Login

russian armor

Ostheer's Panzer IV vs Sherman/T34 Costs

PAGES (7)down
9 May 2015, 13:21 PM
#61
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper . Read the topic starter he shows us that Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper
9 May 2015, 16:24 PM
#62
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned
Nvm t34 cost decrease to 90 fuel would be more appropriate.
9 May 2015, 16:45 PM
#63
avatar of Airborne

Posts: 281

Nvm t34 cost decrease to 90 fuel would be more appropriate.

Or a small armor buff, to make it worth 100 feul.
9 May 2015, 17:26 PM
#64
avatar of iceman

Posts: 148

I lol'ed. Are you playing against easy AI?



You added things to the analysis and reworked the costs to set it up for a straw man argument. This is strictly costs for medium tanks. These costs will affect the timing of the tank to be on the field.

I did not add a pak gun, I just add the cost of the building to get a pak gun. I specifically said that, it was an alternative, but not a calculation needed to get a PIV.

9 May 2015, 17:35 PM
#65
avatar of carloff

Posts: 301


Hell no !!!!

This would simply result in an even faster T70, which simply isn't needed given the current balance. Most players would just abuse T70 and if they didn't win the game with the T70 simply move on to callins anyway. Hardly redefining the meta.

Cheaper T34 maybe.

But-but, OKW can field fast Pz2 much quicker. Wait, oh shi...
9 May 2015, 18:53 PM
#66
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned

Or a small armor buff, to make it worth 100 feul.

It just doesn't fit the unit. T34 shouldn't feel like expensive tanks, but if you make it significantly cheaper it would make early t34s imbalanced. Plus any more armor and then you basically have a clone of the panzer4 for the soviets at 25 less fuel. Panzer4 only has 10 more pen and 30 more frontal armor. It has better vet yes, but I'd feel they would be just too similar.
9 May 2015, 18:56 PM
#67
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
I don't agree with any t34 price nurf
9 May 2015, 20:27 PM
#68
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper . Read the topic starter he shows us that Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper
9 May 2015, 22:12 PM
#69
avatar of turbotortoise

Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4



Actually, most menpower starved are USF. I can't remind myself a single game where I haven't seen 200-300 fuel float because mp bleed prevents me(or whoever I watch that isn't stomping his opponent) from getting armor.
Ost only have most menpower intense teching, but they aren't most mp starved.


yeah, it gets brutal when going AB, god forbid pathfinders... i constantly have to remind myself to only get 3 rifles.
9 May 2015, 22:51 PM
#70
avatar of Zyllen

Posts: 770

If you look at the differences between the varied tanks, the are not that different. what they share 1 thing in common: callins will fucking wipe the floor with them.

For the usf this isnt a problem because the best AT unit is in the same tier 3 and doesnt require any further teching when the callins arrive. The soviets and ost do not have this advantage and its a game losing decesion to go tier against callins. not a single medium tank needs buffs its the cllins that need very hefty nerfs of 4-5 extra cp's


Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper . Read the topic starter he shows us that Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper


As i already explained to you he has calculated it wrong and soviet tier is cheaper in both mp and fuel
9 May 2015, 23:03 PM
#71
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper . Read the topic starter he shows us that Tier 3 Soviets should be cheaper


I have no idea what you are talking about. The Op makes no argument for Sov Tier 3 to be cheaper nor is it obvious. In fact the entire point of his post was that P4 comes too late. If you feel there is an argument to the contrary, then state your case but posting the same post over and over is just embarrassing yourself.

Nvm t34 cost decrease to 90 fuel would be more appropriate.


Would like to see T34 manpower increased to 350 so that cons can't just be spammed and thrown away without thought. If a player goes con heavy and wants to play high risk then they should not be allowed to easily transition into T34 spam.

Also not entirely opposed to slight increase to T70 cost.
10 May 2015, 01:40 AM
#72
avatar of Corsin

Posts: 600

I dont think the USA should get free heavy weapon squads for teching.... but otherwise it seems ok....

(tech for USF should cost more manpower or some ammo).
13 May 2015, 14:30 PM
#73
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

I'd rather the LT and Captain be a 1 man squad that has to merge into an existing riflesquad to make a 6 man officer squad.
14 May 2015, 02:09 AM
#74
avatar of Rasputin

Posts: 57

I dont really think the P4 is the real problem here.

It can hold its own against basic allied tanks and with the recent changes to the Jackson it wont go down in one second anymore either. The bleed it causes to allies in terms of infantry kills is really nice too. Overall, the P4 is rather balanced.

The real problem, and why I think alot of ppl think the P4 isnt competitive, is the size of german squads. When you look at AOE values of P4 and T34/76 for example, youll notice that the P4s AOE near is greater than that of the T34 while having less scatter at the same time(AOE mid and far are the same for both tanks). While the allies will certainly bleed if you use your P4 correctly, scoring squad wipes is something that rarely ever happens, unless the allied player is sleeping. 1 shot squad wipes with the P4 are largely due to the retarded game mechanics that make 6 conscript models clip into each other all on the same spot. This is by no means causes by the P4 but by the game itself. The T34, on the other hand, with its smaller/equal AOE and bigger scatter has a much easier time wiping german squads due to the squad size of grenadiers, pgrens and so on.

Even if you only lose 2 models, you still run the risk of getting wiped on retreat because of some shock blob or(in the case of americans) M1919 rifle blob on your retreat path, ultimately resulting in axis players losing alot more squads overall. But again, this is by no means caused by the tanks themselves. They are fine.

When it comes down to P4 vs T34/Sherman it always boils down to an RNG fest. Most of the time in favour of a P4, but an RNG fest nonetheless, ultimately not ruling out that you can lose your more expensive P4 against a T34 or Sherman(in a vacuum). In reality you can avoid this by keeping grenadiers close by, having smart pak placement and laying down some tellers but if you get caught pants down, you might still lose.

The fundamental problem I personally see here is that:

a: German squad sizes ask for squad wipes will allied squad sizes dont, ultimately making ppl feel like the P4 is less rewarding than it actually is.

b: A tank vs tank battle being the absolute rng horror, with P4s frontally bouncing on a T34 and Sherman(granted this doesnt happen often, but when it does it can fuck you up).

c: P4s frequently failing to penetrate the rear of soviet heavy tanks(I think I am not the only one who had a P4 bounce 4 shots in a row on the rear of an IS2)

But again, all these problems dont really relate to the P4 itself but rather to stupid game mechanics and sloppy balancing on other tanks.

I very much enjoyed the change to Tiger rear armour when it happened and finally allowed allies to penetrate the rear of a tiger. It really baffles me how relic failed to do the same thing for the IS2/ISU in return.

Considering that making german squad sizes bigger would absolutely screw up game balance in more than one way, maybe a decrease in AOE damage for basic allied tanks would be in line too. MAYBE.

And finally, to compensate for the rng fest that is basic tank battles, maybe lowering the prize of the P4 by 5 fuel and 20 manpower(without touching any of its stats) might be acceptable to bring it more in line with the other tanks but at the same time keeping it more expensive than the others(as it very well deserves to be more expensive due to overall better performance).

What do you think?
20 May 2015, 13:34 PM
#75
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

Finally somebody nailed the problem. The power of allied tanks vs ost infantery is the key. It has nothing to do with tanks themselves. Just one sherman on the field is so much more horror to ost than p4 for the allies. I'd add that self repairing crews and capping are also a grat problem. Ost needs to retreat pios which means fewer squads on the field. Same for buidling which means that a lot of manpower can't be running on the field. Add this to free squads for teching and you have a huge imbalance in terms of decapping point and blobbing.
20 May 2015, 17:18 PM
#76
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

Finally somebody nailed the problem. The power of allied tanks vs ost infantery is the key. It has nothing to do with tanks themselves. Just one sherman on the field is so much more horror to ost than p4 for the allies. I'd add that self repairing crews and capping are also a grat problem. Ost needs to retreat pios which means fewer squads on the field. Same for buidling which means that a lot of manpower can't be running on the field. Add this to free squads for teching and you have a huge imbalance in terms of decapping point and blobbing.


Oh the horror of one Panther negating my Sherman/T-34.
20 May 2015, 22:35 PM
#77
avatar of daspoulos

Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1

Permanently Banned


Oh the horror of one Panther negating my Sherman/T-34.

You mean 175 fuel vs a 110/100 fuel unit? Pretty much the equivalent to a panzer4 vs a t70. Except t34s and shermans can actually hurt a panther and are good vs infantry.
20 May 2015, 22:45 PM
#78
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484


You mean 175 fuel vs a 110/100 fuel unit? Pretty much the equivalent to a panzer4 vs a t70. Except t34s and shermans can actually hurt a panther and are good vs infantry.

T-34 is garbage against infantry
20 May 2015, 23:15 PM
#79
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262


T-34 is garbage against infantry


Alot better than Panther.
21 May 2015, 05:11 AM
#80
avatar of austerlitz

Posts: 1705

The worstthing is pz 4 completely unable to penetrate is-2 rear armor....which is absurd.
PAGES (7)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

874 users are online: 1 member and 873 guests
aerafield
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49121
Welcome our newest member, Hanra274
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM