New Incoming Teching Costs.

Would three 222s beat a T70 in a dual?

Would three 222s beat a T70 in a dual?

Quite likely yes.

When I don't take those heavy armor commanders, I usually build 1or2 panzer 4, then go to T4, build a panther to counter allies heavies. But in the next patch it seems impossible. The tech cost is too high when you first go to T3 then go to T4. IMO it's not necessary to increase the T4 cost so much. The T3 cost(45+75=120) is just ok. It would be fine if BP3 cost 45 and T4 cost 45. Because the T4 units already cost so much.

It would be my job here to remind those (like Queenrachet and Katitiof) that the battle phase costs are not the teching costs of the Wehrmacht...

Since a player cannot merely purchase the battle phase and WISH tanks into existence... it would be apparent that they must also include BUILDING COSTS.

When you add that to the Battle phase costs... you will find Ostheer are 130 fuel more expensive than any other faction to tech up.

ALSO refer to my first post in this topic for starting fuel, before saying that its fair for Wehrmacht to pay 130 more than any other faction.

While it is technically true that Ostheer is the most expensive faction to tech, you also have to keep in mind that the Ostheer T4 has no equal in any other faction. Ostheer T4 gives access to heavy armor breakthrough units that do not exist non-doctrinal to other factions.

The correct comparison would be Ostheer T3 (medium tier) to soviet t4 and usf t3. In this comparison, Ostheer tier 3 is very much in line with the tech costs of other factions.

While it is technically true that Ostheer is the most expensive faction to tech, you also have to keep in mind that the Ostheer T4 has no equal in any other faction. Ostheer T4 gives access to heavy armor breakthrough units that do not exist non-doctrinal to other factions.

The correct comparison would be Ostheer T3 (medium tier) to soviet t4 and usf t3. In this comparison, Ostheer tier 3 is very much in line with the tech costs of other factions.

This is the most correct point of view on ost teching.

Their T4 is a bonus, not mandatory.
Its also alternative to T4 right now, not mandatory progression. It was mandatory to fight IS-2s before, with new StuG its not.

Many ost players, especially the fanboy group is completely blind on the fact that ost T4 is league ahead other armies top tier and they need doctrinal support to keep up with it, this is why cost to get to T4 is higher and units there cost more-you're paying premium cost for superior units that you do NOT need or have to get as T3 armor is able to fight every single allied vehicle.

Many ost players, especially the fanboy group is completely blind on the fact that ost T4 is league ahead other armies top tier and they need doctrinal support to keep up with it, this is why cost to get to T4 is higher and units there cost more-you're paying premium cost for superior units that you do NOT need or have to get as T3 armor is able to fight every single allied vehicle.

I dont agree with this. I would rate usf and okw tier 3 higher then ost tier 4. and you know this also applies to the brits. in fact i rate tier 3 ost also higher.

At this point their is no reason to go tier 4 at all. it only offers alternatives and no clear upgrades to tier 3. Thats why it should not be expensive to go to tier 4.


Their T4 is a bonus, not mandatory.

Its neither a bonus or luxury at the moment but a noob trap. you go tier 4 and your loss rates will go up. not actually what i call balance.

Zyllen so what your saying is that tier 4 is a double edged sword that gives alternate options to highly skilled players?

I dont agree with this. I would rate usf and okw tier 3 higher then ost tier 4. and you know this also applies to the brits. in fact i rate tier 3 ost also higher.

At this point their is no reason to go tier 4 at all. it only offers alternatives and no clear upgrades to tier 3. Thats why it should not be expensive to go to tier 4.


Their T4 is a bonus, not mandatory.

Its neither a bonus or luxury at the moment but a noob trap. you go tier 4 and your loss rates will go up. not actually what i call balance.

You may not like t4, but that doesn't make it terrible. It gives you options no regular faction has. There is a distinction that needs to be made.

Ostheer T4 gives you access to singular, powerful, specialised units (except lolwerfer). These units are expensive, but are easily the heaviest units that can be used nondoctrinally. The panther is also the most heavily armored unit in the game, bar the KT and IS2.

In comparison, USF t3, Sov t4, and ostheer t3 give you access to individually less powerful and expensive medium armor and tank destroyers. These tanks are cheaper, and as a result they die a lot easier.

I would argue that Ostheer T4 is fine (can't be sure until I play the patch) statistically, because the units built from tier 4 would be far too powerful if they arrived much earlier. They force a disproportionate amount of micro from opposing players, who do not have an equal option to compare it to.

Better units require more tech costs. This is why the KT requires more tech than the panther, and why the tech system exists in the first place.

Furthermore, it appears that relic wants ostheer t4 to be a luxury, not a logical tech progression. This means that t4 should he at a price that will significantly delay replacement mediums. The price increase may have been too much, but it is definetly not as far off as some people seem to think it should be. Any issues with t4 can be directly attributed to its units' cost efficiency, not it's separate tech price.

You may not like t4, but that doesn't make it terrible. It gives you options no regular faction has. There is a distinction that needs to be made.

It gives options but they are inferior to tier 3. so why get tier 4?

Ostheer T4 gives you access to singular, powerful, specialised units (except lolwerfer). These units are expensive, but are easily the heaviest units that can be used nondoctrinally. The panther is also the most heavily armored unit in the game, bar the KT and IS2.

Heavy means nothing to me. with the usf already having a TD that easily bypasses armour if i had to choose between the p4 or the panther i would choose the p4 to engage the jackson. Also i know the alpha and the last unit i would ever make against the brits is the panther.

Also i would say that medium armour is better at surviving things because if they get into a sticky situation you use blitz and gtfo.

Better units require more tech costs. This is why the KT requires more tech than the panther, and why the tech system exists in the first place.
.

They are not better units. i will give another example. panther vs is2 is a clear win for the is2 while 2 stugs will beat the shit out of an is2.

Zyllen so what your saying is that tier 4 is a double edged sword that gives alternate options to highly skilled players?

Unless you are on a map where stugs do not perform tier 4 is a viable option . but the tiger would be an better option still. Their is no point using tier 4 unless you have no tiger doctrine.

It gives options but they are inferior to tier 3. so why get tier 4?

Heavy means nothing to me. with the usf already having a TD that easily bypasses armour if i had to choose between the p4 or the panther i would choose the p4 to engage the jackson. Also i know the alpha and the last unit i would ever make against the brits is the panther.

Also i would say that medium armour is better at surviving things because if they get into a sticky situation you use blitz and gtfo.

P4 which gets penetrated 100% of the time vs Panther which gets penetrated 62% of the time.
P4 is also slower then panther and takes 1 shot less from any AT that isn't Jackson to be killed.

Yep, no difference here at all, definitely P4 seems better at surviving here.

They are not better units. i will give another example. panther vs is2 is a clear win for the is2 while 2 stugs will beat the shit out of an is2.

That is alex level of contradiction.

Also, panther isn't exactly supposed to slug it out with IS-2. Its faster and have better turret rotation for a reason you know.

Obviously if you're a failure and don't micro multiple weaker units are better then single strong one.

1 thing is sure...T70 comes out way too fast (7-8 min mark).

1 thing is sure...T70 comes out way too fast (7-8 min mark).

Just as fast as any other light tank.

Just as fast as any other light tank.

Allies get more map control --> faster tanks. T70 is the best light tank before the luchs (Stuart is shit), which only has a gap if the allied player goes for call-ins.

1st: Luchs (for a faction that will be rekt by having no map control)
2nd: T70
3rd: M5
4th: Ost has no light vehicle

Tested rushing out T70s..they rekt everything, PAK isn't a solid counter because of the recon mode/self-repair and being a defensive weapon it only provides safety for 2/5 of the map. Add some Quad into the mix and you got a nice grind squad.

Sidenote: T34s + 152mm gonna be the new-meta.

P4 which gets penetrated 100% of the time vs Panther which gets penetrated 62% of the time.
P4 is also slower then panther and takes 1 shot less from any AT that isn't Jackson to be killed.

Yep, no difference here at all, definitely P4 seems better at surviving here.

62 % is a lot for an unit that is expected to win fights because of its durability. and hvap rounds will laugh at the panther armour. also blitz of the p4 is better. But the most important part is that p4 does 35% more damage. and death things cannot kill you. against units like the jackson glass cannons perform much better then units like the panther.

i could also have chosen the stug to be my example. and a single stug (especially with twp) is a way better option then the panther.

That is alex level of contradiction.

what is actually?

Also, panther isn't exactly supposed to slug it out with IS-2. Its faster and have better turret rotation for a reason you know.

Obviously if you're a failure and don't micro multiple weaker units are better then single strong one.

And very low dps making it a terrible flanker. not to mention their is much more risk involved with flanking then with direct engagements . you can run into mines infantry with at nades or supportive at guns.

Allies get more map control --> faster tanks. T70 is the best light tank before the luchs (Stuart is shit), which only has a gap if the allied player goes for call-ins.

1st: Luchs (for a faction that will be rekt by having no map control)
2nd: T70
3rd: M5
4th: Ost has no light vehicle

Tested rushing out T70s..they rekt everything, PAK isn't a solid counter because of the recon mode/self-repair and being a defensive weapon it only provides safety for 2/5 of the map. Add some Quad into the mix and you got a nice grind squad.

Sidenote: T34s + 152mm gonna be the new-meta.

And then the p4 comes out and rek the soviets because they have no tank to counter your p4. heavy tier 3 investment is a very heavy risk for the soviets.

And then the p4 comes out and rek the soviets because they have no tank to counter your p4. heavy tier 3 investment is a very heavy risk for the soviets.

Sure if you can afford 190 fuel to get your T3 up (+125 for the P4) while on the backfoot with reduced map control.

It gives options but they are inferior to tier 3. so why get tier 4?

That's your decision. T3 is definetly more well rounded, but it does not have the capability to break defensive lines and tank damage that t4 has.

Heavy means nothing to me. with the usf already having a TD that easily bypasses armour if i had to choose between the p4 or the panther i would choose the p4 to engage the jackson. Also i know the alpha and the last unit i would ever make against the brits is the panther.

Then that's your choice. First of all, don't 3xpect every unit to be viable against all armies. This is true for example for allied mgs (useless vs. Ost, great vs. Okw). I for one prefer t3 vs. Usf, mainly because of the power of stugs. However, I would much rather have panthers vs. Soviets, due to their reliance on lower pen/dps units.

Also i would say that medium armour is better at surviving things because if they get into a sticky situation you use blitz and gtfo.

Panther is faster than any medium tank, while also having blitz. Will consider this a brainfart.

They are not better units. i will give another example. panther vs is2 is a clear win for the is2 while 2 stugs will beat the shit out of an is2.

A panther is first of all not a true hevy. It is substantially cheaper, whilst retaining the advantages of speed and high armor. A better comparison would be a panther to 3-4 t34s. A panther works in tandem with support units. It tanks damage, whilst supporting units dish out damage. The stugs on the other hand, require meatshields. They are dps, not true armor.

And then the p4 comes out and rek the soviets because they have no tank to counter your p4. heavy tier 3 investment is a very heavy risk for the soviets.

It's not really a risk. Soviet T3 offers everything you need:

M5 for AI, T-70 for AI (and against other light vehicles) and SU-76 for AT and light artillery support.

And then the p4 comes out and rek the soviets because they have no tank to counter your p4. heavy tier 3 investment is a very heavy risk for the soviets.

Zis, Su76?
You can get both wayyyy before OKW P4 hits the field.