PAK 40 is overperforming when compared to other AT guns
17 Oct 2014, 18:02 PM
#121
Posts: 665
I dunno, I think the ZiS does its job well enough. 6 man crew makes it tougher than the PaK and the barrage can be useful in a variety of situations. It could maybe use a slight penetration buff but that's pretty much it.
17 Oct 2014, 18:41 PM
#122
Posts: 371
It's not just in comparison to the Rakaten, Johnny, it's in comparison to all the AT guns.
I completely agree that the Pak40 is overpreforming. The fact that it's the most cost efficient armor counter in the game AND that it can be built 5 mins into a match is reason enough to believe it's way too good for it's cost.
But the thing is, if it gets nerfed, dealing with the much more tangible Soviet armor will become a lot more problematic, as the Soviets have several tanks which at max range will shrug off Pak40 shots rather reliably.
So I think something needs to be done that keeps the Pak40's role against heavier soviet armor, but makes it no so easy to chew threw Shermans and Jacksons like a hot knife through butter, as quoted from the Pak40 bulletin.
well germans already have their doctrinal super heavy tanks , tankdestroyers and even the nondoctrinal so called medium panther which is decent against soviet heavies , now if your point is that soviets can actully stick to one tier and proceed to produce a heavy thats another thing
Please relic and sega just take it easy with the dlc ...
17 Oct 2014, 19:25 PM
#123
Posts: 2070
Faction design including the AT guns is just horrible. We have the awesome Pak gun facing off against weaker Allied armor and an average ZIS facing off against Panthers and KTs....
Axis doesn't have the best AT options in the game
18 Oct 2014, 06:33 AM
#124
Posts: 344
...why not make the ZiS slightly cheaper? 285-300 MP sounds reasonable.
-hides under rock-
-hides under rock-
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
18 Oct 2014, 07:14 AM
#125
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently Banned...why not make the ZiS slightly cheaper? 285-300 MP sounds reasonable.
-hides under rock-
-peaks under rock-
i agree, or buff zis
-places rock back on Volsky-
There is no recording in all WW2 history of a piat actually knocking off a vehicle. Yes, it was THAT bad.
18 Oct 2014, 07:26 AM
#126
Posts: 1042
Triple QFT. They also get the best infantry
Quadruple QFT
They also get the best offmaps (where's my god of war Artillery barrages Relic??).
18 Oct 2014, 08:29 AM
#127
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
...why not make the ZiS slightly cheaper? 285-300 MP sounds reasonable.
-hides under rock-
And then M-42 free? Remember this abomination of AT gun costs outrageous 200mp.
It would be somewhat appealing if it had cost of 150-160.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
18 Oct 2014, 08:31 AM
#128
Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1
Or we could buff it's damage to 120.
And then M-42 free? Remember this abomination of AT gun costs outrageous 200mp.
It would be somewhat appealing if it had cost of 150-160.
_____________________________________________________________________________
18 Oct 2014, 10:07 AM
#129
Posts: 1042
And then M-42 free? Remember this abomination of AT gun costs outrageous 200mp.
It would be somewhat appealing if it had cost of 150-160.
I wonder.... could the M-42 be garrisonable? maybe that'd make it worth something... (if it weren't for the fact that a stuka would come along and annihilate it..
18 Oct 2014, 13:03 PM
#130
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I wonder.... could the M-42 be garrisonable? maybe that'd make it worth something... (if it weren't for the fact that a stuka would come along and annihilate it..
Annihilate is a good word here.
The gun got as much HP as stuka deals damage. One his and its a wreck.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
18 Oct 2014, 15:41 PM
#131
Posts: 344
Make the M-42 better against infantry and buildings.
It was attached to platoons of 30-50 men in Stalingrad (at the very least as a part of the 13 Gv. Str. Div., if not all divisions) that included 2+ flamethrowers, a PTRS team, engineers w. explosives, and a metric arse ton of PPSh-41s and SVTs. The M-42 would blast open a building wall and everyone else would zerg through, presumably whilst the M-42 was making the task of firing out of exposed windows a tricky proposition.
It was attached to platoons of 30-50 men in Stalingrad (at the very least as a part of the 13 Gv. Str. Div., if not all divisions) that included 2+ flamethrowers, a PTRS team, engineers w. explosives, and a metric arse ton of PPSh-41s and SVTs. The M-42 would blast open a building wall and everyone else would zerg through, presumably whilst the M-42 was making the task of firing out of exposed windows a tricky proposition.
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
18 Oct 2014, 16:32 PM
#132
Posts: 108 | Subs: 1
Make the M-42 better against infantry and buildings.
It was attached to platoons of 30-50 men in Stalingrad (at the very least as a part of the 13 Gv. Str. Div., if not all divisions) that included 2+ flamethrowers, a PTRS team, engineers w. explosives, and a metric arse ton of PPSh-41s and SVTs. The M-42 would blast open a building wall and everyone else would zerg through, presumably whilst the M-42 was making the task of firing out of exposed windows a tricky proposition.
If the M-42 could reliably hit infantry it is all any soviet player would build.
18 Oct 2014, 16:38 PM
#133
Posts: 2070
its doctrinal though so i think it would be an interesting strategic choice
Axis doesn't have the best AT options in the game
18 Oct 2014, 17:25 PM
#134
Posts: 94
You could give it HE shells similar to the Sherman's if it was nerfed a little. Or given a muni cost. That thing probably needs like 5 shots to kill a kubel right now.
18 Oct 2014, 20:39 PM
#135
Posts: 4928
Just make it 125 MP and change vet ability to Sprint.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
18 Oct 2014, 21:56 PM
#136
8 Posts: 2470
if the m42 had 120 damage and could pen medium tanks at close to medium range it would be a viable option.
21 Oct 2014, 16:38 PM
#137
Posts: 708 | Subs: 1
...why not make the ZiS slightly cheaper? 285-300 MP sounds reasonable.
-hides under rock-
It need to be better, not cheaper.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.483190.718-1
- 4.587233.716+3
- 5.1095612.641+19
- 6.893399.691+3
- 7.280162.633+8
- 8.1004649.607+5
- 9.304113.729+4
- 10.379114.769+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1006
Board Info
858 users are online:
858 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48779
Welcome our newest member, Adie
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Adie
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM