Login

russian armor

Real Talk: Panther

PAGES (13)down
24 Mar 2015, 19:10 PM
#81
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779



Mark Target is a pretty good but avoidable ability. And I would understand your preference (hey, nobody said T-34/85 wasn't great especially with Mark Target support and how early the call-in mechanic can bring it into the game), but isn't saying that Panther is shit a bit of an exaggeration? I mean the stats are out there; there is nothing subjective about how it isn't the best dedicated AT vehicle per cost in almost every way.


It cannot even solo down a T-34/76 from the north end of Moscow map all the way back to its south base, and it is not a SHIT?

Dude that thing is only good at surviving (RNGod involved), not fighting.
24 Mar 2015, 19:10 PM
#82
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

Oh the shitstorm...

As I said, it seems that your problem is not the panther, but it is the Allied AT power. Aside from Blitz, Panther is fine. It comes late (some argues for OKW here though) and it's expensive.

Nerfing panther will not solve any major issues, because Allied, specially USF, will still have problems dealing with other heavies. You keep comparing Panther to tanks like T34/85 or Jackson, and you want to imply that Panther is superior. But the thing is, Jackson and SU85 need changes to be able to counter Axis heavies. Either that, or all axis heavies need major nerfs. I'm a fan of buffing Jackson and SU85.
24 Mar 2015, 19:11 PM
#83
avatar of After Effect

Posts: 67

Unlike the allied medium tanks, panthers need to be used incredibly defensively in order to keep them alive. Think about the power spike when a double t34/85 call in hits the field; its almost always accompanied by a major Soviet push. The panther doesn't give that same benefit. For ostheer especially it only comes out by the time the faction is on the defensive against heavy/numerous enemy vehicles. Then it's still an uphill battle.

I'd agree that it may be too cheap for OKW considering their cheaper/more beneficial teching, but the unit itself is fine. Both E8s and 34/85s require 0 tech which makes them easily spammable. Personally in 1v1s I don't often see panthers and I can't recall ever having particular trouble beating them.
24 Mar 2015, 19:13 PM
#84
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Mar 2015, 19:10 PMRMMLz
Oh the shitstorm...

As I said, it seems that your problem is not the panther, but it is the Allied AT power. Aside from Blitz, Panther is fine. It comes late (some argues for OKW here though) and it's expensive.

Nerfing panther will not solve any major issues, because Allied, specially USF, will still have problems dealing with other heavies. You keep comparing Panther to tanks like T34/85 or Jackson, and you want to imply that Panther is superior. But the thing is, Jackson and SU85 need changes to be able to counter Axis heavies. Either that, or all axis heavies need major nerfs. I'm a fan of buffing Jackson and SU85.


Yes but if you give Allies more penetration in general, armor advantages of units like Panzer IV and Jagdpanzer IV will be trivialized. The problem is Panther and then the bigger tanks slightly less so, why indirectly nerf all Axis tanks? I think it would be healthy for the game if we saw more of StuG and Panzer IV and less of early Panther. And then Elefant would have a reason to be used; your more flexible vehicles wouldn't actually be too good against enemy armor without being easily removed themselves.
24 Mar 2015, 19:15 PM
#85
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

Unlike the allied medium tanks, panthers need to be used incredibly defensively in order to keep them alive. Think about the power spike when a double t34/85 call in hits the field; its almost always accompanied by a major Soviet push. The panther doesn't give that same benefit. For ostheer especially it only comes out by the time the faction is on the defensive against heavy/numerous enemy vehicles. Then it's still an uphill battle.

I'd agree that it may be too cheap for OKW considering their cheaper/more beneficial teching, but the unit itself is fine. Both E8s and 34/85s require 0 tech which makes them easily spammable. Personally in 1v1s I very rarely (read: literally never) see panthers and I can't recall ever having particular trouble beating them.


As I said: Call-in meta issue. T-34/85 shouldn't be a doctrinal unit and everything else should be tied to teching as well as CPs.
24 Mar 2015, 19:15 PM
#86
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

Panther is last AT tank for ostheer.Ost lacks tank destroyer,p4 useless..tiger useless vs jackson/is-2.
Enormous tech costs.
Contrary to belief can be countered with armor /at gun combo rather than armor alone.
Totally shit DPS.

Blitz can be toned down,other than that..it can't be touched while jackson does 240 dmg at its price/allied medium call-ins require no teching and is-2 has 375 armor.
24 Mar 2015, 19:15 PM
#87
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Mar 2015, 19:10 PMRMMLz
Oh the shitstorm...

As I said, it seems that your problem is not the panther, but it is the Allied AT power. Aside from Blitz, Panther is fine. It comes late (some argues for OKW here though) and it's expensive.

Nerfing panther will not solve any major issues, because Allied, specially USF, will still have problems dealing with other heavies. You keep comparing Panther to tanks like T34/85 or Jackson, and you want to imply that Panther is superior. But the thing is, Jackson and SU85 need changes to be able to counter Axis heavies. Either that, or all axis heavies need major nerfs. I'm a fan of buffing Jackson and SU85.


Carte Blanche upping Allied AT is a band aid on the cut artery.

If we do this then you hurt other things that are not Panther. Heavy tanks are no much weaker and they actually HAVE a a weakness called being slow

Medium tanks like the Panzer IV are even MORE heavily outclassed.

The Panther as the OP pointed out has too many positives and not enough Negatives. I am still waiting to hear someone say yknow IT SHOULDNT GET MORE DPS!!!

Because everyone wants the status Quo. The A move Panther that they only halfway need to pay attention too. Not a unit that rewards good micro.
24 Mar 2015, 19:22 PM
#88
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

What's so bad about Panther's DPS? It's a sure penetration on almost every Allied vehicle, pretty sure its effective DPS is superior to SU-85/Jackson/Easy Eight/T-34-85

I mean its raw DPS is the same as T-34/85 to begin with, slightly better in fact.
24 Mar 2015, 19:25 PM
#89
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

What's so bad about Panther's DPS? It's a sure penetration on almost every Allied vehicle, pretty sure its effective DPS is superior to SU-85/Jackson/Easy Eight/T-34-85

I mean its raw DPS is the same as T-34/85 to begin with, slightly better in fact.


Why don't you trying to use it first instead of those stupid value A > B so it is better? You are claiming a very obvious false argument.
24 Mar 2015, 19:26 PM
#90
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

What's so bad about Panther's DPS? It's a sure penetration on almost every Allied vehicle, pretty sure its effective DPS is superior to SU-85/Jackson/Easy Eight/T-34-85

I mean its raw DPS is the same as T-34/85 to begin with, slightly better in fact.


It not up to Par with other Dedicated Anti Tank units which is a role it now fufills with its ultra high Penetration. Its main reason for a Buff was to deal better with the IS2.

The T34/85 also can kill infantry better then the Panther and the Panther does cost more.

So rather than make it GOD MODE ON dipped in Siegfrieds dragon blood bring it in line with other heavy tank destroyers.

Not equal mind you but better then it is today with lower armor then it enjoys today.

Its HP Pool will already provide it excellent surviability.
24 Mar 2015, 19:31 PM
#91
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Mar 2015, 19:25 PMPorygon


Why don't you trying to use it first instead of those stupid value A > B so it is better? You are claiming a very obvious false argument.


I use it all the time, I used to face it very often until I just stopped playing Allies as much. I do think it is overpowered. Who's making the fallacy here, assuming I never even tried it?
24 Mar 2015, 19:34 PM
#92
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779



I use it all the time, I used to face it very often until I just stopped playing Allies as much. I do think it is overpowered. Who's making the fallacy here, assuming I never even tried it?


Unless you are very good at using it, otherwise it just give frustration, that's my opinion.
Anyway, you will get your dream coming true, this shit gonna be nerfed, you happy now? Purpose of this thread had been done.
24 Mar 2015, 19:38 PM
#93
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Mar 2015, 19:34 PMPorygon


Unless you are very good at using it, otherwise it just give frustration, that's my opinion.
Anyway, you will get your dream coming true, this shit gonna be nerfed, you happy now? Purpose of this thread had been done.


Depends on how they are going to nerf it. What's the change?
24 Mar 2015, 19:42 PM
#94
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
vet2 panther with armor buff could use some treaking

in all honesty , the amount of fuel an MP it takes Ost to get to one

It damn whell better be good.

In contrast i think the OKW panther shouldnt be better since it comes alot sooner
24 Mar 2015, 19:47 PM
#95
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

Vetted P5s had the same role in vcoh...and it worked well.

Has only one role: hunt tanks

For this cost the ost's P5 should stay the same, for such a high cost ost deserves this unit.

Nerf blitz.

Buff USF ATG's pen.
24 Mar 2015, 20:17 PM
#96
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

vet2 panther with armor buff could use some treaking

in all honesty , the amount of fuel an MP it takes Ost to get to one

It damn whell better be good.

In contrast i think the OKW panther shouldnt be better since it comes alot sooner


As I mentioned in the OP, the amount of fuel it takes to get a Panther is quite tame. It's MP that is unfair.
24 Mar 2015, 20:24 PM
#97
avatar of pussyking
Donator 11

Posts: 551

Panthers frontal armor is too damn thick. Bouncing off 50% of shots.
24 Mar 2015, 20:27 PM
#98
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Panthers frontal armor is too damn thick. Bouncing off 50% of shots.


If a tank hunter couldn't bounce the shots of enemy tanks it would be a rather shit tank hunter don't yah think?
24 Mar 2015, 20:27 PM
#99
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1



Carte Blanche upping Allied AT is a band aid on the cut artery.

If we do this then you hurt other things that are not Panther. Heavy tanks are no much weaker and they actually HAVE a a weakness called being slow

Medium tanks like the Panzer IV are even MORE heavily outclassed.

The Panther as the OP pointed out has too many positives and not enough Negatives. I am still waiting to hear someone say yknow IT SHOULDNT GET MORE DPS!!!

Because everyone wants the status Quo. The A move Panther that they only halfway need to pay attention too. Not a unit that rewards good micro.




Yes but if you give Allies more penetration in general, armor advantages of units like Panzer IV and Jagdpanzer IV will be trivialized. The problem is Panther and then the bigger tanks slightly less so, why indirectly nerf all Axis tanks? I think it would be healthy for the game if we saw more of StuG and Panzer IV and less of early Panther. And then Elefant would have a reason to be used; your more flexible vehicles wouldn't actually be too good against enemy armor without being easily removed themselves.


This might be off-topic.

You both make good points about PZIVs and JPZIVs being more viable, BUT:
Correct me if I'm wrong, PZIV is outclassed by Jackson (180 armor meaning around 90% penetration at max range). JPZIV is a bit different, although it has good armor (230 meaning around 70% penetration at max range) and it also has a small target size, so if the shot hits, it most probably will penetrate. IMO, these dedicated tank destroyers should outclass medium armor, YES, Jackson should beat PZIV at max range, and it already does. So, increasing the penetration (and also reducing damage a bit so the poor PZIV has a chance to run) would not do any more harm. Although a well microd PZIV might get the Jackson off-gaurd and kill it, which is a reward for microing your tank well.

About the heavies being slow, you have a point there but it's hard for USF to flank a KT. If your enemy is not brain dead, there is at least another unit to support the KT. A Schreck Blob or their teammate's PZIV or PAK. So, TDs should counter heavy armor from far away, frontally.

In a balance utopia, you find use for each and every unit in the game. But you can't expect your StuG to counter the Jackson. If you see Shermans, you go for StuGs and PZIVs. If you think they might bring in Jacksons, you go for Panthers and other heavies.

PS: Still believe that the Blitz is the major problem.
24 Mar 2015, 20:28 PM
#100
avatar of Razor1O9

Posts: 11



If a tank hunter couldn't bounce the shots of enemy tanks it would be a rather shit tank hunter don't yah think?


Yeah, its called Jackson.
PAGES (13)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

1110 users are online: 1110 guests
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50008
Welcome our newest member, Goynet40
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM