Undo Soviet T3 before T4 requirement

~snip~

Yep, thank you for confirming to me that you basically attach labels to things without even reading up history as to why things are the way they are.

You didn't even answer my questions at all...

The Panther in WW2 for instance - was designed to fight tanks with its high velocity 75mm gun, and had heavy armour (thanks to hitler) and a turret - it was meant to be a medium tank but hitler somehow gave it the same amount of weight that the original Tiger would have had. It was very capable of destroying most tanks and even TDs in WW2 at range (if only it didn't break down en route).

So I find arguments like this is a tank hunter, therefore, all tanks die to it a bit historically ignorant.

History is filled with a lot of shades of grey. Giving clear classifications to everything that's there is not only silly but also counterproductive.

The problem was that Katyushas arrived too early (possibly 11 mins) and there was no real reason to go T3 before...

There now is a reason and the katy arrives at a more balanced time.


Gameplay before as soviets was stale, lets not go back to that. They are much more fun to play now.

Gameplay was stale because people rarely made T3/T4 and spammed T34/85s

It wasnt in an Ok spot at all... it arrived too early where weapon teams and infantry are key and sent the axis players armies running to the base before their first tank arrived.

Its area denail and squad wipe potential and range is far better than its counterpart the panzerwerfer.

You don't need a tank to kill Katyusha. Sneaky 222, Puma, or even a fallschrimjager call in on certain maps will do the trick. Flanking Shrek squads as well. The thing is the Katyusha is equally effective vs infantry at all stages of game, so you if are complaining that it raped your infantry units before you had a tank hard counter, well you already lost a lot of infantry and retaliating won't solve that problem.

Gameplay was stale because people rarely made T3/T4 and spammed T34/85s


You don't need a tank to kill Katyusha. Sneaky 222, Puma, or even a fallschrimjager call in on certain maps will do the trick. Flanking Shrek squads as well. The thing is the Katyusha is equally effective vs infantry at all stages of game, so you if are complaining that it raped your infantry units before you had a tank hard counter, well you already lost a lot of infantry and retaliating won't solve that problem.

depends on the map as to what counters you have against it... Its highly unlikely any decent player will leave a katyusha in a position to be killed by a "sneaky shrek squad"

12 min Katy is too early, game its fine as it is.

Ive stopped replying to AAA because his posts are purely nonsensical .

The Katyusha has a lot of RANGE, you don't move it to the very front of the line. It is an artillery piece that is meant to be used behind the line. The OKW Walking Stuka dies to anything with a cannon too and it costs a ton....

i know both the walking stuka and the katyusha are meant to be behind enemy lines BUT the walking stuka happens to wipe more often then a katyusha at long range and also survive 1 tank shots(320hp) unlike the katyusha(160),(both units are ok just made a little comparison).
anyways this new tech tree just made T4 useless for what it offers(even if you need to tech there late game just to survive)

Yep, thank you for confirming to me that you basically attach labels to things without even reading up history as to why things are the way they are.

You didn't even answer my questions at all...

The Panther in WW2 for instance - was designed to fight tanks with its high velocity 75mm gun, and had heavy armour (thanks to hitler) and a turret - it was meant to be a medium tank but hitler somehow gave it the same amount of weight that the original Tiger would have had. It was very capable of destroying most tanks and even TDs in WW2 at range (if only it didn't break down en route).

So I find arguments like this is a tank hunter, therefore, all tanks die to it a bit historically ignorant.

History is filled with a lot of shades of grey. Giving clear classifications to everything that's there is not only silly but also counterproductive.

no thank you for confirming your an AXIS fanboy who doesnt understand unit roles and counters,i know what those units do but you clearly dont know and neither wish to understand.

but i see your a fun of supreme commander,clearly you wish allied players to either spent more resources on tank destroyers or simple bring their high tect units,the only problem here is that the soviet army in coh 2 doesnt have SU-100s nor BS-3 AT-GUNs nor IS-3s and even units that should destroy it with your logic(IS-2s,ISU-152)you dont even bother mentioning their awful performance at AT.

since we cant make it possible for the panther to face SU-100 tank destroyers,or BS-3 AT-GUNS and clearly you dont want IS-2s and ISU-152s buffed at AT we cant go with your logic(the AXIS fanboys logic).

now the other think you wish (spam expencive tank destroyers like the su-85,and jackson to counter your panther) cant happend for the 2 reasons below

1)the soviet and the american player dont magically gain more resources
2)it goes against the tank destroyer's role

one last thing HISTORICALLY the PANTHER had LOW SIDE ARMOR and it was one of its weaknesses it had during WW2 and vCOH,in COH 2 however side armor doesnt exist.... this makes the panther unrealistically powerful and OP(thats why you dont flank panthers in COH 2 unless its alone)

P.S:i answered everything you asked but you didnt even bothered reading

Invisied post 120 for flaming another user.

i know both the walking stuka and the katyusha are meant to be behind enemy lines BUT the walking stuka happens to wipe more often then a katyusha at long range and also survive 1 tank shots(320hp) unlike the katyusha(160),(both units are ok just made a little comparison).
anyways this new tech tree just made T4 useless for what it offers(even if you need to tech there late game just to survive)

if we dont count teching then walking stuka cost like 2 catty (fuel penalty)

SO i think their both fine

if we dont count teching then walking stuka cost like 2 catty (fuel penalty)

SO i think their both fine

i said that both units are fine i just made a comparison

i know both the walking stuka and the katyusha are meant to be behind enemy lines BUT the walking stuka happens to wipe more often then a katyusha at long range and also survive 1 tank shots(320hp) unlike the katyusha(160),(both units are ok just made a little comparison).
anyways this new tech tree just made T4 useless for what it offers(even if you need to tech there late game just to survive)

I disagree, T4 is fine and better for team games, where mass SU76s might not get you the best results. The Katyusha fires more shots and fires faster than the W-Stuka. The W-Stuka is better for building demolition and hitting that one emplacement that is greefing you and the Katyusha is better for area denial and shaking up larger defensive areas and has a shorter timer in between shots. Plus the new Vet 1 ability is very similar to the W-Stuka's normal fire. On the whole I find Katyushas pretty on par with W-Stukas and remember every unit's performance is still tied to player skill. For the cost though, I love getting Katyushas even in the new teching system.

revert the changes to the soviet tech.

give the player a discount on t3/t4 once he's built either of them

t34 85 require both t3 and t4 built to use.

this way it give an incentive to fully tech and also provide the soviet a choice between either building first. this also delay the quad,t70, and the su76

no thank you for confirming your an AXIS fanboy who doesnt understand unit roles and counters,i know what those units do but you clearly dont know and neither wish to understand.

but i see your a fun of supreme commander,clearly you wish allied players to either spent more resources on tank destroyers or simple bring their high tect units,the only problem here is that the soviet army in coh 2 doesnt have SU-100s nor BS-3 AT-GUNs nor IS-3s and even units that should destroy it with your logic(IS-2s,ISU-152)you dont even bother mentioning their awful performance at AT.

since we cant make it possible for the panther to face SU-100 tank destroyers,or BS-3 AT-GUNS and clearly you dont want IS-2s and ISU-152s buffed at AT we cant go with your logic(the AXIS fanboys logic).

now the other think you wish (spam expencive tank destroyers like the su-85,and jackson to counter your panther) cant happend for the 2 reasons below

1)the soviet and the american player dont magically gain more resources
2)it goes against the tank destroyer's role

one last thing HISTORICALLY the PANTHER had LOW SIDE ARMOR and it was one of its weaknesses it had during WW2 and vCOH,in COH 2 however side armor doesnt exist.... this makes the panther unrealistically powerful and OP(thats why you dont flank panthers in COH 2 unless its alone)

P.S:i answered everything you asked but you didnt even bothered reading

No problems with SU-85 or Jackson whatsoever, they performed well against tanks like Panthers and Tigers in the war so they should perform well in the game (Jackson's less but the 90mm gun did perform well). And if I always needed a Jackson's in 1v1s or 2v2s I can always build one.

About that SU-76.....

And no you didn't answer my question, you copypasta definitions without knowing the answers to my questions. There's a difference.

I'd say IS-2 and ISU can fight off Panthers, maybe not in a vacuum but then again by the time you get to endgame, you rarely see units fighting in a vacuum. Same goes for the Tiger.

As for Panther side armour... Well of course it's a lot weaker than the frontal sloped armour, that's what the percentage chance is for, but ATM SU-76 penning... I don't know, 40% of the time is a bit too high.

Of course, despite what my playercard says, you're going to keep at it that I'm an axis fanboy despite my most played faction being Soviets. So keep up with the attempt at ad hominem, I'm sure it'll take you many places.