Brummbar performance

What do you think?

Imo it's a bit overperforming but I am Allies-biased af
Maybe it could use some nerfs, not directly to the damage/aoe/scatter, but main gun arc radius or something?

Brummbär is a hardcounter to infantry with absolutely no AT.

So try Jacksons, Su85s and Fireflies. Thats all you need ;-)

For its price, role and timing the brum performs well. It's got reasonably short range so it has to put itself in the line of fire to do work.

What faction are you struggling against it with?

Points for admitting your own bias for what it's worth.

Brummbär is a hardcounter to infantry with absolutely no AT.

So try Jacksons, Su85s and Fireflies. Thats all you need ;-)

It does have AT if it hits directly, but yeah, no AT otherwise.

All in all it's fine. It's one of the best stock heavy tanks to deal with infantry. Don't use ATs against it. Flank with T34/Sherman/Cromwell or use TDs at range.

Any sort of infantry play is highly advised against it, unless flanking with handheld AT squads (brumbar is not good at turning).

In competitive I only play USF and in standard custom games, OKW. Here is how I deal with it:

Rangers with 3 zooks that flank after I snare it. (or echelons)
Jackson at range.

If the brummbar is well supported by pak40s that can deny your Jackson, then I use 2x pak howi to displace the paks before I move in. You can be sure that the brummbar won't move in on it's own if there is a TD on the field.

EDIT: I play 3v3 exclusively.

I never buy the USF AT gun since I've never ever been able to rely on it, unless I sink a ton of munitions in it (penetrating shells), and even then you need to actually use it, which means that the most important first shot will usually bounce, unless you're actively using the AT gun and use the ability.

absolutely no AT.

l2p

Need reduced damage versus numbers of models (max 3) as ISU have (if i remember all changes correctly).
Too much easy wipes.
I am forced every game versus OST pick T34/85 doc.

Its fine

it's fine but it seems to be very beastly when properly microed with ground attacks. it's a better non-doc sturmtiger.

Need reduced damage versus numbers of models (max 3) as ISU have (if i remember all changes correctly).
Too much easy wipes.
I am forced every game versus OST pick T34/85 doc.

ISU-152 performance should not be used a benchmark for Brumbar.

There is little reason to hard cap number of kill for brumbar (there are very few unit with such modifier and ISU is not one of them).

I would rather see the unit have faster projectile speed and lower AOE so that the gap in the performance between auto aim and manual aim is reduced.

I would rather see the unit have faster projectile speed and lower AOE so that the gap in the performance between auto aim and manual aim is reduced.

Do you mean the Brummbar?
Iirc, Sanders already showed this gap does not exist.

Do you mean the Brummbar?
Iirc, Sanders already showed this gap does not exist.

From my experience (I use brumms a lot lately in team games) there is still a major gap. Brummy would just auto target single models that stand out from the group. Also, when they start retreating, brummy is terrible at leading shots on auto.

Do you mean the Brummbar?
Iirc, Sanders already showed this gap does not exist.

She prolly means the skill gap on using the brumm. I am exclusively using the Brummbar in manual mode, with ground attacks, and the unit's shot generally feels faster, better, and hits harder that way. There seems to be something broken when the unit is used normally in full-auto compared to manual ground attacks. It feels there is a difference between auto and manual aim. Stats cannot capture that difference.

Beware: it's just an unquantifiable feeling that the unit works better manually, even if Sander already clearly demonstrated that it's not the case.

From my experience (I use brumms a lot lately in team games) there is still a major gap. Brummy would just auto target single models that stand out from the group. Also, when they start retreating, brummy is terrible at leading shots on auto.

I was slightly unspecific, I thought Vipper is referring to different projectile speeds between auto attack and ground attack. This does not exist.

Otherwise you are right. The Brummbar obviously does not lead shots when auto firing and usually picks the nearest model. There's a major difference though if the squad moved to or away from the Brummbar, because a squad closing in will be hit hard, one moving away usually not.

All animations, cost and the role of the Brummbar force it to have decent AoE though. The only unit that for me is on the verge between manual aiming and auto fire is the KT. Here I think it is still beneficial to ground attack, but auto fire is fine as well if I don't have the micro for it.
I think that would be the AoE design one needed to look for if one agrees with Vipper's assessment. Of course with regards to projectile speed and reload times.

She prolly means the skill gap on using the brumm. I am exclusively using the Brummbar in manual mode, with ground attacks, and the unit's shot generally feels faster, better, and hits harder that way. There seems to be something broken when the unit is used normally in full-auto compared to manual ground attacks. It feels there is a difference between auto and manual aim. Stats cannot capture that difference.

Beware: it's just an unquantifiable feeling that the unit works better manually, even if Sander already clearly demonstrated that it's not the case.

Yes, I pointed out in my response to UnitG17 that I might have misunderstood Vipper's post. Sander demonstrated that there is no difference in flight time between auto fire and manual ground attack.
Afaik there is nothing "broken" with the Brumm (in the sense that it would not function as expected). A normal auto-first just won't target the center of the squad, plus it won't lead a shot. So overall, your Brumm hits less hard and fewer models.

Do you mean the Brummbar?
Iirc, Sanders already showed this gap does not exist.

Yes I mean Brumbar's performance gab between auto attack and manual shots. Even thou the unit uses the same stat in auto and manual shots, there is a big gap in performance.

Projectile speed which is lower than most weapons has do with it especially vs moving targets.

Yes I mean Brumbar's performance gab between auto attack and manual shots. Even thou the unit uses the same stat in auto and manual shots, there is a big gap in performance.

Projectile speed which is lower than most weapons has do with it especially vs moving targets.

Imo the problem wth the Brumbar is the lack of reliable soft counter to it. If you don't have a hard counter to it aka premium medium tank or heavier unit, soft counters are completely obliterated by the said brumbar.
There is a reason it is popular to simply rush it as first tank unit in team game, because you can stale with a team weapon wall during early game as Ostheer to get the brumbar super fast for maximum efficiency.

The problem is probably that it is too easily accessible.

Imo the problem wth the Brumbar is the lack of reliable soft counter to it. If you don't have a hard counter to it aka premium medium tank or heavier unit, soft counters are completely obliterated by the said brumbar.
There is a reason it is popular to simply rush it as first tank unit in team game, because you can stale with a team weapon wall during early game as Ostheer to get the brumbar super fast for maximum efficiency.

The problem is probably that it is too easily accessible.

This is a problem of the "rush to last tier" mentality that the Mod team is promoting (and I have already pointed out several times) (which is also part of the problem with light/micro light vehicles) but I doubt they would like to change that.

(edited so that it would be clear what mean)