Login

russian armor

State of the balance according to Imperial Dane

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (16)down
21 Jul 2014, 14:58 PM
#181
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

Since you don't seem to get it:

215 is bigger than 190
215 is bigger than 200
215 is bigger than 210

That means on all ranges the pack "bounces", which is usually defined as not penetrating all the time.


I've used the tank repeatedly. I do not have the commander in live, yet in the test client we have access to all commanders and my impression is by far not only based on stats. Besides that I faced it several times in live.


You are wrong. Does the PaK gun bounce the KV-1 100% of the time? How about the IS-2?


I just played a game where I took out a KT from the front with 3 SU-85s.

SU-85 has 200 penetration, KT has 425 front armor.

"lol but 425 > 200"

are you fucking serious right now?
21 Jul 2014, 15:00 PM
#182
avatar of Charerg

Posts: 8

I 100% agree that the Easy Eight is too powerful for its cost. It's not just the 215 frontal armour (compared to 160 on a standard Sherman, 150 on T-34/76, 180 on PIV or 160 on T-34/85).

Easy Eight also has the best anti-tank gun of the medium tanks excluding Panther. And from what I've seen it does just as well VS infantry as any other medium tank.

Easy Eight Gun penetration: 175/165/155
T-34/85 penetration: 160/140/120.
PIV penetration: 120/110/100.

Basically the Easy Eight is just a beefed up version of the T-34/85 for pretty much the same price, except easier to spam as they don't need to be called in pairs. The only thing T-34/85 has over the Eazy8 is 800 hp (pretty much all mediums have 640 hp, including Eazy8).

Nevertheless, 215 armour vs 160 seems to give more survivability than the extra hp of the T-34/85 does. Basically you don't even necessarily need Jacksons to counter heavy armour with Easy Eights, thanks to the high penetration gun.

So, the Eazy8 clearly needs either a cost increase to reflect it's performance or it's AI effectiveness needs to be reduced to a point where it's clearly inferior to HE round Sherman.
21 Jul 2014, 15:11 PM
#183
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

When the penetration is lower than the armour value there is a CHANCE for the round to bounce. You work out the chance by dividing penetration by the armour value.

So in the case of the Pak 40 vs the M4A3E8 the chances are as follows:

  • Far chance = 190/215 x 100 = 88%
  • Mid chance = 200/215 x 100 = 93%
  • Near chance = 210/215 x 100 = 98%


So while the penetration chance is very high there is a small chance that a Pak 40 round will bounce at all ranges since the values are not 100%
21 Jul 2014, 15:11 PM
#184
avatar of MilkaCow

Posts: 577

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:58 PMArclyte


You are wrong. Does the PaK gun bounce the KV-1 100% of the time? How about the IS-2?


I just played a game where I took out a KT from the front with 3 SU-85s.

SU-85 has 200 penetration, KT has 425 front armor.

"lol but 425 > 200"

are you fucking serious right now?


Read my post. Re-read it. Read what I write about "bouncing".

Bouncing means it deflects shots. It does not mean it "bounces" all the time, as that is never possible, except for small arms weapons. None of the weapons here are small arms.

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:48 PMArclyte
E8 has never bounced a shot from a pak gun, nor should it


You state that the PaK never bounces from an Easy Eight
190/215 = 88% Chance to penetrate
200/215 = 93% Chance to penetrate
210/215 = 98% Chance to penetrate

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:57 PMwongtp


has the formula for armour vs penetration changed? pen/armour = chance to penetrate, amirite?


Nope, it's still the same. Since the term "bouncing" could be misunderstood I actually added a description hoping that would clarify things. It's pretty much the way, that almost everything that's not small arms can penetrate anything, the chances just get really small. So it's easiest to differentiate into things that always penetrate and those that don't, as that is the most simplified view of a main guns penetration power.
The Easy Eight has the ability to bounce almost all German guns. It does not do so reliably, but unlike for example the T34 which can bounce only a few it is far more resilient.
21 Jul 2014, 15:12 PM
#185
avatar of TensaiOni

Posts: 198

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:58 PMArclyte


You are wrong. Does the PaK gun bounce the KV-1 100% of the time? How about the IS-2?


I just played a game where I took out a KT from the front with 3 SU-85s.

SU-85 has 200 penetration, KT has 425 front armor.

"lol but 425 > 200"

are you fucking serious right now?


I think the point is that you've said that the increased armour of Easy8 doesn't matter, since it doesn't bounce anything.

But it can bounce shots from a lot of units, which doesn't make the armour insignificant.

As a side note, I find it hilarious that KT has such bad penetration.
21 Jul 2014, 15:26 PM
#187
avatar of wongtp

Posts: 647



Read my post. Re-read it. Read what I write about "bouncing".

Bouncing means it deflects shots. It does not mean it "bounces" all the time, as that is never possible, except for small arms weapons. None of the weapons here are small arms.



You state that the PaK never bounces from an Easy Eight
190/215 = 88% Chance to penetrate
200/215 = 93% Chance to penetrate
210/215 = 98% Chance to penetrate



Nope, it's still the same. Since the term "bouncing" could be misunderstood I actually added a description hoping that would clarify things. It's pretty much the way, that almost everything that's not small arms can penetrate anything, the chances just get really small. So it's easiest to differentiate into things that always penetrate and those that don't, as that is the most simplified view of a main guns penetration power.
The Easy Eight has the ability to bounce almost all German guns. It does not do so reliably, but unlike for example the T34 which can bounce only a few it is far more resilient.


since you have clarified me and even worked out the values, i think it speaks for itself. the 215 armour is at least 88% meaningless. in fact, against values like these, 800hp is more important than 640hp + 35% armour increase, since it guarantees at least 1 additional hit rather than relying on the 12% bounce.

the only advantage ez8 has over t34/85 is against medium tanks, which then, the armour means alot more. however, when compared to the majority of german anti armour units, it is at least 79% meaningless, using jadgpanzer values.
21 Jul 2014, 15:28 PM
#188
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jul 2014, 18:48 PMNalano
You don't burn towns and starve cities and work slave labor to death and enact genocide pogroms without expecting a little payback.


Why not?

The Soviets got away with exactly that for another 60 years.
21 Jul 2014, 15:35 PM
#189
avatar of Siberian

Posts: 545 | Subs: 3

I think someone is being a bad boy, telling Strategists they are clueless. I wonder if I should do something.
21 Jul 2014, 15:39 PM
#190
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

I suppose banning me would be easier than making sure your "strategists" don't put their foot in their mouth
21 Jul 2014, 15:40 PM
#191
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

I think someone is being a bad boy, telling Strategists they are clueless. I wonder if I should do something.


My suggestion to what you could do, is rationally, coherently and concisely explain the related game issues from ypur perspective, supported with either stat or video evidence if possible.

And leave moderation to the Moderation team.

"Strategists" are not infallible. Never have been, never will be.
21 Jul 2014, 15:43 PM
#192
avatar of SUCKmyCLOCK

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:48 PMArclyte
you obviously haven't used the tank yourself

the fact that your numbers show the PaK bounces at all ranges is clear proof that you are wrong

E8 has never bounced a shot from a pak gun, nor should it

also, jackson is dogshit on any map that isn't a wide open field, like steppes


.......like steppes

you see right here is why you should never comment on balance. You do not play 1v1 which is where 90% of balance issues occur, with 9.5% in 2v2s and the remaining in the noob blob 3v3s/4v4s.
21 Jul 2014, 15:43 PM
#193
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

Someone is arguing with a strategist? Madness.
21 Jul 2014, 15:46 PM
#194
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692



.......like steppes

you see right here is why you should never comment on balance. You don not play 1v1 which is where 90% of balance issues occur, with 9.5% in 2v2s and the remaining in the noob blob 3v3s/4v4s.


I'm sure the 50 or so odd people that play 1v1 will be greatly offended
21 Jul 2014, 15:50 PM
#195
avatar of Charerg

Posts: 8

The 215 armour is far from meaningless. Sure, it's not very good vs Paks, Panther or Tiger. But who seriously parks his tanks in PaK range?

The armour does help versus PIV, StuGs, Panzerschrecks and Panzerfaust.

VS Panzerfaust
T-34/85 vs Easy Eight
Far: 140/160=88% vs 140/215=65%
Middle: 150/160=94% vs 150/215=70%
Near: 160/160=100% vs 160/215=74%

VS Panzer IV
T-34/85 vs Easy Eight
Far: 100/160=63% vs 100/215=47%
Middle: 110/160=69% vs 110/215=51%
Near: 120/160=75% vs 120/215=56%

Basically the Easy Eight has on average 17-18% better survivability in terms of armour. This obviously isn't insignificant, although the T-34/85 can take 5 penetrating shots instead of 4 from most AT, thanks to it's increased HP.
21 Jul 2014, 15:51 PM
#196
avatar of MilkaCow

Posts: 577

Dude, wtf is wrong with you? Why the personal attacks? You write it never bounces. I wrote it actually can bounce shots. That's it.

Please show me exactly where I stated even one false thing.

I stated, that the 215 armor matters as it allows the tank to bounce most German vehicles since you said it can't bounce anything. Nowhere did I state that it ALWAYS or RELIABLY bounces, but just that it can bounce (as in, they do not always penetrate) almost all German guns, exceptions being Panther, Jagdtiger, Elefant and PaK43.

@wongtp:
I guess it's just preferences then. The higher armor does not matter much vs a PaK40, indeed the health is probably more useful in that case. Yet I'd take the armor any day as it gives a higher chance to bounce Panzerfausts. 140 penetration vs 215 armor is just 65% chance to penetrate, and if it does usually there is no mobile tank that could exploit this situation. The only slightly cheaper PIV certainly cannot and the StuG, while outranging, does not really trouble. By the time he moved his ATG over it's already repaired (use smoke and repair critical) or moved back sufficiently to get covered by infantry.

The higher HP certainly help vs Elefant, PaK43 and Jagdtiger a lot, as well as against the Sturmtiger.
21 Jul 2014, 15:53 PM
#197
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 14:48 PMArclyte


u obviously haven't used the tank yourself

the fact that your numbers show the PaK bounces at all ranges is clear proof that you are wrong

E8 has never bounced a shot from a pak gun, nor should it

also, jackson is dogshit on any map that isn't a wide open field, like steppes


jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jul 2014, 15:39 PMArclyte


I suppose banning me would be easier than making sure your "strategists" don't put their foot in their mouth


Pretty sure you're the only one putting your foot in your mouth. You made a completely false claim, got disproved by math and game mechanics and are now grasping at straws to try and somehow still make your statement valid, when it isn't... sorry bro...
21 Jul 2014, 16:00 PM
#198
avatar of Cannonade

Posts: 752

Though I appreciate the lateral preference vs Faust, I do think it is a bit beside the point.

Owing to the practical difficulties of positioning infantry for the shot vs armors far better mobility, I think if Fausts are your concern, those dont reconcile or justify the armor.

Its not difficult to keep armor out of Faust range, and if that is what one has enough leeway to be concerned about that as a "primary preference" rather than dedicated AT for purposes of destroying (rather than simply snaring) then I think there is cause to reconsider the armor value.

Ciez: Milka was being excessively pedantic on a point that, though he is technically correct, was not really the issue.
21 Jul 2014, 16:04 PM
#199
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Now now. Don't make me maul you all.

PS: This thread is poop. Close it.
21 Jul 2014, 16:10 PM
#200
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

Apart from a small cost increase, I'm pretty sure the E8 doesn't need a nerf. It's a powerful, doctrinal medium tank, sure, and the armor is sweet, but 640 HP leaves not a look of margin for errors. Maybe reduce its AI power a bit.

The vet 2 rifles off the bat, well that's a bigger problem. IMO the doctrine should give you vet 1 rifles, with no additional XP, out of the gate at the price of a cost increase, maybe to 320 MP or something like that. It still gives you the smaller, more powerful army flavor without allowing to unleash the rifle's vet 2 bonuses that early on.

I'm fine with a AA HT nerf by all means but I'd like US early game to be less one-dimensional. You pretty much have no choice but to go 3x rifles then LT, unless you get assault engineers (for some reason) or an early ambulance. Rear echelons are fairly worthless until late game when you need repairs.
PAGES (16)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

795 users are online: 795 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM