Relic: are tanks supposed to solo AT guns?
27 Apr 2014, 03:19 AM
#21
Posts: 1571
I find that the main cost of the Antitank guns is pop cap. They were a mere 3 in vcoh and you could make an anti-tank wall to support your armor.
27 Apr 2014, 04:03 AM
#22
Posts: 896
a stug should not do that, but that is perfectly normal for a brummber or tiger.
27 Apr 2014, 05:11 AM
#23
Posts: 60
In addition to low pop cap, they have the best anti-tank dps/unit cost, they're affordable at all stages of the game, they completely deny area to light vehicles, are a serious threat to medium tanks and are among a handful of units capable of penetrating heavy tanks.
If the tank is already right next to it, where its main cannon will hit consistently and its machine guns are most effective, it may as well move a few more meters and park behind the AT gun.
If the tank is already right next to it, where its main cannon will hit consistently and its machine guns are most effective, it may as well move a few more meters and park behind the AT gun.
27 Apr 2014, 05:56 AM
#24
Posts: 1702
at guns got a huge buff this patch. They are so much more useful againts heavy tanks now.
27 Apr 2014, 06:09 AM
#25
Posts: 1026
I don't always agree with Katitof, but when I do, it's because he's right. AT guns do very well vs tanks, but if it comes down to a straight up duke fest, the tank should win.
It really depends on the tank. A Stug or T34 should not be able to solo an AT gun assuming no maneuvering, but a Tiger or IS2 should. AT guns are hard to keep alive in the face of any unit solo, they are slow, they take positioning, and they are a specialist unit. Well, the Zis gets the fantastic barrage ability too, but otherwise it's AT only. It's fine for them to excel in this role for their cost, since they are so easily countered in general.
27 Apr 2014, 06:11 AM
#26
Posts: 1571
It was and is still common for Soviet players to not build a single Zis and just spam the T-34 call-ins or regular T-34s with all their fuel. I found that tactic quite stupid even if there was fuel to spare. The T-34s would eventually take losses and they'll be short a fuel reserve to call-in or buy new ones.
Only Relic post
27 Apr 2014, 06:49 AM
#27
Posts: 267 | Subs: 8
We will look into this issue Neo. Thanks for bringing it up.
27 Apr 2014, 06:51 AM
#28
Posts: 589
IMO it's fine.. Why shouldn't a tiger be able to take out a single AT gun from the front?
27 Apr 2014, 07:23 AM
#29
Posts: 105
AT guns are powerful as hell this time around. The Pak now has a ridiculous firing rate.
27 Apr 2014, 07:27 AM
#30
Posts: 1702
Good job neo, you have potentially made relic break something.
Like i said AT guns are insanely good this patch.
Like i said AT guns are insanely good this patch.
27 Apr 2014, 07:55 AM
#31
Posts: 1702
Good job neo, you have potentially made relic break something.
Like i said AT guns are insanely good this patch.
Like i said AT guns are insanely good this patch.
27 Apr 2014, 08:27 AM
#32
10 Posts: 155
Is it really necessary to change this? In my humble opinion antitank and tank behavior is great and sometimes breathtakingly swift and punching... I really like it 
(Even when my tanks are reduced to ashes).
(Even when my tanks are reduced to ashes).
27 Apr 2014, 09:38 AM
#33
Posts: 471
We will look into this issue Neo. Thanks for bringing it up.
Thanks Peter. From what I can tell, tanks do a lot of damage to infantry in this patch and this seems to be causing them to kill 2-3 AT gun crew members per shot sometimes. Perhaps AT guns need a little more resistance to tank weapons and mgs given that they have that small metal guard to protect them?
@ Katitof: I hope that popcorn is still as sweet as it was...
@ Burts: the knowledge that you're upset is reward enough for all my efforts
27 Apr 2014, 09:42 AM
#34
Posts: 1702
Thanks Peter. From what I can tell, tanks do a lot of damage to infantry in this patch and this seems to be causing them to kill 2-3 AT gun crew members per shot sometimes. Perhaps AT guns need a little more resistance to tank weapons and mgs given that they have that small metal guard to protect them?
@ Katitof: I hope that popcorn is still as sweet as it was...
@ Burts: the knowledge that you're upset is reward enough for all my efforts
I'm not upset, i'm just worried. Because AT guns are insanely good this patch.
27 Apr 2014, 10:14 AM
#35
4 Posts: 550 | Subs: 1
The patch notes make it rather clear that at-guns are intended to perform the same or better against medium and heavy tanks.
http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/67-coh-2-changelog/page3
Medium and heavy vehicle potency has been increased with this update, these changes help offset this increased potency by improving the performance and reliability of AT guns.
http://community.companyofheroes.com/forum/company-of-heroes-2/company-of-heroes-2-general-discussion/67-coh-2-changelog/page3
Help test the USF teching adjustment mod: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1553135357
27 Apr 2014, 10:19 AM
#36
1 
Posts: 1838 | Subs: 17
Stugs be chewing up everything in their path including at guns. #StugLife.
27 Apr 2014, 14:10 PM
#37
1 
Posts: 2075 | Subs: 2
I think the issue with tanks vs AT guns is the same issue as all the one shot wiping potential. A stationary AT gun crew obviously has greater chance of the 1-shot-wipe that we all hate.
27 Apr 2014, 14:18 PM
#38
Posts: 1439
I do think both PaK and ZiS could be more lethal to armour somehow. I do realize it's hard to balance them so they won't one shoot light vehicles and still provide decent punch against super heavies but maybe messing around with scatter so it got less chance to hit fast moving light vehicle than slowly approaching heavy tank could be an option or implementation of AP round ability that comes later in the game and costs ammunition?
I think is a bit too easy to ignore AT guns in CoH2 although I had a game yesterday in which I managed to kill a Tiger with ZiS gun after he got lured onto mines planted before. ZiS was Vet1 though and I had T-34/76 flanking from behind.
I think is a bit too easy to ignore AT guns in CoH2 although I had a game yesterday in which I managed to kill a Tiger with ZiS gun after he got lured onto mines planted before. ZiS was Vet1 though and I had T-34/76 flanking from behind.
27 Apr 2014, 15:49 PM
#39
Posts: 27
Well let's put it this way: I'm not sure if a StuG should be able to to take out an AT Gun head to head by just standing in front of it. Due to it's now bigger AI role it should still be decent against AT Guns but not a reliable counter. But a Tiger/IS-2 and all the heavy tanks should definetly have an easy time against a lone AT gun head to head.
27 Apr 2014, 15:55 PM
#40
Posts: 1571
The main issue I have with AT guns (since forever) is the high pop intake. They should take far less pop- I've thinking 6 is more fair.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
130 | ||
 |
|
|
36 | ||
 |
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
10 | ||
 |
|
|
88 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
12 | ||
 |
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.883398.689+5
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1001
Board Info
566 users are online:
566 guests
0 post in the last 24h
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48733
Welcome our newest member, service
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, service
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM