Login

russian armor

Axis heavy armor needs nerf or Allied AT needs buffs

PAGES (13)down
26 Dec 2014, 07:08 AM
#101
avatar of JuanElstretchyNeck

Posts: 226

Agree with pretty much everything you said in the OP Ninja.

The imbalances are a lot worse in team games since Axis have increased ability to build heavy tanks compared to 1v1.

I think the issues you mentioned re the Jackson are accentuated a hell of a lot in team games too, it makes the late game USF really poor, pretty much being reliant on P47's for all heavy AT needs.

Of course, all these problems could be quite easily fixed (fixing Jackson Pen chance, slightly buffing Jackson armour/HP, increasing su85 pen and adding the Pershing to USF) but I'm sure balancing larger format team games is right down the bottom of Relic's ever-growing "to do list" - which is a shame because of just how many people play 3v3 and 4v4 exclusively.

26 Dec 2014, 07:40 AM
#102
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

Agree with pretty much everything you said in the OP Ninja.

The imbalances are a lot worse in team games since Axis have increased ability to build heavy tanks compared to 1v1.

I think the issues you mentioned re the Jackson are accentuated a hell of a lot in team games too, it makes the late game USF really poor, pretty much being reliant on P47's for all heavy AT needs.

Of course, all these problems could be quite easily fixed (fixing Jackson Pen chance, slightly buffing Jackson armour/HP, increasing su85 pen and adding the Pershing to USF) but I'm sure balancing larger format team games is right down the bottom of Relic's ever-growing "to do list" - which is a shame because of just how many people play 3v3 and 4v4 exclusively.



its easier to see the affects of the situation in 4v4 and 3v3 because there are a lot more tank on tank matchups with heavier german tanks being built. im sure the problem still exists in 1v1 though. I realize the Panther and KT aren't built much in 1v1. However, whenever i see streams of 1v1 and 2v2 players, the Panther and Kt gives ALlies a hard time when they roll onto the field.
26 Dec 2014, 09:13 AM
#103
avatar of JuanElstretchyNeck

Posts: 226

I don't think Panther is really one of the problem tanks. AT guns and SU85/jackson can stand up to panther so long as Panther isn't allowed to close the distance before it takes a couple of hits.

The real problem (especially for USF) is Tiger Ace and the King Tiger. The massive amount of HP/armour requires a hell of a lot of DPS and units with high pen - a major shortfall in USF army composition.
26 Dec 2014, 09:38 AM
#104
avatar of ☭ Калашникова ☭

Posts: 322

If your already loosing to a aggressive USF and holding out to 15 CP (Instead of 11) TA won't save you.
26 Dec 2014, 09:57 AM
#105
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819

Absolutely.
Against late armor, every shot against the heavy armor becomes a game of rng. And for a jackson (which is not spamable), that uses his ability, it is extremely frustrating to not penetrate.
Also the At gun of usf is so bad against the axis heavy armor, its uust not even funny.
26 Dec 2014, 10:11 AM
#106
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 00:01 AMCieZ


You do realize that zooks have a ONE HUNDRED percent chance to penetrate the rear armor of a panther at all ranges, right? If you're blitzing in to flank something with your Panther, you'll easily be exposing your rear armor to zooks.

Yes, people don't always have them - I actually think they're a little too expensive fuel-wise. Just wanted to point out the obvious flaw in your statement. They are in fact a threat to all Ost armor except for the Tiger (because of higher rear armor than the panther)

Really wanna know where your arbitrary claim of 40% chance for Panther to beat an Is-2 is coming from. It's pretty much a 0% chance for the Panther to score a kill on an Is-2 if a ZiS gun is around, or if the Soviet knows that his munitions can be used to plant mines.

If it is an actual 1v1, with no interference - which will never happen - the Panther has a 100% chance of beating the Is-2 as long as it has an infantry unit spotting for it. Probably a 0% chance of winning in a vacuum 1v1 (doesn't mean anything though).

Same exact logic applies to Jackson vs Tiger.


Except IS-2 and ISU-152 are the only tanks, that Panther actually need to flank to reliably penetrate, and these tanks are Soviet, and Soviets don't have zooks.

USF have zooks, but Panther doesn't need to flank USF armor to reliably penetrate it.
26 Dec 2014, 10:20 AM
#107
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

So in fact US Forces have to use Jackson because there is no other unit which could be used in late game.
How broken is that?

Soviets have: IS, ISU, SU (better pen than Jackson and sefl spotting) and T34/85+Mark Target, ZiS
Ost: Tiger, Tiger Ace, Panther, Elephnat, Pak43, Pak40.
OKW: schreck blob, Panther, Sturmtiger, King Tiger, Jadgtiger, Pak43
USF: Jackson... Even E8 is not usefull since Panther wrecks it and there is nothing like mark target to use them efficiently like T34. So in fact if you won't pick up P47 you are going to have really bad time in late-game. How often do you see any other doctrine in 1v1/2v2? Airborne is in about 80% of the games because USF lack of late-game AT units.
Imagine situation where Ost player is forced to take JU in every game because if he won't he will lose.
26 Dec 2014, 10:58 AM
#108
avatar of ☭ Калашникова ☭

Posts: 322

So in fact US Forces have to use Jackson because there is no other unit which could be used in late game.
How broken is that?

Soviets have: IS, ISU, SU (better pen than Jackson and sefl spotting) and T34/85+Mark Target, ZiS
Ost: Tiger, Tiger Ace, Panther, Elephnat, Pak43, Pak40.
OKW: schreck blob, Panther, Sturmtiger, King Tiger, Jadgtiger, Pak43
USF: Jackson... Even E8 is not usefull since Panther wrecks it and there is nothing like mark target to use them efficiently like T34. So in fact if you won't pick up P47 you are going to have really bad time in late-game. How often do you see any other doctrine in 1v1/2v2? Airborne is in about 80% of the games because USF lack of late-game AT units.
Imagine situation where Ost player is forced to take JU in every game because if he won't he will lose.


Oh so you mean like stuka dive bomb doct and b4?
26 Dec 2014, 11:08 AM
#109
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



You mean like stuka dive bomb doct and b4?


You can counter B4 without stuka bomb. It's just more difficult.
And Stuka is useful not only against B4.
Force inf to retreat, recon over retreat Point, use stuka and watch how it hits in same moment when inf come back to base.
___
If Soviets go for IS2, ISU or T34/85 they should be fine vs King Tiger, Tigers, Panthers.
If US Forces go for something different than P47 they won't be fine vs these units.
Right now P47 is a key because if you won't chose it, you will have hard time in late game.
Doctrinal Pershing would, at least, make Airborne used in 60% of games, not in 80%.
26 Dec 2014, 12:19 PM
#110
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

The way I see it:

- Jackson too RNG dependent versus heavy armor

- Jackson over-performing versus medium armor (Ostheer T3). Defeating StuGs with two shots, Panzer IVs with three shots.

--> Solution: Increase penetration. Turn damage per shot down to 160.
26 Dec 2014, 12:52 PM
#111
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

+1 Butcher;

- M36's Penetration:
200.0/180.0/160.0

- Panther's armor: 320... Tiger's 300


Another problem:

- PAK + Tiger/Panther >>> every armor except ISU

- shrecks + OKW >>> every armor except ISU

- 57mm/zooks + M36 = Tiger/Panther (if there is no support or blitz)

And there is always hand-held AT or axis ATGs on the field :P
26 Dec 2014, 13:39 PM
#112
avatar of Glendizzle

Posts: 149

I think soviets are fine. I actually don't think axis tanks are all that crazy either. I've gotten to where I don't like playing usf since the only viable option is airborne lt->maj and two m36. M36 is batshit op vs t3 and entirely rng vs heavies. I've even had times that bounces led to real troubles vs tiger. It's boring meta, nothing new or uniquely usf there. The biggest issue is the rng pen/bounce. Feeding heavies vet by sacrificing spotters gets old fast.
26 Dec 2014, 16:20 PM
#113
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 05:55 AMNinjaWJ


I know you have been discussing a lot of the numbers on the tanks Ciez, but what do you think about Allied and Axis Tanks? As someone who is highly-ranked, do you think there are some imbalanced between Axis and Allied AT, particularly tanks?


I think Soviets have the best overall tanks, but only because they get such strong doctrinal tanks in the Is-2/T34 85 and ISU. Sadly Soviet stock tanks are generally lack-luster. Even three T34/76 will struggle to kill an unsupported Tiger despite costing more in raw fuel/manpower even without tech costs included.

USF/OKW both have good stock tanks with Shermans, Jacksons, Scotts, Luchs, jp4 and Panther all being pretty awesome. E8s are probably a bit too weak for their current price (I'd just drop price a little and keep performance the same) while the bulldozer wipes infantry too often but is useless against armor.

Ost T3 is just dead for the most part. Maybe it is viable vs Soviet who goes T3... but you could just get a Tiger for less of a resource investment than your first P4 costs and be basically invincible to T34/76s - plus be able to stand up to Is-2 (something that P4s fail almost as bad against as T34 76 do against Tigers).

On the whole I prefer Allied tanks because of their ability to completely mop up infantry, which the Panther is pretty poor against. With regard to your specific question about Allied vs Axis AT capabilities I think the Jackson and Panther are pretty equivalent in power. Jackson is more fragile but more deadly. The vet 4/5 on OKW panther - whichever gives it 60 range needs to be re-worked because a 60 range panther is super OP. PaK 40 and ZiS are pretty equal, I think the PaK 40 is slightly stronger but ZiS definitely does its job. The USF AT gun could maybe use a 5 man squad, but it is surprisingly strong with the ability popped - fast rate of fire and 70 range is nothing to scoff at. Su85 is just garbage though, which leaves the Soviets having to use normal tanks to fight Axis TDs, which can be awkward at times... but the Soviet call-ins are crazy strong overall.

I guess the TL:DR version is that all factions have some good stuff and some bad stuff. I'd probably give the overall AT edge to Axis because of PaK 40/schrecks and the durability of the Panther making it easier to duel with. Allies have the overall AI edge when it comes to their tanks though. Soviet and Ost stock tanks need love (or t4 to be cheaper for Ost, or both).
26 Dec 2014, 21:01 PM
#114
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

why T-34/85 is regarded as strong doctrinal tank.....It's barely a good tank in German standard in game, much inferior than a panther only sighlty cheaper, and even a Panzer IV with MG upgrade could do more harm in AI capability.
26 Dec 2014, 21:13 PM
#115
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

I think due to Allied tanks being weaker than Axis ones, it becomes quite frustrating when killing retreating German armor. Tanks such as JP4 and Panther with a sliver of life can still bounce shots as they are reversing out, while hits to retreating Allied vehicles (except Soviet heavies) are bound to penetrate. This makes games particularly frustrating, because it feels like the player got cheated,
26 Dec 2014, 21:13 PM
#116
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 21:01 PMUGBEAR
why T-34/85 is regarded as strong doctrinal tank.....It's barely a good tank in German standard in game, much inferior than a panther only sighlty cheaper, and even a Panzer IV with MG upgrade could do more harm in AI capability.


I guess price since 800 health and better penetration.

But IS-2 is better, so i see it more often as it is much better for a person to handle one super tank than two weaker tanks.
26 Dec 2014, 22:41 PM
#117
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262

So in fact US Forces have to use Jackson because there is no other unit which could be used in late game.
How broken is that?

Soviets have: IS, ISU, SU (better pen than Jackson and sefl spotting) and T34/85+Mark Target, ZiS
Ost: Tiger, Tiger Ace, Panther, Elephnat, Pak43, Pak40.
OKW: schreck blob, Panther, Sturmtiger, King Tiger, Jadgtiger, Pak43
USF: Jackson... Even E8 is not usefull since Panther wrecks it and there is nothing like mark target to use them efficiently like T34. So in fact if you won't pick up P47 you are going to have really bad time in late-game. How often do you see any other doctrine in 1v1/2v2? Airborne is in about 80% of the games because USF lack of late-game AT units.
Imagine situation where Ost player is forced to take JU in every game because if he won't he will lose.


Well, there is nothing wrong with e8, not it's not a heavy unit, but it's still easy to spam. Btw, panther is a unit that can only go after tanks and it is alot more expensive than e8, and require teching, and it cant deal with infantry like e8, if u want that e8 has a very good chance against panther in head on scenario, then, u have no idea what ur talking about. And no, panther doesn't make e8 a bad unit. I agree that USF needs some tweaking on late game, but only if ur going to compensate on early game.

Btw. sturmtiger is a troll unit. Very expensive, very slow, big target, slow aim, unable to move wile reloading that takes around 50-60 sec. It's not a late game solution, for anything except having fun in already won game
26 Dec 2014, 23:11 PM
#118
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

One more think...

Yea, Jackson is great unit but only on open wide maps. It has so many pathfinding issues that on some maps (especially ones with forests) it's deadly for USF Players.
Panther can survive most of the pathing issues.
Jackson can't.
So if Relic makes such glass cannon unit it should be able to move to survive so if I'm reversing it should reverse instead of rotate 260 degree if it can rotate over second side for 100 degree.




26 Dec 2014, 23:50 PM
#119
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 21:13 PMNinjaWJ
I think due to Allied tanks being weaker than Axis ones, it becomes quite frustrating when killing retreating German armor. Tanks such as JP4 and Panther with a sliver of life can still bounce shots as they are reversing out, while hits to retreating Allied vehicles (except Soviet heavies) are bound to penetrate. This makes games particularly frustrating, because it feels like the player got cheated,


Thats depends on what tanks we are taking about. currently the allies have the better selection of medium and AI tanks. the OKW ( not ostheer btw) has the better selection of AT tanks. Heavy tanks are equal KT defeats the is2 but not entirely unjustified giving the cost between them
27 Dec 2014, 00:32 AM
#120
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2014, 23:50 PMJaigen


Thats depends on what tanks we are taking about. currently the allies have the better selection of medium and AI tanks. the OKW ( not ostheer btw) has the better selection of AT tanks. Heavy tanks are equal KT defeats the is2 but not entirely unjustified giving the cost between them


I think the IS2 can beat KT by circle strafing but KT can beat IS2 head on (seems like). Seems like in a late game scenario, the Axis can build the better tanks. Since decisive tank battles can generally determine who will the game, i feel the Allies are at a disadvantage.
PAGES (13)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

836 users are online: 836 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49104
Welcome our newest member, zhcnwps
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM