[Winter Balance Update] General Discussion

What exactly is the change you have in mind without saying give the usf a redesign, because whats in the roaster is what usf has to work with and you are dreaming if usf design would ever change at this point.

Imo having medium tank with range 40 being damage with probabilities that close to 100% from range 60 is bad for the game.

In addition making stock units expensive and all powerful is again bad for the game.

In sort the power level of units like the M36 is bad for the game.

(Since this is a feedback thread pls contact me via PM or start a thread about TDs/Medium tanks.)

Imo having medium tank with range 40 being damage with probabilities that close to 100% from range 60 is bad for the game.

In addition making stock units expensive and all powerful is again bad for the game.

In sort the power level of units like the M36 is bad for the game.

You didnt answer the question, wait ill add in the question mark my bad.

Can the mod team answer Katikof question? I think it is a good one. Was the panther really inacurrate vs heavies and super heavies? Aren´t you again creating an -one unit to answer all problems?

Can the mod team answer Katikof question? I think it is a good one. Was the panther really inacurrate vs heavies and super heavies? Aren´t you again creating an -one unit to answer all problems?

Can’t wait for the Jagdpanzer IV and StuGG buffs next patch because the even more OP than now Panther will leave them without a role.

I can't speak for the others, but I think the choice between the Panther and the Jagdpanzer IV / StuG is mostly a player preference and/or map/situation dependant. One isn't necessarily better/worse than the other against similar targets. I'd say all of them perform roughly similar against most targets at the moment. The JP4 has the range and DPM advantage, the StuG has the cost effectiveness advantage (get two for 1 Panther) and the Panther has the generalist/brawler advantage.

The Panther however, is a mix of mostly mediocre characteristics. It has mediocre DPM, mediocre accuracy, kinda mediocre pen (for an AT vehicle), good but not fantastic mobility, held together with high durability. The complete package is good, but any one of those aspects on its own isn't anything to write home about. It is supposed to expose itself though, mostly by diving, where the current accuracy is often not adequate and it makes dives/attacks more risky than they should be. That is why it is being buffed slightly.

That being said, the accuracy buff is being toned down in V2. And if it turns out that the Panther with increased accuracy becomes too good, then we can nerf something else about it later.

Can’t wait for the Jagdpanzer IV and StuGG buffs next patch because the even more OP than now Panther will leave them without a role.

Advice, ignore General V. I mean, JP4 is more than enough to counter anything USF related stock armour. Soviet too. UKF, Comet is a bit harder to kill but still JP4 is more than enough.
Stug is dirt cheap, fires fast and giving it 60 range would make it OP. Don't know how Jackson is OP. You have stock Panther with 260 armour in both axis factions. 230 armour P4 and JP4 in OKW. Saying that the allies TDs are OP is delusional at best. I mean, USF has the doctrinal Pershing that nobody is commenting on which is downright useless in teamgames with low armour and HP (for a heavy). And yet, a Panther is getting an accuracy buff.

If anyone from the mod team can answer the following question: What is exactly the weakness of Panther with the acc buff?

Can the mod team answer Katikof question? I think it is a good one. Was the panther really inacurrate vs heavies and super heavies? Aren´t you again creating an -one unit to answer all problems?

Panther (and other units) become less accurate vs medium in previous patch by roughly 10% with size reduction.

Unlike other allied TDs (that start with higher accuracy and some of them even have better accuracy on the move) the Panther did not get accuracy bones and even with this patch it get 10% while allied TD gain 3 times that.

Now once vet 2 (which is reached slower than allied TDs,) it will perform vs medium as it did (before size reduction) at vet 0.

This is simply a storm in a cup.

The Panther however, is a mix of mostly mediocre characteristics. It has mediocre DPM, mediocre accuracy, kinda mediocre pen (for an AT vehicle), good but not fantastic mobility, held together with high durability. The complete package is good, but any one of those aspects on its own isn't anything to write home about. It is supposed to expose itself though, mostly by diving, where the current accuracy is often not adequate and it makes dives/attacks more risky than they should be. That is why it is being buffed slightly.

You just speak my mind.

As a 2vs2 Ostheer player, I don't really see much use in using the Panther right now: everything is so so mediocre and it doesn't really do anything against infantry. Like the only thing it got going for is speed and high durability.

Which Allies can just lay cheap 30muni mine to denied the "speed" for flanking and high durability also meaning easier vet gain for Allies TD like SU-85 / Jackson (which by feeding them to vet 2 or 3, my panther even when showing frontal armor is not that good anymore)

I rather just going for the Brumbar + Elefant + PG Sherck right now to outright destroy Allies TD / Infantry / AT gun in 2vs2.

I know that if we ask for any form of buff for Panther will result it being spam in other games mode so I'm not gonna touch on that, I'm just express my mind that in my 2vs2 game (Usually Top 100), I rather going for my combo then getting a Panther out which is not a threat against Infantry like the Comet or T34/85mm and also a vet feeding system for SU85 / Jackson.

P/S: if ya people play lots of 2vs2, those Alllies do lay down lots of mines, explains why I don't really like to Blitz a Panther to flank (which it penetrate and accuracy is not even that good lol)

I can't speak for the others, but I think the choice between the Panther and the Jagdpanzer IV / StuG is mostly a player preference and/or map/situation dependant. One isn't necessarily better/worse than the other against similar targets. I'd say all of them perform roughly similar against most targets at the moment. The JP4 has the range and DPM advantage, the StuG has the cost effectiveness advantage (get two for 1 Panther) and the Panther has the generalist/brawler advantage.

The Panther however, is a mix of mostly mediocre characteristics. It has mediocre DPM, mediocre accuracy, kinda mediocre pen (for an AT vehicle), good but not fantastic mobility, held together with high durability. The complete package is good, but any one of those aspects on its own isn't anything to write home about. It is supposed to expose itself though, mostly by diving, where the current accuracy is often not adequate and it makes dives/attacks more risky than they should be. That is why it is being buffed slightly.

That being said, the accuracy buff is being toned down in V2. And if it turns out that the Panther with increased accuracy becomes too good, then we can nerf something else about it later.

I dont agree that the panther is a mix of mediocre characteristics.
Its very mobile, the heavy crush allows it to move around unhindered while being about as fast as any medium. Its armour is only reliably penned by dedicated td's. It has more range then any medium, it has more pen and more acc then any medium.

Just by glancing at its cost and stats shows the panther is not meant to be the answer to every tank. Its meant to be a heavy counter. The stug and jp4 do a more then adaquate job vs meds. Even both p4 do a good job vs mediums then allied meds do vs p4,'s.

The acc buff also negates the target size reduction only on the allied side.

The acc buff also negates the target size reduction only on the allied side.

There are many more AT sources than just the Panther.

I dont agree that the panther is a mix of mediocre characteristics.
Its very mobile, the heavy crush allows it to move around unhindered while being about as fast as any medium. Its armour is only reliably penned by dedicated td's. It has more range then any medium, it has more pen and more acc then any medium.

That is because you choose to compare it with medium tanks while it is a TD. I has less range then most allied TD, less penetration and less accuracy. On top of that it cost more and has higher pop.

Just by glancing at its cost and stats shows the panther is not meant to be the answer to every tank. Its meant to be a heavy counter. The stug and jp4 do a more then adaquate job vs meds. Even both p4 do a good job vs mediums then allied meds do vs p4,'s.

PzIV is good vs mediums but it is not got vs premium mediums and get rolf stop by heavy tanks(not super heavy).

The acc buff also negates the target size reduction only on the allied side.

Allied TDs get 3 times the bonus Panther gets while more accurate to begin with and while vetting faster.

Panther (and other units) become less accurate vs medium in previous patch by roughly 10% with size reduction.

That was the point of the change. To make mediums less likely to die in late game.

I dont agree that the panther is a mix of mediocre characteristics.
Its very mobile, the heavy crush allows it to move around unhindered while being about as fast as any medium. Its armour is only reliably penned by dedicated td's. It has more range then any medium, it has more pen and more acc then any medium.

Just by glancing at its cost and stats shows the panther is not meant to be the answer to every tank. Its meant to be a heavy counter. The stug and jp4 do a more then adaquate job vs meds. Even both p4 do a good job vs mediums then allied meds do vs p4,'s.

Panther is not just a heavy counter, it's just meant to be a massive pain in the arse, which is something it already does well. It zones out allied mediums, it can't be ignored by infantry, it takes a lot of resouruces (muni, manpower, damage taken) to force it away, because frontally it doesn't take damage from anything else other than vetted up AT guns and tank destroyers, and constantly threatens with flanking/diving with its extreme mobily and veta ability. It just causes a lot of stress, having this thing around.

I generally support changes that increase consistency/reduce RNG, so I don't care about this particular buff, since I already assume Panthers land 100 % of their shots when facing them, but for the same reason I dislike the nerfs to allied TDs and the generally low pen on ZIS. I feel that this kind of small bounce RNG on AT guns and TDs specifically has no place in a competitive environment.

That was the point of the change. To make mediums less likely to die in late game.

Now calculate the probability of allied TDs hitting a PzIV once they get their accuracy bonuses and calculate at what range each of them has 100% to hit it.

I'm with Vipper on this one. I don't get this furor over the Panther base acc buff. The way some ppl talk about the change is as if the tank gained a RoF buff or something crazy. Med tank being easier to hit by a Panther at far, 70%+-to-whateverthenew% is? I must ask why is that med not running away asap from it? Or if it's the 1hit scenario, you're already rolling the dice real bad. It's like sending a pz iv against a comet and being surprised when it stomps your tank.

The Panther vet acc buff was overdue for years, made no sense it was kept with stock accuracy even after vetting up. 260 armor is practically irrelevant in the face of Allied TDs (who have stock 210/220 far pen) so I don't know why ppl tout this figure about as if means anything. Vet II vs vet II (a big ask for a Panther) you will get autopenned by SU-85 + Jackson atm. (Virtually autopenned after the patch as well, so you can assume 100% as well unless you like looking at hulks of your own tanks)

Seems like the panther is going to stay put in the closet for now, as it was.

Now calculate the probability of allied TDs hitting a PzIV once they get their accuracy bonuses and calculate at what range each of them has 100% to hit it.

I'm not against the change, which is something you can notice if you read my whole post. But comparing TDs with Panther is not appropriate, as those are completely different unit types. One is a fast and durable brawler with mutiple uses, good for breakthroughs and dives. The others are fragile, can do only one specific thing and, except for M36/M10, are also slow and clunky.

I'm not against the change, which is something you can notice if you read my whole post. But comparing TDs with Panther is not appropriate, as those are completely different unit types. One is a fast and durable brawler with mutiple uses, good for breakthroughs and dives. The others are fragile, can do only one specific thing and, except for M36/M10, are also slow and clunky.

My comment was explaining how effective the target reduction of the medium tanks in late game was once allied TDs are vetted.