[Winter Balance Update] General Discussion

Oddly SU-76 get same defensive perk (although it can not move) and 1.2 accuracy/penetration from vet 1 and the M-42 start with camo and first strike bonus +25% reload speed,+20% accuracy,+20% penetration contrary to RW.

? SU76 gets "normal" vet
And this camo ability is one of the few things that keeps it relevant late game

? SU76 gets "normal" vet
And this camo ability is one of the few things that keeps it relevant late game

Soviet first strikes bonuses for ATG and TD applies from vet 0 vet 1 (XP 0/1044).

OKW first strike bonus are available from vet 3 and vet 5 (XP 4320/14298)

Soviet first strikes bonuses for ATG and TD applies from vet 0 vet 1.

OKW first strike bonus are available from vet 3 and vet 5

A wait you were talking about the preview version, I only thought about the live build.

In the end the units have quite some important differences though, there is no reason why they must have the same veterancy.

A wait you were talking about the preview version, I only thought about the live build.

In the end the units have quite some important differences though, there is no reason why they must have the same veterancy.

Yes they should not have the same veterancy.

On the other hand vet bonus overhaul is long overdue and many vet bonuses like the vet 1 camo for RW and vet 5 vet bonus for JP are simply bad.

The only reason I even pointed it out was because elchino7 made a reference to "cautious movement defensive perks" (I guess he referring to "dimaterialize") which is also available to Soviet cloaked vehicles.

He is implying the boost you suggest is too strong.

Increasing the pen/accuracy more is fine, not dmg. Specially when cautious movement defensive perks have never been fixed.

well the current + 25% damage is useless i don't mind if it increased the reload further instead of damage too

and comes way too late

just so people understand why the 25% damage is useless

it's 40 more damage so in 90% of the cases vs tanks it does nothing as they generally hit multiple of 160
this is especially relevant vs medium tanks which is supposed to counter

at 50% it would be + 80 damage so if u actually have 2 raketen or 2 jp4 u actually would take 1 less shoot to kill if they both reach the required vet

and as i said above i don't mind if it's changed to a reload bonus so it actually does something insated of a token bonus

Soviet first strikes bonuses for ATG and TD applies from vet 0 vet 1 (XP 0/1044).

OKW first strike bonus are available from vet 3 and vet 5 (XP 4320/14298)

Soviet ones are doctrinal or on a shitty unit.
OKW ones are on potent, constantly buffed techless ATG and strong tank destroyer that doesn't easily deal exclusively with doctrinal heavy armor and even that changes with right doctrine.

mhh honestly speaking , the JP4 does not need that many changes, 1 like elchino said bringing it at tier 4 base should see it more usable to counter a fast medium, 2 buff the first stike bonus to actually do something: from 25% to 50% too pen,dmg and acc
the unit has 0 pen buff and the reload is very similar to the su 85, so making first stike bonus actually useful would not be a bad idea

btw the vet req should be brought in line with su 85 cause if u see them they are basically the 3 vet of the su 85 divided in 5 but like double the vet req and they should reshufle the bonus liek this

1 Unlocks the "Cautious Movement" ability.

2 +160 additional healthpoints.
+20% accuracy.

3 For first shot fired out of camouflage:
+50% damage.
+50% accuracy.
+50% penetration.

4 +20% rotation speed.
+20% maximum speed.
+10% reload speed.

5 +15% reload speed.
+15% accuracy.

btw don't forget staggered vet bonus are less cumulative than 1 big one (30% cd > 20%+10% cd) cause math

Totally agree.

+1 TO VET OVERHAUL
-1 TO COMPARING THE JP4 TO THE SU76...

+1 TO VET OVERHAUL
-1 TO COMPARING THE JP4 TO THE SU76...

????

????

the discussion about jp4 getting its mostly useless first strike buffed, and later on a genral Passover for all vet is good, comparing the jp4 and su76 though is a joke, even if they have similar vet bonus at the moment.

the discussion about jp4 getting its mostly useless first strike buffed, and later on a genral Passover for all vet is good, comparing the jp4 and su76 though is a joke, even if they have similar vet bonus at the moment.

That is simply inaccurate the comparison was about abilities and not the units

But there is little reason not to compare the units to begin with:
Stug/SU-76 and JP are unit in the same category. Actually SU-76 and JP have same range and similar penetration/ROF while Stug has 10 less range.

Su-76 has utility, mobility and price on its side while JP has Armor/HP/target size/damage on it side.

That is simply inaccurate the comparison was about abilities and not the units

But there is little reason not to compare the units to begin with:
Stug/SU-76 and JP are unit in the same category. Actually SU-76 and JP have same range and similar penetration/ROF while Stug has 10 less range.

Stop comparing incomparable units forcefully.
There is no very strong med tank standing behind SU-76 while there are Panthers, Brummbars and stock 230+ armor meds complimenting JP4 and StuGs.

Units are NOT balanced against their archetypes in opposing factions, they are balanced around the faction they are WITHIN.

SU-76 and StuG stats could not be any less relevant to JP balance.

Su-76 has utility, mobility and price on its side while JP has Armor/HP/damage on it side.

I don't think you know what utility means, because SU-76 has none on preview.
If you mean barrage, its not utility, its units design of dual role that is with it since day 1 and no amount of wordplay and semantic spinning from you will ever change that.

the discussion about jp4 getting its mostly useless first strike buffed, and later on a genral Passover for all vet is good, comparing the jp4 and su76 though is a joke, even if they have similar vet bonus at the moment.

i did not tho

Stop comparing incomparable units forcefully.
There is no very strong med tank standing behind SU-76 while there are Panthers, Brummbars and stock 230+ armor meds complimenting JP4 and StuGs.

Units are NOT balanced against their archetypes in opposing factions, they are balanced around the faction they are WITHIN.

SU-76 and StuG stats could not be any less relevant to JP balance.

TDs are incomparable to each other now?
I mean I agree that faction context is important, but this does not make them incomparable by default.

I don't think you know what utility means, because SU-76 has none on preview.
If you mean barrage, its not utility, its units design of dual role that is with it since day 1 and no amount of wordplay and semantic spinning from you will ever change that.

Being able to perform a task beside your main obligation is literally utility. Otherwise laying mines, building sand bags, barbed wire and whatnot are not utility because "its units design of dual role that is with it since day 1".

TDs are incomparable to each other now?
I mean I agree that faction context is important, but this does not make them incomparable by default.

They are not comparable -directly-.
You can't compare units cross faction without context of the faction.

StuG is not going to have same support and doctrinal abilities as SU-76 and that affects performance already.

You don't compare TDs based on other TDs, unless its another TD within the same faction.
You compare TDs based on what they fight, what they are supposed to fight and if they do it within the reasonable bracket allowed by their cost, timing and scaling.

And it does not go for just TDs, but for all units.
This is why, for example, cons and grens are not equals at all stages of the game.
Or why you don't base HMG performance on the results of HMG duels.
Or why you don't say that ZiS is superior to PaK40, because ZiS kills it easily.

Being able to perform a task beside your main obligation is literally utility. Otherwise laying mines, building sand bags, barbed wire and whatnot are not utility because "its units design of dual role that is with it since day 1".

Eh, I can concede that argument.

That is simply inaccurate the comparison was about abilities and not the units

But there is little reason not to compare the units to begin with:
Stug/SU-76 and JP are unit in the same category. Actually SU-76 and JP have same range and similar penetration/ROF while Stug has 10 less range.

Su-76 has utility, mobility and price on its side while JP has Armor/HP/target size/damage on it side.

the abilities are % based so the units underneath matter very much so, for the su76 it gets a shot of full 160 damage which can be nice in conjunction with other AT as it will make up for what would otherwise be overkill damage, but on the JP4 it puts its damage to an odd spot that is mostly just absorbed by not changing the TTK, things get even stranger for the su76 when it gets that +20 damage with vet putting it to the unheard of 140 damage, with the first strike bonus bringing it to 175 damage

what's more, while its true the su76 and jp4 have 60 range and shoot at tanks, that about the extent of the comparison capacity. the su76 is multirole for one and drastically cheaper, the durability also dramatically confuses the comparison, we dont compare the puma and the panther despite them both having 50 range and a turret with low AOE on the cannon because unit class matters. durability is the difference between the t34/76 and the kv-1, let alone adding in damage differences and utility like in the su76/jp4 category. the su76 is a baby in terms of AT platforms

another dramatic difference is what the TDs are shooting at, combined with the previous point, makes them very difficult to compare. if the su76 was cloned and put in both okws army and the soviet army, some how set up to hit the field at the EXACT same time, the okw su76 would be better, simply because of the targets it shoots at. comparing things like TDs in a vacuum is difficult enough to begin with, let alone ones that dont even have the standard damage for medium AT in common.

these are the reasons im in favor of a vet rework (bring things like the su76 odd numbers in line, and making the damage bonus of the jp4 mean something) and why i dont believe the 2 units should be directly compared

Oddly SU-76 get same defensive perk (although it can not move) and 1.2 accuracy/penetration from vet 1 and the M-42 start with camo and first strike bonus +25% reload speed,+20% accuracy,+20% penetration contrary to RW.

Indeed, but as you said it remains in position and doesn't increase damage. The problem is creeping AND increasing dmg, when you can also use commanders to increase it further ahead (either Heat or mark vehicle).

If the ability made the tank stay immobile i would had less problems with it having vet1 higher values or even increasing it further than what it is now.

the abilities are % based so the units underneath matter very much so, for the su76 it gets a shot of full 160 damage which can be nice in conjunction with other AT as it will make up for what would otherwise be overkill damage, but on the JP4 it puts its damage to an odd spot that is mostly just absorbed by not changing the TTK, things get even stranger for the su76 when it gets that +20 damage with vet putting it to the unheard of 140 damage, with the first strike bonus bringing it to 175 damage

SU-76 does not do extra damage as first strike bonus.

what's more, while its true the su76 and jp4 have 60 range and shoot at tanks, that about the extent of the comparison capacity. the su76 is multirole for one and drastically cheaper, the durability also dramatically confuses the comparison, we dont compare the puma and the panther despite them both having 50 range and a turret with low AOE on the cannon because unit class matters. durability is the difference between the t34/76 and the kv-1, let alone adding in damage differences and utility like in the su76/jp4 category. the su76 is a baby in terms of AT platforms

Puma and Panther do not have similar accuracy or penetration

another dramatic difference is what the TDs are shooting at, combined with the previous point, makes them very difficult to compare. if the su76 was cloned and put in both okws army and the soviet army, some how set up to hit the field at the EXACT same time, the okw su76 would be better, simply because of the targets it shoots at. comparing things like TDs in a vacuum is difficult enough to begin with, let alone ones that dont even have the standard damage for medium AT in common.

these are the reasons im in favor of a vet rework (bring things like the su76 odd numbers in line, and making the damage bonus of the jp4 mean something) and why i dont believe the 2 units should be directly compared

Well I did not compare them in my initial post. In the following post I simply pointed out that one can compare them since there are similarities.

Indeed, but as you said it remains in position and doesn't increase damage. The problem is creeping AND increasing dmg, when you can also use commanders to increase it further ahead (either Heat or mark vehicle).

If the ability made the tank stay immobile i would had less problems with it having vet1 higher values or even increasing it further than what it is now.

Moving cloaked unit where a problem but the mode team went from one extreme to other.

Both cautious movement and RW cloaked have simply become bad to the point of being circumstantial.

Cautious movement makes a low mobility vehicle even less mobile while many time it bugs out and does not attack vehicles in range. Provide no first strike bonus until vet 5 (which incredibly difficult to reach) and even the bonuses are not that great make cautious movement a circumstantial ability.

RW cloak is very player unfriendly and most people do not both use. Again first strike bonus become available only at Vet3 with little reason to use it before that.

One should have a look at these abilities and either make decent or replace them with something more useful.

Moving cloaked unit where a problem but the mode team went from one extreme to other.

Both cautious movement and RW cloaked have simply become bad to the point of being circumstantial.

Cautious movement makes a low mobility vehicle even less mobile while many time it bugs out and does not attack vehicles in range. Provide no first strike bonus until vet 5 (which incredibly difficult to reach) and even the bonuses are not that great make cautious movement a circumstantial ability.

RW cloak is very player unfriendly and most people do not both use. Again first strike bonus become available only at Vet3 with little reason to use it before that.

One should have a look at these abilities and either make decent or replace them with something more useful.

Veterancy adjustments are long overdue.

I disagree on cautious movement been bad for the sole reason it provides initiative on engagement at no cost. For a vet 1 ability is not bad.

RW is indeed cumbersome to use but not bad for what it does. I think it could have like 5%/10% movement speed but i suspect it is in the current state to disuade the whole keeping 2x AT gun in the front at a risky position, shoot and then retreat away.