Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?
Posts: 5279
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Do players frequently send their expensive hevay tanks around the map where there is no friendly infantry to support it? That may in part be the root of the issue in the "squishy" Pershing issue.
Which one is it? Am I supposed to use it differently because of it's mobility advantage? Or am I supposed to have a rifle squad in range of it at all times?
If you yourself suggest abilities that do things like increase mobility or reduce target size, then I'm not sure why you're questioning people who say it's squishy. Either of those changes help it survive more, which is exactly what it needs. Better survivability, in whatever form that may come.
Or drop the cost. It's "squishy" because it's relatively easy to kill for it's cost
Posts: 1515
WTF are you on about? Pershing with the role of rocket arty? What?
Pershing is heavy infantry support only in 1v1s and 2v2s. Good luck supporting anything with 45 range and 270 armour that gets penned by pretty much everything (hell, yesterday P4 had 3 pens in a row on mid range vs my pershing, RNG but still, the armour is low enough for RNG to be effective).
Nobody in their right mind uses heavy tanks as solo rangers. Tiger was used that way before the heavy nerf. Pershing was and will never be used that way unless they buff acceleration, speed and rotation to 9000.
Pershing needs 300 armour OR better AI through MGs (or maybe introduction of pintle MG) OR through AOE/scatter profile. Best way would be to give it 300 armour, buff MGs by a tiny bit and call it a day. At least in my opinion.
Read thoroughly next time please. Don't assume such BS.
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
...
Pershing is heavy infantry support only in 1v1s and 2v2s. Good luck supporting anything with 45 range and 270 armour that gets penned by pretty much everything (hell, yesterday P4 had 3 pens in a row on mid range vs my pershing, RNG but still, the armour is low enough for RNG to be effective).
...
Pershing needs 300 armour OR better AI through MGs (or maybe introduction of pintle MG) OR through AOE/scatter profile. Best way would be to give it 300 armour, buff MGs by a tiny bit and call it a day. At least in my opinion.
The pen chance for medium vs generalist heavy is one of the lowest you can get (Elefant/JT/etc excluded, these are even lower) with late game units. With the RNG base of this game obviously everything could happen. CoH2 is a lot about reliability. Fighting a Pershing with a medium is extremely unreliable and therefore uneffective, not "effective" with RNG. If your complaint is that RNG were too effective, an armor buff to 300 would do next to nothing in that regard.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 92
630/230 is ridiculous at best, when axis get an alround moving stronghold like the Tiger for that.
Posts: 132
Posts: 1515
Imo, just reduce the cost and remove the limit to one, it is not anymore a heavy tank so it should be considerate as such.
Pershing is too good to not be capped at one and
where would you fit 2 pershings into a standard army composition?
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Pershing is too good to not be capped at one and
where would you fit 2 pershings into a standard army composition?
Into a not so standard army composition
Posts: 1379
Into a not so standard army composition
Rear echelon spam opening
Posts: 1594
Pershing is too good to not be capped at one and
where would you fit 2 pershings into a standard army composition?
I'd argue that the Pershing should indeed have its' cap removed, as well as some further fiddling with stats. It could well be given a vehicle crew if this were done.
I don't think the faction works well with a "traditional" heavy tank, especially as one of the faction's main vehicular gimmicks (Vehicle crews) simply can't be combined with the traditional heavy tank population limit. Making it more of a "premium premium medium" feels as though it would better fit the faction's design.
The main issue here is that USF already have a million Sherman variants that already struggle to find a niche/identity, so I'm not sure what statistics a "premium premium" Pershing might actually have.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
I dare people to play Heavy cav on 3v3 maps and use CA.
I accepted this challenge. Heavy Cav only. Got the Pershing every match that lasted long enough. Used CA all the time. It did very well. Got plenty of Angermundes and Ettelbrucks, I don't care. I only vetoed the shitty lane and ice maps that I veto with every faction. I hope top 10 is good enough. I'd continue, but I'd like some variety again now.
so I guess this commander will still be underused in 1v1 or 2v2 the only modes where it CAN be effective. Here is the Heavy Cavalry usage stats for April 2021.
The purpose of this patch is to create an as large amount of middle ground (good/viable) commanders as possible to increase commander diversity. Not to create more top meta commanders. Heavy Cav is already nice and comfortable in the middle being 4th most popular in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 and it's getting a few nice buffs too (3 medium-small Pershing buffs, cheaper offmap smoke, Rangers will get a small buff). And some heavy meta commanders like Mechanized are being nerfed. And it being picked less than Urban Assault in teamgames for example has less to do with Heavy Cav itself and more with the Calliope being a necessary tool that more people prefer. There's no need to turn the Pershing into some kind of monster just to make it the number one pick. We're trying to move away from number one picks.
Posts: 1515
I accepted this challenge. Heavy Cav only. Got the Pershing every match that lasted long enough. Used CA all the time. It did very well. Got plenty of Angermundes and Ettelbrucks, I don't care. I only vetoed the shitty lane and ice maps that I veto with every faction. I hope top 10 is good enough. I'd continue, but I'd like some variety again now.
Well f*** me sideways and call me a bitch. I stand corrected and salute you. I still think the Pershing could use a survivability buff but heck, if you used it, you used it.
EDIT: I still think the armor should be buffed to 300 at least OR decrease the price. Winning games or not with it, the price does not reflect the performance.
Posts: 5
...
The purpose of this patch is to create an as large amount of middle ground (good/viable) commanders as possible to increase commander diversity. Not to create more top meta commanders. Heavy Cav is already nice and comfortable in the middle being 4th most popular in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 and it's getting a few nice buffs too (3 medium-small Pershing buffs, cheaper offmap smoke, Rangers will get a small buff). And some heavy meta commanders like Mechanized are being nerfed. And it being picked less than Urban Assault in teamgames for example has less to do with Heavy Cav itself and more with the Calliope being a necessary tool that more people prefer. There's no need to turn the Pershing into some kind of monster just to make it the number one pick. We're trying to move away from number one picks.
Very good to see that both in the patchnotes as well as in the forum discussions a lot of information is added about what the goal of the patch is in addition to what the changes actually are.
Posts: 5279
Which one is it? Am I supposed to use it differently because of it's mobility advantage? Or am I supposed to have a rifle squad in range of it at all times?
If you yourself suggest abilities that do things like increase mobility or reduce target size, then I'm not sure why you're questioning people who say it's squishy. Either of those changes help it survive more, which is exactly what it needs. Better survivability, in whatever form that may come.
Or drop the cost. It's "squishy" because it's relatively easy to kill for it's cost
mobility =/= the ability to one man army behind enemy lines. one shouldnt be soloing the commando effort even with a tiger that is more durable and has blitz.
mobility allows the perhsing to respond where its needed and GTFO when its in danger, assuming the retreat path isnt the entire map from the enemy base to your own.
my suggestion was specifically ability based. a timed ability, not a stat change.
i think its core stats are good, what it needs is peripheral. as i said i support an ability and a price reduction. its squishy for its cost but extremely durable for the faction. for USF durability comes at an unfavorable exchange rate, but mobility and utility grows on trees. id see more utility.
side note, what about swapping rangers for ass engineers? then the pershing commander has more built in repairs, and importantly critical repairs for the pershing
Posts: 92
side note, what about swapping rangers for ass engineers? then the pershing commander has more built in repairs, and importantly critical repairs for the pershing
Now that sounds interesting!
Posts: 1515
side note, what about swapping rangers for ass engineers? then the pershing commander has more built in repairs, and importantly critical repairs for the pershing
It would weaken the commander. Adding a self repair for muni on Pershing would be much better. With rangers you can somewhat differentiate between different AT options. 3 zook rangers are quite nice if you can't fit a Jackson just yet into your build next to the Pershing.
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
side note, what about swapping rangers for ass engineers? then the pershing commander has more built in repairs, and importantly critical repairs for the pershing
Ass engineer dont really fit the theme of heavy cav i think, but on the other hand pershing/ass engine combo sound very "armor company"
Posts: 5279
Ass engineer dont really fit the theme of heavy cav i think, but on the other hand pershing/ass engine combo sound very "armor company"
Change the name? Ass engies and heavy Armour definitely says spear point to me.
The repair saturation and crit repair is what has my attention
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
Change the name? Ass engies and heavy Armour definitely says spear point to me.
The repair saturation and crit repair is what has my attention
I mean such a combo fit the theme of armor company rather than cav company but it is just me tho. Someone said replace ranger by ass engineer will weaken the Commander, true, but it can also open space for buff in other abilities in the lineup.
Speaking of ranger, i heard that irl they are actually classified as light infantry, so they dont have to stick wih heavy cav by all mean.
Livestreams
31 | |||||
22 | |||||
22 | |||||
1 | |||||
305 | |||||
204 | |||||
5 | |||||
4 | |||||
3 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM