Personally I think it's fine, I find the Pershing vets up fast from my experience and has a high speed and acceleration for a heavy (with vet, never took notice when it was vetless), similar to a comet/panther reskin. Overall for the USF play style I think it's great.
Although not all heavy tanks are the same, I find some to be similar (IS2 and Tiger) and I like that the pershing is not another heavy reskin, another then a heavy medium. I think Relic designed it well
What do you guys think of it?
Pershing feedback
30 Oct 2015, 05:29 AM
#1
15 
Posts: 486 | Subs: 1
"Being a *** is the best thing you can ever do." - StephennJF 19/10/2013
30 Oct 2015, 05:32 AM
#2
4 
Posts: 474
Double shermans > Pershing.
It's fine if you want to have ez micro ez life. I rather have double e8s then this thing, higher chances of winning with them since their combined hp almost doubles that of a pershing.
It's fine if you want to have ez micro ez life. I rather have double e8s then this thing, higher chances of winning with them since their combined hp almost doubles that of a pershing.
30 Oct 2015, 05:33 AM
#4
Posts: 372
I like it, it's good good accuracy against infantry. Overall, it's a good infantry support tank, and good against most axis armor.
30 Oct 2015, 05:35 AM
#6
15 Posts: 486 | Subs: 1
Personally I like to mix it with a Sherman and have at least 2-3 RE squads for fast repairs on my Sherman's and pershing, rangers I liked but tbh I find them to be meh for my play style.
"Being a *** is the best thing you can ever do." - StephennJF 19/10/2013
30 Oct 2015, 05:40 AM
#7
1 
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
I found it very meh vs infantry, very good vs mediums and average vs other heavies(haven't had the chance or the balls to try circle strafing much, I tried once and the enemy just rotated the whole tank to keep up with my Pershing, not to mention it happened in Garbage time after we already won)
30 Oct 2015, 05:41 AM
#8
Posts: 2561
If anything they are a little too expensive.
Rangers are more costly then airborne, but a functionally weaker with 1 less man and no abilities. And pershing is priced like the other heavies, but isn't really as good.
Rangers are more costly then airborne, but a functionally weaker with 1 less man and no abilities. And pershing is priced like the other heavies, but isn't really as good.
30 Oct 2015, 05:44 AM
#9
Posts: 621
It oneshotted multiple pak crews XD
30 Oct 2015, 06:26 AM
#10
Posts: 334
Would it be better to mix it with Shermans or Jacksons in your opinions? I haven't tried it yet..
30 Oct 2015, 06:28 AM
#11
15 Posts: 486 | Subs: 1
Would it be better to mix it with Shermans or Jacksons in your opinions? I haven't tried it yet..
It can be, I just like Sherman for the multi-role ability they can do, While Jacksons are really only for AT, more or less
Shermans are great for massive pushes where you can use your infantry to kill AT guns and tanks to deal with both infantry and other tanks.
"Being a *** is the best thing you can ever do." - StephennJF 19/10/2013
30 Oct 2015, 06:53 AM
#12
Posts: 1653
Have to try it, but like I read it atm it's like a tiger with 800 hp
30 Oct 2015, 07:54 AM
#13
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
It's loosing vs Panther on long range quite sorely (bounce bounce). And I'm not sure if it should lose like that.
30 Oct 2015, 08:01 AM
#14
Posts: 210
The combined arms ability actually makes the Pershing shoot slower at Vet 3. It also uses MG42 sounds when it should be using .30 cal machine gun sounds.
Other than that, it costs too much fuel for what it does. It's worse than a Tiger, but costs the exact same as a Tiger. IMO the fuel cost should be reduced to around 205. Which is in between a Panther and Tiger.
The saddest part of it all, is that this Pershing is actually weaker/worse than the Pershing in vCoH. The Pershing in vCoH could consistently win against a Tiger and even take on 2 Panthers at once. This Pershing can barely take on 1 Tiger depending on RNG and will lose to 2 Panthers.
Other than that, it costs too much fuel for what it does. It's worse than a Tiger, but costs the exact same as a Tiger. IMO the fuel cost should be reduced to around 205. Which is in between a Panther and Tiger.
The saddest part of it all, is that this Pershing is actually weaker/worse than the Pershing in vCoH. The Pershing in vCoH could consistently win against a Tiger and even take on 2 Panthers at once. This Pershing can barely take on 1 Tiger depending on RNG and will lose to 2 Panthers.
30 Oct 2015, 08:17 AM
#15
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
The combined arms ability actually makes the Pershing shoot slower at Vet 3. It also uses MG42 sounds when it should be using .30 cal machine gun sounds.
Other than that, it costs too much fuel for what it does. It's worse than a Tiger, but costs the exact same as a Tiger. IMO the fuel cost should be reduced to around 205. Which is in between a Panther and Tiger.
The saddest part of it all, is that this Pershing is actually weaker/worse than the Pershing in vCoH. The Pershing in vCoH could consistently win against a Tiger and even take on 2 Panthers at once. This Pershing can barely take on 1 Tiger depending on RNG and will lose to 2 Panthers.
You expected a pershing to win against 2 Panthers ? do you know the price of 2 panthers (excluding tech cost) ?
30 Oct 2015, 08:20 AM
#16
Posts: 128
Pershing is a trifle underpowered.Its got 50-50 chance win against panther,and it got penertrated by ratenwerfer and pak too easily.Currently Pershing does not live up to its cost,a minor buff to bring it in line with other heavies like tiger or IS2 would be just fine.
It takes great skills to hide the fact that you have great skills
30 Oct 2015, 08:32 AM
#17
Posts: 210
You expected a pershing to win against 2 Panthers ? do you know the price of 2 panthers (excluding tech cost) ?
I can use that argument too. You realize, 2 Stugs completely stomp and deny a Pershing? Do you know the price of 2 Stugs?
You don't need Panthers to deal with a Pershing and I never expected or said the Pershing should dominate everything. It just doesn't perform for the cost.
30 Oct 2015, 08:42 AM
#18
Posts: 954
230fuel for a 800HP unit..... what a expensive-limited-to-one comet tank.....
The HP should go up to at least 960~1040 range, meanwhile the AOE for AI should be reduced a little....
The HP should go up to at least 960~1040 range, meanwhile the AOE for AI should be reduced a little....
First off all. Tripwire so gud, 10 ammo for a whole dead squad ? + sight.
Vehicle capture point can win games, blitzkrieg save a tank. Fair Deal i think
30 Oct 2015, 08:50 AM
#19
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
I can use that argument too. You realize, 2 Stugs completely stomp and deny a Pershing? Do you know the price of 2 Stugs?
You don't need Panthers to deal with a Pershing and I never expected or said the Pershing should dominate everything. It just doesn't perform for the cost.
As OST i dont expect my Tiger winning against 2 Su 85 / 2 Jacksons / 3 Su-76.
As SOV i dont expect my Is2 Winning against 2 Stugs / 2 Panthers.
As USF why should i expect a Pershing winning against 2 Stugs / 2 Panthers ?
2 Panthers are 980 MP and 350 Fuel
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 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
1231
Board Info
605 users are online:
605 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49060
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM