Reduce SU-76 range to 50.
Equalize T-34-76 scatter values with those of the M4A3 (unless they're already equal), if so, increase the hull and co-axial MGs' incremental accuracy to 1.05 (unless they already have an incremental accuracy mod that's equal or higher than that) or 1.1 (unless, again, it's already at/near 1.1).
This makes the hull and co-ax MGs more able to engage mass infantry but doesn't make them insta-death lazors against single squads or snipers or whatevah.
T-34/76 - just little fix
20 Oct 2015, 15:16 PM
#21
Posts: 344
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
20 Oct 2015, 15:18 PM
#22
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
What does SU-76 have to do with T34/76 being bad?
They don't share even remotely similar role-or even tier.
That makes as much sense as buffing Tiger by reducing ele range to 60 and armor to 200.
They don't share even remotely similar role-or even tier.
That makes as much sense as buffing Tiger by reducing ele range to 60 and armor to 200.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
20 Oct 2015, 15:19 PM
#23
Posts: 76
not a good idea because if it come earlier and cheaper allied fanboys will just spam t34 blob into su76 blob and then good night
20 Oct 2015, 15:33 PM
#24
Posts: 2561
What does SU-76 have to do with T34/76 being bad?The SU-76 is why players aren't using T4 units at all.
They don't share even remotely similar role-or even tier.
That makes as much sense as buffing Tiger by reducing ele range to 60 and armor to 200.
Between the manpower heavy cost of getting T-34s out and the SU-76's ability to deal with everything from P4's to Tigers. Players are just choosing to forgo T4 all together.
20 Oct 2015, 15:34 PM
#25
Posts: 344
The SU-76 is why players aren't using T4 units at all.
Between the manpower heavy cost of getting T-34s out and the SU-76's ability to deal with everything from P4's to Tigers. Players are just choosing to forgo T4 all together.
@Katikof, hence me proposing a range nerf on the SU-76, since right now it's literally a ZiS on Kettenkrad treads.
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
20 Oct 2015, 15:45 PM
#26
Posts: 1484
I think the price is fine for the Tank, the performance is still not attractive.
 | Playercard of WingZero | |||||||||||||||
|
20 Oct 2015, 15:46 PM
#27
Posts: 2561
Range nerf is bad idea. It doesn't have the mobility or health to survive being that close like the M-10 or the damage like the Stug. I think a pen nerf would be better. That way it would let players to still have the AT they need if they go for T1 and stay in the game vs T3 armor, but make them vulnerable to heavier units without T4 support and be incentivised to tech up instead of spamming SU-76s all game.
@Katikof, hence me proposing a range nerf on the SU-76, since right now it's literally a ZiS on Kettenkrad treads.
20 Oct 2015, 16:01 PM
#28
Posts: 2561
I think the price is fine for the Tank, the performance is still not attractive.It performs fine for it's fuel cost, but manpower cost is still high for what you get.
The way I see it 1 T-34 is worth 2/3 of the other generalist mediums. But it's mapower is still around 8/10 of a normal medium. And between that and the teching costs. Getting them out in the numbers you need and maintaining a decent infantry force isn't really viable.
So relic has 2 options:
1. Lower manpower costs to better fit it's current exposable and spammable intent.
or
2. Buff it's performance and raise it's cost to be more similar to the other generalist mediums.
Any middle ground between these two will leave the T-34 in a state where it has no real advantage.
I also think ram can use a slight buff, but that isn't really going to solve the problem on it's own.
20 Oct 2015, 16:02 PM
#29
Posts: 344
What's the current MP cost on the T-34 atm?
Pocketsize: "I can't wait till they add british to CoH: O; the extreme forces leveled by the new imbalances will create a black hole around the servers that destroys half of Canada."
20 Oct 2015, 16:03 PM
#30
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
The SU-76 is why players aren't using T4 units at all.
Between the manpower heavy cost of getting T-34s out and the SU-76's ability to deal with everything from P4's to Tigers. Players are just choosing to forgo T4 all together.
I'm quite sure the reason why players aren't going for T4 is that units there perform worst in game of their respectable categories, T34 being worst med tank, SU-85 while not being bad by itself, is outclassed by any other TD in the game(and no, nerfing other TDs, especially other soviet TDs because of it is wrong, you buff units that underperform, not nerf the ones that are fine) and katy being stealth nerfed is completely useless unless paired and vetted.
Nothing in T4 performs up to the cost-this is why no one is using it unless they go for T34/85.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
20 Oct 2015, 16:07 PM
#31
Posts: 2561
What's the current MP cost on the T-34 atm?I think either 290 or 300. With other mediums being around the 340 area.
20 Oct 2015, 16:13 PM
#32
Posts: 275 | Subs: 1
The SU-76 is why players aren't using T4 units at all.
Wrong. The SU-76 is why players aren't using SU-85 at all.
Victory needs no explanation, defeat allows none
20 Oct 2015, 16:14 PM
#33
Posts: 2561
The SU-76 is most certainly not fine. It's a cheap vehicle available in the light vehicle phase of the game that can be spammed indefinitely even to take on late game heavies. And even has AI capabilities on top of this. With a unit this great it's obvious why so many players are avoiding T4.
I'm quite sure the reason why players aren't going for T4 is that units there perform worst in game of their respectable categories, T34 being worst med tank, SU-85 while not being bad by itself, is outclassed by any other TD in the game(and no, nerfing other TDs, especially other soviet TDs because of it is wrong, you buff units that underperform, not nerf the ones that are fine) and katy being stealth nerfed is completely useless unless paired and vetted.
Nothing in T4 performs up to the cost-this is why no one is using it unless they go for T34/85.
T4 has a few problems making it unenticing in general. But the current perfomance of the SU-76 only makes the problem worse, giving the soviets no reason to ever need to tech up.
20 Oct 2015, 16:37 PM
#34
Posts: 170
The SU-76 is most certainly not fine. It's a cheap vehicle available in the light vehicle phase of the game that can be spammed indefinitely even to take on late game heavies. And even has AI capabilities on top of this. With a unit this great it's obvious why so many players are avoiding T4.
T4 has a few problems making it unenticing in general. But the current perfomance of the SU-76 only makes the problem worse, giving the soviets no reason to ever need to tech up.
SU-76 is very fragile and vulnerable to flanks, making it bad in the lategame where there is an abundance of mediums. But yes, it needs a slight pen reduction.
T4 and its units really needs to cost less manpower. MP is the constraining factor about it, not fuel, and that's why it is terrible, you are investing MP in an opportunity to make frankly unnecessary units for even more MP. It doesn't leave a place for infantry, and a t4-heavy vehicle army (basically a lot of t34s) is subpar at best.
20 Oct 2015, 16:49 PM
#35
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
I think either 290 or 300. With other mediums being around the 340 area.
It's 310.
| Playercard of RedT3rror | |||||||||||||||
|
20 Oct 2015, 16:54 PM
#36
Posts: 2561
Exactly!
SU-76 is very fragile and vulnerable to flanks, making it bad in the lategame where there is an abundance of mediums. But yes, it needs a slight pen reduction.
T4 and its units really needs to cost less manpower. MP is the constraining factor about it, not fuel, and that's why it is terrible, you are investing MP in an opportunity to make frankly unnecessary units for even more MP. It doesn't leave a place for infantry, and a t4-heavy vehicle army (basically a lot of t34s) is subpar at best.
20 Oct 2015, 16:55 PM
#37
Posts: 2561
Yeah thanks.
It's 310.
20 Oct 2015, 17:01 PM
#38
Posts: 1487
Sure, as long as it will be as good as ostheer P4 and not better not even by the smallest margin. Or cheaper.
thats the axis balance. 12 popcap axis p4 with cheating abilities must be equal to 16 popcap 3485 with no ability of any use.
| Playercard of eqdw | |||||||||||||||||||
|
SteamId is set to private for user id aaa. Set it to public if you want to link to your playercard via your user id.
20 Oct 2015, 17:18 PM
#39
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I changed my mind, I want to see aaa and johhnyb locked for the night in the same room with a rusted spoon in the middle of it 
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
21 Oct 2015, 16:39 PM
#40
Posts: 344
@Katikof, hence me proposing a range nerf on the SU-76, since right now it's literally a ZiS on Kettenkrad treads.
Because SU-76 it is a ZiS-3 on a T-70 hull.
Design of the SU-76 began in November 1942, when the State Defense Committee ordered the construction of infantry support self-propelled guns armed with the ZiS-3 76.2 mm anti-tank gun and the M-30 122 mm howitzer. The T-70 chassis was chosen for mounting the ZiS-3 gun, and was lengthened, adding one road wheel per side, to facilitate better gun mounting.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
35 | ||
|
|
|
|
29 | ||
|
|
|
|
20 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
14 | ||
|
|
|
|
10 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.611220.735+5
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
692 users are online:
692 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49118
Welcome our newest member, Ava Sofia
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Ava Sofia
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM