Login

russian armor

What is up with the pzkpfw V Panther ?

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (7)down
23 Jan 2014, 06:23 AM
#61
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I do Brumbar first, and I use it to bleed Soviet manpower while the SU-85 threat is not big yet. I use my double PzG Panzershreck squads for anti-tank. (bind to 2) Brumbars are good enough against T3. It's t4 that it has trouble with.

Then when fuel's up I get a panther, (even if I lose the Brumbar) because soon there will be more than soviet tanks + Zis and the Brumbar + Shrecks won't cut it.

So I start going after their armor with the Panther & Panzershrecks, and if I still have the brumbar, it is used for AI/anti-zis. I try to keep the 1 Panther / 1 Brumbar/ 2 panzershreck group around. If I am rich, I will have 2 panthers.

I bind them 1, 2, 3, and have developed a 'combined arms' sort of feel with them.

23 Jan 2014, 08:54 AM
#62
avatar of Sedghammer

Posts: 179

Instead of hostile arguments, let's try and analyse this.

If the Ostheer player goes tier 2 to tier 4 then into a Panther without expending fuel on units, his total costs for doing so (tech cost + cost of Panther) is 1480 MP, 275 Fuel. This assumes that the Ostheer player buys the Tier 2 building.

If the Soviet player goes tier 1 into tier 4 then into an SU-85, his total costs for doing so, without expending fuel on other units (tech cost + cost of SU85) is 795 MP, 245 Fuel.

This means the Ostheer player has expended 685 more MP and 30 more fuel over the Soviet to get his Panther out. A 700 manpower window for the Soviets is ample time to secure either fuel advantage or further their manpower advantage over the Ostheer. Given that the Soviet will generally have one or 2 snipers out from tier 1, the manpower advantage starts to widen even further.

Think about that for a while.
23 Jan 2014, 09:58 AM
#63
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

@Sedghammer
You might want to include the cost of molotovs and AT nades that are always upgraded before soviet armor hits the field, unless you play industry. No one will go T1-T4 without these upgrades and its plain stupid to not include them as teching costs as you will be forced to get them before SU.
23 Jan 2014, 13:01 PM
#64
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

And he should probably factor it as T2 - T4. T1 is lacking in AT and not many people are willing to skip wait for an SU-85 without any AT defense.
23 Jan 2014, 13:42 PM
#65
avatar of Sedghammer

Posts: 179

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jan 2014, 09:58 AMKatitof
@Sedghammer
You might want to include the cost of molotovs and AT nades that are always upgraded before soviet armor hits the field, unless you play industry. No one will go T1-T4 without these upgrades and its plain stupid to not include them as teching costs as you will be forced to get them before SU.


I didn't include either because they depend on play style, for much the same reason I didn't include Ostheer light vehicles. (For example, AT grenades being skipped early if no light vehicles are seen. Molotovs are skipped when rushing T70's.) I was just trying to demonstrate the manpower difference if you're a Soviet encountering an Ostheer opponent that goes tier 4 instead of tier 3.

That being said, with Molotovs and AT Grenade upgrades added to the above mention costs, the difference changes to 535 MP advantage for Soviets and a 20 Fuel advantage for Ostheer.
23 Jan 2014, 14:36 PM
#66
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I find that the constant need to buy or reinforce Zis guns @ 320 a pop as Soviets tends to even out the manpower distinction. Soviets always need Zis guns to supplement their AT while the German can go without paks and spend munis for tactically flexible Panzershrecks.

So the T4/Panther/Brumbar teching costs tend to even out. In a difficult 1 v 1, however, there is sometimes no window for the delay to T4. But IMO, if you get through it then it's good to go.
23 Jan 2014, 14:57 PM
#67
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

I'd argue that PaK's are more of a sink due to game dynamics. Same price, but smaller crew, and against molotovs (the weapon for decrewing).
23 Jan 2014, 15:16 PM
#68
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

That too, but I find that the constant need for a pair of Zis guns + a conscript supporting them comes from ever present and flexible German Armor superiority.... T-34s need Zis pair, Su's need Zis pair, IS-2 needs zis pair, ISU needs zis pair, KV-1 needs zis pair,...etc.
23 Jan 2014, 15:27 PM
#69
avatar of Mad_Hatter

Posts: 134

Instead of hostile arguments, let's try and analyse this.

If the Ostheer player goes tier 2 to tier 4 then into a Panther without expending fuel on units, his total costs for doing so (tech cost + cost of Panther) is 1480 MP, 275 Fuel. This assumes that the Ostheer player buys the Tier 2 building.

If the Soviet player goes tier 1 into tier 4 then into an SU-85, his total costs for doing so, without expending fuel on other units (tech cost + cost of SU85) is 795 MP, 245 Fuel.

This means the Ostheer player has expended 685 more MP and 30 more fuel over the Soviet to get his Panther out. A 700 manpower window for the Soviets is ample time to secure either fuel advantage or further their manpower advantage over the Ostheer. Given that the Soviet will generally have one or 2 snipers out from tier 1, the manpower advantage starts to widen even further.

Think about that for a while.


This analysis shows nothing ... Yes a quick tech sov build is cheaper than a slow tech ost build. So you think a sov player is going to hold out without hmgs, mortars, zis, or expensive infantry call ins, etc but will be able to fight off German t2 (without Molotov and at nades mind you)? And will then be able to turn the tide with a single su85 with no support? He may have a chance if the panther driver hits a tree cause he's too busy laughing at the su85 as he circle strafes it as the cons wave at it since they don't have at nades
23 Jan 2014, 15:51 PM
#70
avatar of Darc Reaver

Posts: 194

Panther much op, nerf pls
23 Jan 2014, 16:12 PM
#71
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

That too, but I find that the constant need for a pair of Zis guns + a conscript supporting them comes from ever present and flexible German Armor superiority.... T-34s need Zis pair, Su's need Zis pair, IS-2 needs zis pair, ISU needs zis pair, KV-1 needs zis pair,...etc.


I'm not sure why an ISU-152 needs, in your words, a "ZiS pair" when it *greatly* out-ranges every piece of German armor except for the Elefant. ISU-152 can kill Tigers and Panthers with ease, as can Su85s which also don't need ZiS to support them.

Sure a KV-1 or a T-34 need ZiS support. Why? Because they're tanks designed and used for killing infantry... not other tanks. Even then a T-34 ram has a 100% chance to penetrate the rear/side armor of a Panther. In fact a side/rear ram has a 100% chance to disable every German tank except for a Tiger.

Between AT Nades, mines, guards, Su-85, Su76, mark target and ram if you have trouble dealing with any German armor outside of an elefant... you're doing it wrong. Soviet AT is freaking amazingly good.
23 Jan 2014, 16:25 PM
#72
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jan 2014, 16:12 PMCieZ


I'm not sure why an ISU-152 needs, in your words, a "ZiS pair" when it *greatly* out-ranges every piece of German armor except for the Elefant. ISU-152 can kill Tigers and Panthers with ease, as can Su85s which also don't need ZiS to support them.

Might have something to do with 9 sec reload, extremely slow rotation, paper armor and 150 penetration. The only german piece of armor that can't outrun it is elephant.
23 Jan 2014, 16:40 PM
#73
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jan 2014, 16:25 PMKatitof

Might have something to do with 9 sec reload, extremely slow rotation, paper armor and 150 penetration. The only german piece of armor that can't outrun it is elephant.


Yeah let's just forget that it 1 shots squads frequently, has an ability that lets it shoot through *EVERYTHING* on the map, crew shocks other tanks, does 240 damage (tied for 2nd highest damage value in the game on a unit) and 100 range.

The ISU-152 is probably the best tank in the game...
23 Jan 2014, 17:09 PM
#74
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

The flanks of the ISU must be defended. They are vulnerable to all tanks and panzershrecks at tank range (below 50). They are vulnerable to stuka bombing strike. Once they are brought on the field, people treat it like the tiger ace- they focus their attention on killing it before it does any irrecoverable damage.

The Zis guns+ conscripts also help cover the ISU's retreat just in case it gets shot at by tanks.
23 Jan 2014, 17:12 PM
#75
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jan 2014, 16:40 PMCieZ


Yeah let's just forget that it 1 shots squads frequently, has an ability that lets it shoot through *EVERYTHING* on the map, crew shocks other tanks, does 240 damage (tied for 2nd highest damage value in the game on a unit) and 100 range.

The ISU-152 is probably the best tank in the game...

That must be why we see it almost every game.

Oh wait, last time I've faced ISU was back in november!

Last time where I thought "oh crap, I'd love to have ISU now" was before IS-2 T34/85 buffs.
23 Jan 2014, 18:13 PM
#76
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

The ISU-152 is clearly a situational weapon. Depending on the map it can be almost useless to overpowered (Pripjat).

Back to the Panther: I would really like to see some changes that reward the skilled use of a Panther and punish the player that rushes it in. With this I mean increased range, slightly better frontal protection in exchange for a slight HP nerf and certain penetrations to its sides and rear from any AT weapon, or at least something in that direction.

Imo the Panther should be something you keep in the distance and as soon as it gets close to the enemy, you should be in trouble keeping it alive.
23 Jan 2014, 18:50 PM
#77
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647


Back to the Panther: I would really like to see some changes that reward the skilled use of a Panther and punish the player that rushes it in. With this I mean increased range, slightly better frontal protection in exchange for a slight HP nerf and certain penetrations to its sides and rear from any AT weapon, or at least something in that direction.

Imo the Panther should be something you keep in the distance and as soon as it gets close to the enemy, you should be in trouble keeping it alive.


the solution is simple, but difficult to implement. REAL Infantry AT. lets go back to vcoh, panthers werent such an issue there because 1: Ranger bazookas rape panthers rear armour. 2: paras with RRs are superb AT. 3: Panthers are piss poor against infantry. A trait about infantry AT is that they do not require setup to shoot and can react to quick movement such as tanks, resulting in them being superb in close ranges, best used to support AT guns.

yet here in coh2, we only have AT guns as the closest thing soviet has as infantry AT, or PTRS that dont even have a good 100% chance to penetrate rear armour. and AT nades at best a snare tool, cannot be counted on to do consistent dps.

so as panthers charges in, all it has to do is wade thru the initial AT fire, which it can count on its heavy armor to negate a good amount of the damage, easily getting into the flanks and ravaging soviet lines. because there is nothing that can protect flanks at close ranges. AT guns are too clunky and have to be constantly resetup, su85 can be circle strafed, ptrs takes years to down a panther.

the nature of soviet AT is that they are all long ranged snipers, so the best tactic to use them would be in staggered formation. in order to cover each other from armoured rush. so now, in order to counter panthers, or actually german armour mobility, every piece of AT equipment must be supported by another. if not, they are very easily circled and destroyed.
23 Jan 2014, 19:18 PM
#78
avatar of 5trategos

Posts: 449

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jan 2014, 18:50 PMwongtp


the solution is simple, but difficult to implement. REAL Infantry AT. lets go back to vcoh, panthers werent such an issue there because 1: Ranger bazookas rape panthers rear armour. 2: paras with RRs are superb AT. 3: Panthers are piss poor against infantry. A trait about infantry AT is that they do not require setup to shoot and can react to quick movement such as tanks, resulting in them being superb in close ranges, best used to support AT guns.

yet here in coh2, we only have AT guns as the closest thing soviet has as infantry AT, or PTRS that dont even have a good 100% chance to penetrate rear armour. and AT nades at best a snare tool, cannot be counted on to do consistent dps.

so as panthers charges in, all it has to do is wade thru the initial AT fire, which it can count on its heavy armor to negate a good amount of the damage, easily getting into the flanks and ravaging soviet lines. because there is nothing that can protect flanks at close ranges. AT guns are too clunky and have to be constantly resetup, su85 can be circle strafed, ptrs takes years to down a panther.

the nature of soviet AT is that they are all long ranged snipers, so the best tactic to use them would be in staggered formation. in order to cover each other from armoured rush. so now, in order to counter panthers, or actually german armour mobility, every piece of AT equipment must be supported by another. if not, they are very easily circled and destroyed.


+1 Best analysis so far.

I feel like Relic is clearly aware of this issue and tried to compensate the lack of proper handheld AT with retardedly strong veterancy bonuses on the SU-85 and Zis. It's clearly a design decision and they've stuck with it so far.

I got my fingers crossed for an AT upgrade on penal troops but I doubt we'll ever see that.
23 Jan 2014, 19:20 PM
#79
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

My favorite doctrine is armored assault since I am always wary of getting hit by German T4/Call-ins. I always listen the radio intercept for evidence of T4.

The plane strafe, which will damage tanks, the self-repair, and the IS-2s in the late game even the odds in my view. German infantry otherwise do not intimidate me as soviet is strong in infantry & AI.
23 Jan 2014, 20:04 PM
#80
avatar of tokarev

Posts: 307

I'd argue that PaK's are more of a sink due to game dynamics. Same price, but smaller crew, and against molotovs (the weapon for decrewing).


You should have plenty of time to move away. Molotovs are not insta kill weapons
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

828 users are online: 828 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49113
Welcome our newest member, Dedek545
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM