc helps alleviate this.

I am not sure about the exact values of the firing arch although I think the USFs is slightly better, but not sure by how much.
As USF, you buy a relatively cheap ATG but then basically have to spend mun every time to bump your ATG up to about normal ATG performance (with 10% higher ROF of 4,5s compared to ~5 of OST ATG).
Self-spotting + extra range only exists if you invest another 30 mun, which would be 60 mun in total. Spending 30 mun once or twice is fine, but overall that is too much for the whole game to use it regularly. Personally, I would say that the shitty ATG is the root cause of most of USFs design problems (together with the inital tech split of MG and ATG). I don't want to go off topic too much here so I will leave it at that.

The Pershing needs to carry USFs late game AI though. USF has the best TD. If they need AT, they can just buy the Jackson. The only reason to get a Pershing would be either very high durability (which it never had) or very good AI (which it does not have since the heavy nerf). It's still okay-good, but I can get okay-good AI performance as USF for a much better price in the Calliope and Sherman.

Popcap especially is a hard thing to argue regarding USF, due to their inbuilt (And in my opinion terribly designed) ability to circumvent popcap restrictions. If this could be done away with somehow then I think this would leave room for further changes.

Ideally, vehicle crews would share the population space of their parent vehicles (Unless the vehicle is destroyed/captured), at which point the crew's population would revert to the current "Crew Pop". A side benefit of this would be, if implemented correctly, that the Pershing might be able to have a crew without causing issues with allowing you to double up on Pershings. Honestly in an ideal world USF would be able to call in replacement Vehicle Crews, and empty vehicles for crews they salvaged to occupy.

I'm really not sure how feasible this is though, it would be a very complex thing to implement, and likely cause unfortunate bugs,

While I agree, this would probably cause a ton of bugs. I know there are players who scam popcap as USF, but truth is that this is very micro heavy and from what I can tell (without any backup data obviously) I would say it is a very minor fraction of players.
I'd stand by my point that the crews get used as they should be in a normal match and that USF is pop capped to 100 like any other faction.

I am not sure about the exact values of the firing arch although I think the USFs is slightly better, but not sure by how much.
As USF, you buy a relatively cheap ATG but then basically have to spend mun every time to bump ...

UKF 6p firing Arc 60 horizontal tracking speed 12
RW firing arc 70 horizontal tracking speed 12
Pak firing arc 60 horizontal tracking speed 12
zis firing arc 60 horizontal tracking speed 12

M1 firing arc 80 horizontal tracking speed 18!

edited to make more clear.

snip

The USF ATG doesn't fire insignificantly faster than the other ATGs, it makes a big difference against light vehicles. Regarding the cost of APDS and "Take Aim", that's a fair point to make... They are quite expensive, though "Take Aim" is a bonus ability. Giving an ATG 70 range and self spotting is very powerful.

I think it can be argued in either direction whether the USF ATG is the "Best" or the "Worst". I think it depends how you value things. If you consider the 30 muni cost to have the highest DPS, and highest pen (Minimally higher than other ATGs), potentially killing a tank another faction simply could not (with just their ATG/A snare), then you might consider it the "best", though if you believe the fact you have to pay 30 muni any time you want your ATG to pen medium or heavier armour reliably to be a detriment, and too much upkeep/micro, then you might consider it the "Worst". It's an odd unit.

If im honest I think the Calliope is overstrength. It's fantastic rocket arty that is absurdly survivable compared to others in its class. This isnt exactly relevant to the strength of the Pershing though.

I would prefer the Pershing didn't go back to the way it was before, it was rather a wipe machine, and I really don't like losing entire squads to single shells. I don't think anyone likes oneshots. It definitely needs buffs/changes, particularly for 1v1, but it's hard to know what they oughtta be. Larger AOE, lower (infantry) damage, faster firerate, better MG, and slightly higher armour? It would be good for it to maintain the niche of "Infantry memer", but preferably in an interesting and "unique" way. (Ideally it would also have a crew, but this simply isn't possible right now)

The thing with the Popcap "Abuse" is that it's considered part of the faction "Balance" by the balance team, to my knowledge. Even if it isnt often used to its full potential, the option IS there, and the balance team seems to take it into account. I think solving it would ultimately be a good thing, but it's unlikely to happen given how much work would be involved... and the fact we aren't guaranteed any more patches. (I'm hopeful we'll get some though! The 64 bit update leaves me somewhat optimistic)

snip

Does it get a special bonus against lights? Otherwise this is what the stats tell me and I think also what I saw in the game. OST ATG fires about every 5 secs, USF ATG about every 4,5 (all vet0).

And while the "take aim" is cool, it is useless in the late game due to the low pen. With those ~50% pen chance against a Panther I will have to assume that I will often bounce that shot anyway. In my eyes these abilities make mostly sense if combined together.

Yes, the USF ATG is ambiguous, but it is on a quite muni starved faction that already lacks in AT if they do not buy a Jackson. Those muni abilities are nice but they should be occasional. In the case of the USF ATG I would go as far to say that this ability is the only thing that makes it usable in the late game.

But well, Coh2 won't see much changes anymore in that regard. Towards the end of the Pershing, I already suggested to bump the middle AoE up to 80 dmg (50% modifier). This way the OHK radius is in between the old version and the current one, while the rest of the profile is minimally affected. Even this unit would be way worse then the previous "Two shot that squad" Pershing but gain more specific AI power.

snip

I believe the Six Pounder used to have specific accuracy bonuses against Lights, back when UKF didnt have a (non sniper) snare. I don't know if the M1 does, but the increased arc and increased firerate indirectly make it better than other ATGs against light vehicles. Perhaps it has a specific bonus as well, but that isn't what i meant.

Also, yeah, I'm not stating that Take Aim is an ability to be used alone, it does generally need to be in concert with APDS. Perhaps making it a free ability that immobilises the ATG instead? A team weapon with a "Dig in" ability would be interesting. Sort of goes against the USF "Mobility" design though.

Bumping up the middle AOE to 80 lets it go back to regularly oneshotting (vet2 and below) grens again though, I'm personally not a fan of that but that's more due to enjoying OST than anything else. Maybe it's the correct move, I don't play USF enough to really know what would be "Best" for the Pershing. All i know is i really don't find it a particularly frightening opponent at the moment.


EDIT: According to Vipper's post the M1 fires approximately 50% faster than other ATGs at vet0, are you sure it's "4.5 seconds / 5 seconds"?

I believe the Six Pounder used to have specific accuracy bonuses against Lights, back when UKF didnt have a (non sniper) snare. I don't know if the M1 does, but the increased arc and increased firerate indirectly make it better than other ATGs against light vehicles. Perhaps it has a specific bonus as well, but that isn't what i meant.

Also, yeah, I'm not stating that Take Aim is an ability to be used alone, it does generally need to be in concert with APDS. Perhaps making it a free ability that immobilises the ATG instead? A team weapon with a "Dig in" ability would be interesting. Sort of goes against the USF "Mobility" design though.

Bumping up the middle AOE to 80 lets it go back to regularly oneshotting (vet2 and below) grens again though, I'm personally not a fan of that but that's more due to enjoying OST than anything else. Maybe it's the correct move, I don't play USF enough to really know what would be "Best" for the Pershing. All i know is i really don't find it a particularly frightening opponent at the moment.


EDIT: According to Vipper's post the M1 fires approximately 50% faster than other ATGs at vet0, are you sure it's "4.5 seconds / 5 seconds"?

My apologies for the confusion the "speed" I provided is the tracking speed with in the angle of fire.

The combination of wide arc and fast tracking my the M1 good vs fast vehicles.

My apologies for the confusion the "speed" I provided is the tracking speed with in the angle of fire.

The combination of wide arc and fast tracking my the M1 good vs fast vehicles.

Oh, no, sorry, that's my fault for completely misreading your post. It clearly says "Tracking speed" now that i go back to look at it.

Either way, the increased rate of fire of the M1 over the (for example) PAK40 is also a great boon, not JUST against light vehicles, but it's certainly very deadly for them.

I know it's getting off topic this discussion but I feel like usf is supposed to thrive with munitions like okw does with fuel. Choices and what not are supposed to matter. The biggest flaw imo is that weapon upgrades for all factions are so damn mandatory/no brainer that it makes munitions tight just because for a one time upgrade you get a flat power increase (where for hvap or something it's a timed thing) so deciding which one to take isn't really much of a decision at all.

Its too late in the games life but imo weapon upgrades should be more tailored and less good at everything so that non upgraded squads are more viable thus freeing up munitions for more dynamic play like grenades and HVAP ect.

The usf57mm is a great lil gun, but nobody bothers to have muni for it because them bars are much easier to see the impact of.

I know it's getting off topic this discussion but I feel like usf is supposed to thrive with munitions like okw does with fuel. Choices and what not are supposed to matter. The biggest flaw imo is that weapon upgrades for all factions are so damn mandatory/no brainer that it makes munitions tight just because for a one time upgrade you get a flat power increase (where for hvap or something it's a timed thing) so deciding which one to take isn't really much of a decision at all.

Its too late in the games life but imo weapon upgrades should be more tailored and less good at everything so that non upgraded squads are more viable thus freeing up munitions for more dynamic play like grenades and HVAP ect.

The usf57mm is a great lil gun, but nobody bothers to have muni for it because them bars are much easier to see the impact of.

Yeah... I think about this a lot too. I always wondered if it would be a good idea for the USF to get some kind of final tech to reduce ability costs... Probably to late in the game.

The Pershings HVAP is always a risky choice because of its absurd windup time. I recently had a PIV escape by just simply backing out of the range...

I don't see how there's any justification for its lower armor. Just give it 300, keep everything else mostly the same. I would love to hear some actual good reasoning for its lower armor. I don't see how it's mobility justifies it

Maybe reduce it's speed or accel a little with that change, but I don't think it would be necessary

It certainly needs a buff. I don't see any reason why I panther should be able to defeat it in a 1v1 engagement. WP and a self repair ability on a heavy tank is cancerous if you're being serious. An increase in health and armor so it's actually capable of dealing heavy damage is all it needs.

It certainly needs a buff. I don't see any reason why I panther should be able to defeat it in a 1v1 engagement. WP and a self repair ability on a heavy tank is cancerous if you're being serious. An increase in health and armor so it's actually capable of dealing heavy damage is all it needs.

Maybe because a panther is supposed to counter heavy tanks?

You might as well just give the Pershing a crew now. Who cares if you can call in more than one that way. The thing sucks anyway.

Maybe because a panther is supposed to counter heavy tanks?

A 185 fuel costing medium tank that can be spammed, being able to single handily destroy a heavy tank that costs 230 fuel is BS.
Tank destroyers are meant to counter tanks, should a single Jackson be able to destroy a tiger now?

A 185 fuel costing medium tank that can be spammed, being able to single handily destroy a heavy tank that costs 230 fuel is BS.
Tank destroyers are meant to counter tanks, should a single Jackson be able to destroy a tiger now?

It can, assuming you use it as it's meant to be used. The Panther is a brawling "TD", the Jackson is a TD that relies on its range advantage.

A 185 fuel costing medium tank that can be spammed, being able to single handily destroy a heavy tank that costs 230 fuel is BS.
Tank destroyers are meant to counter tanks, should a single Jackson be able to destroy a tiger now?

A single Jackson CAN kill a tiger. The issue with the Jackson isn't its firepower its the firepower combined with the mobility combined with the HVAP combined with the crew combined with the range combined with the standard health.

The Panther IS. A tank destroyer, just in a different package. It lacks range but instead has durabilitym compared to other TDs. It also gains some AI in exchange for increased price.

If the Panther is not supposed to kill the Pershing, what pray tell is ost supposed to use? Or are they expected to simply surrender when the Pershing hits the field?