inefficiency of panthers
Posts: 83
Ostheer T3 on the other hand has more efficent units despite being cheaper. Only 80 fuel stug which only takes 8 pop (probably too efficent since Pak takes 9). I'd take two stugs over one panther anyday.
Panthers imo should get pop reduction to 14 like jacksons and fireflys and get a slight price decrease or give them a dual purpose gun.
Posts: 1653
I do keep in mind that the Comet (counter-part) is 185 fuel. The brits teching is just way cheaper than the ostheer teching. That's why I'd suggest to make it 160 fuel.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Why would you take 16 pop panther over 19 pop tiger? Or compare it to 16 pop pershing which has similiar at capabilities and is also godly against infantry
Don't know, maybe because you can get as many as you can afford? Sure, lets lower its pop, but lock it at 1 as well, up for that?
Panthers imo should get pop reduction to 14 like jacksons and fireflys and get a slight price decrease or give them a dual purpose gun.
So, which thing should go to 200? Armor, penetration or minus to its HP then?
Posts: 83
Don't know, maybe because you can get as many as you can afford? Sure, lets lower its pop, but lock it at 1 as well, up for that?
Thats right. From time to time I have this late game scenario where resources are not a problem but I still don't get them because spamming stugs and paks is more popcap efficent. I don't see any reason to lock them for one.
So, which thing should go to 200? Armor, penetration or minus to its HP then?
None. Firefly has better abilities and m36 has better gun. Also why shouldn't units which are more expensive to tech be more efficent?
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
None. Firefly has better abilities and m36 has better gun. Also why shouldn't units which are more expensive to tech be more efficent?
the rule only applies to allies, you see him walking around saying rifle must beat everyone because 280manpower but of course it doenst work the other way around
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
Thats right. From time to time I have this late game scenario where resources are not a problem but I still don't get them because spamming stugs and paks is more popcap efficent. I don't see any reason to lock them for one.
Using Stugs and Paks requires micro. Allies are all the time in that situation thanks to their inferior armor. Panthers on the other hand are no-brainers. They have a turret, high HP and armor value and are pretty fast.
None. Firefly has better abilities and m36 has better gun. Also why shouldn't units which are more expensive to tech be more efficent?
The Firefly is slow, goes down with 4 shots (1 shot less than the Panther) and has a massive reload of 9s. The Jackson has 320 hp less than the Panther (2 normal pak/tank shots). Both tanks are not as reliable in penetrating axis tanks as the Panther is in penning allied tanks (will pen most of the time). Oh, and btw, the Panther gets an armor and hp increase on vet2.
Posts: 174
It's probably the best non-doctrinal tank in the game except maybe the British heavies. The Panther's frontal armor is insane and consistently bounces shots from tank destroyers like Jacksons and SU-85s. It has very high health and if it's not the fastest tank in the game, it's one of the fastest, meaning you can dive with it to finish off enemy tanks (and it will penetrate all Allied armor every time except maybe Pershing and Churchhill) or do drive-bys on things like Ambulances and mobile artillery.
With its armor, health, and speed, plus smoke, I've seen Panthers get out of situations where an Allied tank would have been knocked out 3 times. I think a lot of what you're paying for is the survivability, and therefore its cost is justified IMO. It can go toe to toe with any Allied tank, not to mention the three MGs which can do solid DPS to infantry.
I could see maybe a very slight pop decrease but the unit certainly doesn't need any performance buffs.
Posts: 83
Using Stugs and Paks requires micro. Allies are all the time in that situation thanks to their inferior armor. Panthers on the other hand are no-brainers. They have a turret, high HP and armor value and are pretty fast.
Panthers are far from no-brainers. Building a panther literally means no brains. Why would you ever build a unit that is too expensive to tech, too expensive to build and even takes too much population
With its armor, health, and speed, plus smoke, I've seen Panthers get out of situations where an Allied tank would have been knocked out 3 times. I think a lot of what you're paying for is the survivability, and therefore its cost is justified IMO. It can go toe to toe with any Allied tank, not to mention the three MGs which can do solid DPS to infantry.
Just because panthers are survivable that dosen't make them good tanks. It's suprisingly hard to kill anything with them. They have slowihs rof and they miss from the move often. Panthers get usually pushed back by at guns before they can kill their targets.
Posts: 1930
Panthers are far from no-brainers. Building a panther literally means no brains. Why would you ever build a unit that is too expensive to tech, too expensive to build and even takes too much population
Just because panthers are survivable that dosen't make them good tanks. It's suprisingly hard to kill anything with them. They have slowihs rof and they miss from the move often. Panthers get usually pushed back by at guns before they can kill their targets.
the panther have an excellent combination of armor, hp, and speed that given it excellent survivability. It can outrun anything it can't outfight and outfight anything it can't outrun. It also have 50 range meaning it can out range anything it can't outfight.
If it have good dps on top of all those advantages it would be unbeatable.
yes, the panther is not perfect, and that's the point. If there's a unit that's truly perfect with no weakness then it would be overpowered.
Posts: 2470
Posts: 830
For ostheer it is too expensive, since their t4 tech cost is just straight up too high. For OKW it is fine where it is, with the new tech cost changes in the OKW revamp.
The only thing I would change is its accuracy on the move. It is meant to be a mobile and swift tank hunter, yet misses way to much on the move. A slight increase in movement accuracy and we're good.
Posts: 1653
I think the Panther is fine.
It's probably the best non-doctrinal tank in the game except maybe the British heavies. The Panther's frontal armor is insane and consistently bounces shots from tank destroyers like Jacksons and SU-85s. It has very high health and if it's not the fastest tank in the game, it's one of the fastest, meaning you can dive with it to finish off enemy tanks (and it will penetrate all Allied armor every time except maybe Pershing and Churchhill) or do drive-bys on things like Ambulances and mobile artillery.
With its armor, health, and speed, plus smoke, I've seen Panthers get out of situations where an Allied tank would have been knocked out 3 times. I think a lot of what you're paying for is the survivability, and therefore its cost is justified IMO. It can go toe to toe with any Allied tank, not to mention the three MGs which can do solid DPS to infantry.
I could see maybe a very slight pop decrease but the unit certainly doesn't need any performance buffs.
You hit the nail of the head right here. Survivability is the most important thing on this unit. Fine unit and no chamce required at all
Posts: 1604 | Subs: 3
On low level gaming this is complete the other case around - players have a hard time dealing with them. Especially in 3vs3+ games.
So buffing them would lead to whine, 'hurr relic are nazis' threads etc.
So if you want to buff the Panther that has to be done indirectly. In my opinion the price of Ostheer t4 needs to be decreased. That will make the panther less of a gamble to invest.
Also the panther still can go toe on toe with the Pershing and is2. And it's abilities to crush + pintle MG allow it to counter harass.
Posts: 2470
Front armor is very good, sides and rear[...]
NO SIDE ARMOUR
also, all tanks have shit rear armour compared to their frontal armour.
Posts: 1653
Posts: 830
NO SIDE ARMOUR
also, all tanks have shit rear armour compared to their frontal armour.
I know that the side is counted as front armor for half of the tank and rear for the other half. Which means that side armor isn't really something you want to show, since it has a 50% change of being rear armor hits, just as showing the rear does.
Posts: 2470
I know that the side is counted as front armor for half of the tank and rear for the other half. Which means that side armor isn't really something you want to show, since it has a 50% change of being rear armor hits, just as showing the rear does.
the please, don't mention it; it throws people who don't know that off. it's not necessarily 50% either, depends on the angle of the tank. plus you can always keep the rear half behind cover to mitigate it.
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
Posts: 482
Posts: 1705
MAYBE Remove blitz at vet 1 and add a ROF boost ability.Panther don't need blitz.
Overall main problem is not panther itself but rather the penetration of su-76 and the broken tulip .
Livestreams
324 | |||||
63 | |||||
15 | |||||
7 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
10 posts in the last week
29 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Bendiger
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM