Smartie's commander reworks: USF

And a panther IS SUPPOSED TO COUNTER A PERSHING

I chuckled.

Pershing does not compete with Jackons or Shermans, just like Tiger doesn't compete with Panzers and Panthers. It's a heavy, and as such you expect it to perform these roles, which mediums simply cannot:

• Provide staying power, the ability to directly remain in a fight for longer periods of time before resorting to hit/reverse strategy.
  
• Converting recuperation costs from resources (manpower, fuel) into repair time, thus helping to spread resource/repair economy more evenly across your composition and generally saving resources in the long run.
  
• Frontload DPS into big blasts, resulting in more wipes.
  
• Fitting multiple roles (damage sponge, AI, AT) into relatively small amount of pop, making your overall composition more efficient in relation to popcap.

Tiger can do all of that in accordance with its price. IS-2 too, but being more clunky and less dangerous at that, hence its lower popularity. Pershing kinda does fit these roles too, but does so at a very high price despite having comparably low durability, which is the key stat if you want it to perform well at #1, #2 and #4. As such it's simply not so desirable at its price, especially considering that sticking to the baseline composition is goood enough and leaving you with the option to pick the best possible doctrine.

Which is why Pershing needs a buff. Easiest way to do that would be making it into a faster Tiger with less armour if people want to preserve US faction's flavour or whatever.

Pershing does not compete with Jackons or Shermans, just like Tiger doesn't compete with Panzers and Panthers. It's a heavy, and as such you expect it to perform these roles, which mediums simply cannot:

• Provide staying power, the ability to directly remain in a fight for longer periods of time before resorting to hit/reverse strategy.
  
• Converting recuperation costs from resources (manpower, fuel) into repair time, thus helping to spread resource/repair economy more evenly across your composition and generally saving resources in the long run.
  
• Frontload DPS into big blasts, resulting in more wipes.
  
• Fitting multiple roles (damage sponge, AI, AT) into relatively small amount of pop, making your overall composition more efficient in relation to popcap.

Tiger can do all of that in accordance with its price. IS-2 too, but being more clunky and less dangerous at that, hence its lower popularity. Pershing kinda does fit these roles too, but does so at a very high price despite having comparably low durability, which is the key stat if you want it to perform well at #1, #2 and #4. As such it's simply not so desirable at its price, especially considering that sticking to the baseline composition is goood enough and leaving you with the option to pick the best possible doctrine.

I mean, isn't this general knowledge? Heavy tanks are best generalists. A sherman and a Jackson cost 28 pop cap while the Pershing costs 19. That 9 pop can be utilized into other units. While heavy tanks are not needed in 1v1s. 2v2+ they shine. Let's not kid ourselves, Pershing is OK at best, but it's still a meme unit compared to other heavies. If you compare it side by side (https://coh2.serealia.ca/#21) to Tiger, a sort of mirror heavy, you'd see that the only thing Pershing has better is the AI cannon. And that's slightly better. Accuracy and moving accuracy are better on the Pershing but since it's a heavy tank, you don't really expect it to run and gun anyways, so that stat is not as important as on a TD or generalist tank. It's a bit more agile but also not important most of the time (unless you use your heavy tanks as divers)

Easiest way to do that would be making it into a faster Tiger with less armour if people want to preserve US faction's flavour or whatever.

Ironically, it already is exactly that.

Ironically, it already is exactly that.

It doesn't feel like it at all. Does it have the same HP and main gun stats? Because it feels a lot less survivable and less damaging than a Tiger. Granted it gets shot by and shoots at Panthers and other bullshit like that but it's AI performance feels lacking especially.

It doesn't feel like it at all. Does it have the same HP and main gun stats? Because it feels a lot less survivable and less damaging than a Tiger. Granted it gets shot by and shoots at Panthers and other bullshit like that but it's AI performance feels lacking especially.

To be precise. Pershing has a better gun in terms of damage/penetration. It has worse ROF. Compared to Tiger OFC. Tiger also has better bonuses for it's main gun (extended range, etc).
The reason Pershing doesn't feel more agile than a Tiger is because it's not THAT more agile (you can get full stats here https://coh2.serealia.ca/#). Basically the Pershing is a turtle while Tiger is a tortoise (on land both).

Giving WFA factions snipers is going to make the game almost symmetrical

To be precise. Pershing has a better gun in terms of damage/penetration. It has worse ROF. Compared to Tiger OFC. Tiger also has better bonuses for it's main gun (extended range, etc).
The reason Pershing doesn't feel more agile than a Tiger is because it's not THAT more agile (you can get full stats here https://coh2.serealia.ca/#). Basically the Pershing is a turtle while Tiger is a tortoise (on land both).

Yeah, I just looked it up. Not only does the Pershing have less HP but also the mobility stats are so negligibly better it makes no difference. If this is the idea of "more mobile, less armoured Tiger" then it might as well be a straight Tiger copy. Panther has better mobility and that's not even a doctrine tank.

Yeah, I just looked it up. Not only does the Pershing have less HP but also the mobility stats are so negligibly better it makes no difference. If this is the idea of "more mobile, less armoured Tiger" then it might as well be a straight Tiger copy. Panther has better mobility and that's not even a doctrine tank.

Truth be told. Mobility is not doctrine bound. Panther has a role of it's own and is expensive. Shouldn't be compared to pershing as the Panther is a direct Pershing counter. Panther is the counter of every heavy tank. Unlike Jackson, which relies on it's mobility and range (60) to deter tanks, Panther uses armour/HP/range(50)/mobility to destroy tanks. Plus it has a pintle MG which can bleed infantry nicely. One should not compare Panther and Pershing tbh

Truth be told. Mobility is not doctrine bound. Panther has a role of it's own and is expensive. Shouldn't be compared to pershing as the Panther is a direct Pershing counter. Panther is the counter of every heavy tank. Unlike Jackson, which relies on it's mobility and range (60) to deter tanks, Panther uses armour/HP/range(50)/mobility to destroy tanks. Plus it has a pintle MG which can bleed infantry nicely. One should not compare Panther and Pershing tbh

Still the Pershing is laughably immobile if it's supposed to be a more mobile Tiger. The Panther remark I put in there because I checked it's stats while looking at the heavies and it really struck me because Pershing isn't even equal to a Panther.

Well. If you compare Panther and Pershing, you'll notice that Pershing only has a better AI gun and moving accuracy. Rest of the stats the Panther wins, even in the ability department. I think that was the original design and the devs are sticking to it, so nothing you can do about it. Panther will always win vs any tank, allied units can field. Both in vacuum and regular gameplay. That is by design, so it's expensive. One could only argue that it's design is bad for teamgames, where the resource management is not as important as 1v1 and you can get steamrolled by pintled Panthers late game if you allow axis to reach critical mass. Other faction that can do that is the UKF with the Comets. Of course, you can spam any tank, but only those two can actually be useful lategame. Although you will see T34 critical mass in teamgames. An early c.mass that can steamroll the opponent if you've been playing well.

Back to the point at hand. Pershing not being equal to Panther. While that is true, it's not as clear cut as it seems. Yes, Panther has 90% of stats better, but one major stat is the AI power, and Pershing with it's 4 AOE (compared to 0.5 on Panther) clearly wins, and infantry is a major element of any mode. While the Panther can have decent AI once the pintle MG has been upgraded, especially if you keep all 3 MGs on your targets, it will never wipe more than one model with one shot, never ever. That is quite a big setback. Of course, that setback is contrasted by the fact that it's sturdy, fast, long ranged, highly penetrating and frequently shooting. Compare it to the Comet, you'll see that the Comet has even more armour, less HP, less range, but better AI cannon and nice utility.

It's all give and take generally in this game, contrary to what some people claim.

Does Pershing need a buff? IMHO yes.
Does the E8 need a slight buff? IMHO yes.
Is USF a bad faction for teamgames or lacks something non-doctrinal? IMHO no.

I wonder how the commander patch, if it occurs will look like. But I wouldn't expect much. The low number of commanders on the newer factions puts a strain on combining the existing ones.

I chuckled.

Yes at a FACT. Everyone on this forums knows panther exists to COUNTER ALLIED HEAVIES.

@Protos Angelus you are over exaggerating the panther soo much, making it seem like anti allied vehicle of doom "panther will win vs any allied tank" i mean this is complete stupidy, tone it down

Overall, anyone can see perishing has good stats but saying it’s not worth the price, that doesn’t immediately mean it needs a performance buff, you can just decrease the price and not break balance again.

And its not just about the performance of specific units, it’s also about what the enemy has to counter. Compare the Tiger and Pershing (which are more similar than the stupid panther comparison). Yh tiger has more HP and Armour, but ALL allied factions have 60 range high pen non doc TD's to outrange and counter all axis heavies like tiger and panther.

I do not see how you can buff the perishing without making it OP. It has 960hp, same armour as panther (260 I believe), High speed, best AI out of heavies and very good AT with ability to improve its penetration. (correct me if im wrong)

If its overpriced for what it gives, then reduce the price.

Yes at a FACT. Everyone on this forums knows panther exists to COUNTER ALLIED HEAVIES.

@Protos Angelus you are over exaggerating the panther soo much, making it seem like anti allied vehicle of doom "panther will win vs any allied tank" i mean this is complete stupidy, tone it down

Overall, anyone can see perishing has good stats but saying it’s not worth the price, that doesn’t immediately mean it needs a performance buff, you can just decrease the price and not break balance again.

And its not just about the performance of specific units, it’s also about what the enemy has to counter. Compare the Tiger and Pershing (which are more similar than the stupid panther comparison). Yh tiger has more HP and Armour, but ALL allied factions have 60 range high pen non doc TD's to outrange and counter all axis heavies like tiger and panther.

I do not see how you can buff the perishing without making it OP. It has 960hp, same armour as panther (260 I believe), High speed, best AI out of heavies and very good AT with ability to improve its penetration. (correct me if im wrong)

If its overpriced for what it gives, then reduce the price.

I didn't call it nor intended to call it a tank of doom. However, I can't think of a single tank that a Panther can not dive and win. In vacuum definitely; and in a regular engagement, they can get into the 50 range, shoot a few shots and get out (and you'll def force the player to react with SUs or Jacksons, moving them away)
So a Panther will win vs any allied tank. That's not exaggeration, but a fact. It won't shit on every tank, but will win in 1v1 unless the axis player is not using it's speed and frontal armour and is diving into snares and tanks. If one can nullify the range advantage of TDs by positioning and sight blockers (or carpeting the area beforehand to kill enemy sight providers)...kudos.

Pershing has 270 armour (10 more than Panther, same HP as panther). IS-2 has a cannon that is sort of on par with the Pershing (higher AOE but a bit worse modifiers with similar ROF). Compared to the Tiger AI. Tiger has 15% worse AOE but higher ROF and has a pintle MG. So, less wipes but more bleed. Pershing gets an acceleration buff at vet1. Accuracy and automatic nade throw at vet2 and 35% better reload speed at vet3 (5.5s to 3.85s + 1 s of wind down). Penetration is the same as Panther's and does not change (260-240-220). I pretty much think that's all, unless I'm forgetting something in the vet department.


Either decrease the price of Pershing or buff it's armour back to 300.

Id just buff pershings acceleration and deceleration so it would be much more nimble, taking note its more mobile than other heavies.

snip

I understand Relic's idea of asymmetrical balance and I have no issue with it but the Pershing is just not worth it's price. I'd much rather get a Sherman and a Jackson for slightly more pop cap but both combined would still way outperform a Pershing so there's very little reason to get a Pershing outside of memes. It needs something to be worthwile.

"panther will win vs any allied tank" i mean this is complete stupidy, tone it down

Name a single Allied tank/SPG that will win against a Panther.

Loiter planes with calliope is a terrible idea because they can stop any dives attempt to kill calliope

You already have this situation for Katiusha and Panzerwerfer. Yeah they have less health but you still have to dive in. So what?

Heavy cavalry
Ranger and Pershing should simply not be in the same commander.

There are multiple examples of elite units and heavy tank / super heavy tank in the hands of one player in this game already. In addition Pershing really isn't the best one. So I don't see your point either.


Just to clear this up, I play USF next to never. But I just don't see this points if they exist already at other factions in a similar way.

You already have this situation for Katiusha and Panzerwerfer. Yeah they have less health but you still have to dive in. So what?

That situation is not really the same since Calliope is a lot more durable than Kat and Panz.

In addition the combination of doctrinal rocket AI arty like Calliope and an AT off map is bad to begin with.

There are multiple examples of elite units and heavy tank / super heavy tank in the hands of one player in this game already. In addition Pershing really isn't the best one. So I don't see your point either.

Mostly for soviet and none of them have the AT capability of rangers.

Just to clear this up, I play USF next to never. But I just don't see this points if they exist already at other factions in a similar way.

Each faction plays differently now imagine how broken it would be one combined 5 men grenadier with a Super heavy like Tiger or Elefant.

You already have this situation for Katiusha and Panzerwerfer. Yeah they have less health but you still have to dive in. So what?




There are multiple examples of elite units and heavy tank / super heavy tank in the hands of one player in this game already. In addition Pershing really isn't the best one. So I don't see your point either.


Just to clear this up, I play USF next to never. But I just don't see this points if they exist already at other factions in a similar way.

Because the Calliope has thrice the HP of the Pwerfer and Katyusha, and enough armour to bounce rounds.

It's unreasonably hard to kill for the type of unit that it is.

That situation is not really the same since Calliope is a lot more durable than Kat and Panz.

In addition the combination of doctrinal rocket AI arty like Calliope and an AT off map is bad to begin with.



Mostly for soviet and none of them have the AT capability of rangers.


Each faction plays differently now imagine how broken it would be one combined 5 men grenadier with a Super heavy like Tiger or Elefant.

5 man grens are equal to rangers now? You do know Rangers are expensive both in MP and population? Not only that, they are not mainline infantry and are only suited for close range or zooks. Please stop these silly uninformative comparisons. Shame on you.

For all the people who think the Pershing is useless: Watch Von Ivans game vs. Luvnest

5 man grens are equal to rangers now?

I never said they where. Ranger are superior

You do know Rangers are expensive both in MP and population?

I never said Rangers where not more expensive

Not only that, they are not mainline infantry and are only suited for close range or zooks.

I never said that Rangers where a mainline infatry.

Is sort I have to compared Ranges with grenadiers.

Please stop these silly uninformative comparisons. Shame on you.

Now you are transferring because you are the one that with misinformation and not me.


What I pointed out is just because a faction get something like Soviet get Super heavies and superior infatry it does not mean that it a good idea for other factions.