Login

russian armor

Jagdtiger Balance for 3v3+

14 Apr 2016, 15:52 PM
#61
avatar of Smiling Tiger

Posts: 207



You don't seem to be familiar with the HE ability at Vet1. It has a 125 range and it bascially counters it's counter: AT guns.


So what do you have to say about the comets phosphorus ability that also counters at guns except less obviously because it doesn't make a lot of noise an ability which it shoudnt need because it is much faster and less expensive and just because of the fact that it is a medium tank and medium tanks shouldn't be able to counter at guns while heavies actually have trouble moving around them and could actually use an anti at gun ability.
14 Apr 2016, 15:55 PM
#62
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276



So what do you have to say about the comets phosphorus ability that also counters at guns except less obviously because it doesn't make a lot of noise an ability which it shoudnt need because it is much faster and less expensive and just because of the fact that it is a medium tank and medium tanks shouldn't be able to counter at guns while heavies actually have trouble moving around them and could actually use an anti at gun ability.


Your comparison is not valid, its not a heavy tanks with long range and piercing shot. You have to risk the unit to fire the WP rounds. If the comet was a copy of the panther than your statement would be true but the frontal armor of the comet as well as the damage/pen is overall lower than the panther and as such has better AI.

If you compared the ISU it would makes sense but even then you have to switch rounds and the range is at 70 not 85.

EDIT: Forgot to say WP rounds are also buggy meaning you cant move your tank while trying to fire them/give move orders or its cancelled.
14 Apr 2016, 16:01 PM
#63
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2



So what do you have to say about the comets phosphorus ability that also counters at guns except less obviously because it doesn't make a lot of noise an ability which it shoudnt need because it is much faster and less expensive and just because of the fact that it is a medium tank and medium tanks shouldn't be able to counter at guns while heavies actually have trouble moving around them and could actually use an anti at gun ability.


Are you seriously trying to compare an almost non-lethal special ability (which is bugged on top of that) of a generalist medium , with an anti-infantry ability of a heavy tank destroyer?


dude you know the smallest terrain elevetion make useless this ability right ?


It's not very hard to find elevated ground for your Jagdtiger, especially with 125 range, is it? I also remember a certain soviet vehicle suffering extremely from this particular issue.
14 Apr 2016, 16:07 PM
#64
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

Who cares, horde of stugs with command p4 (or goold old jp4+cp) far better and factions are not symmetrical. JT could be a problem, but it should be a problem, allies already have far superior midgame and free map control light vehicles, why axis should not have superior lategame?

And saying "well he have AI and AT and JT on top of it coz team" is BS, honestly. You also have team, you know, and hid volks (or volks and some pzfusiliers) cant fight upgraded rifle blobs supported by tanks and rocket arty really well, so i dont see missed tradeoffs with your infantry being able to walk over him and your or yourd teammates rocket arty kill or force off (usually kill with following push) all this JT "op" supoport in few clicks.

Also axis ATs still losing to eqal allied ATs in 4v4 on 100% basis in a games which are over before 15cp mark, untill they are played on ridcolous maps.
14 Apr 2016, 16:28 PM
#65
avatar of RedT3rror

Posts: 747 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Apr 2016, 16:07 PMJadame!
Who cares, horde of stugs far better and factions are not symmetrical. JT could be a problem, but it should be a problem, allies already have far superior midgame, why axis should not have superior lategame?

And saying "well he have AI and AT and JT on top of it coz team" is BS, honestly. You also have team, you know, and volks cant fight upgraded rifle blobs really well, so i dont see missed tradeoffs with your infantry being able to walk over him.

Also axis ATs still losing to eqal allied ATs in 4v4 on 100% basis.


The idea of losing because you ran out of time and entered the lategame, or having to survive a hard midgame to have a secured victory is outright stupid.

Having an imba unit with it's performance dependant on the map and the game progression, in order to justify underperformance in other sections also stupid. Imbalance on one side doesn't justify imbalance on the other side.

If you want to achieve proper balance it's better to find out about what/where and when certain factions/units are in an unsuitable position. Your way of thinking is what causes the up and down of a faction's performance with the patches.

I suggest you play pre-british allied factions (who haven't changed much) without pay2win commanders for once, in order to remember.
14 Apr 2016, 16:38 PM
#66
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

The idea of losing because you ran out of time and entered the lategame, or having to survive a hard midgame to have a secured victory is outright stupid.


If allies surviving hard midgame with amount of advantages they have, they should have done lots of mistakes and should pay for it.

Having an imba unit with it's performance dependant on the map and the game progression in order to also stupid. Imbalance on one side doesn't justify imbalance on the other side.


Thats kinda how coh works from my expirience, and again, you are advocating for nerf on tremendously disadvantaged side overplaying hard to deal unit to "impossible to win against unit". And if we create a list of what is broken, unfun to play or badly designed, we can just remove everything which makes coh coh like emplacements, okw vet 5, frps, indirect fire, and on and on.

I suggest you play allied factions without pay2win commanders for once. Ironically you seem to have forgotten pre-brittish allies in 4v4.


Pfft, yeah i sure forgot uncounterable maximspam followed by 3 quads on steppes by 6 minutes, which could kill ENTIRE axis team, if somehow failed followed by easy full mass retreat wipes on katy precision barrages with katys being protected by 999 cheap mines from 20minutes of free map controll and atg walls which could not be killed by axis rocket arty unless not moved from stuka barrages (and even then they probably would not die or would be immediately recrewed by engies and reinforced from nearest quad). Poor allies, totally need p2w commanders to win (which, btw, ironiaclly only they are getting).
14 Apr 2016, 16:53 PM
#67
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Apr 2016, 16:07 PMJadame!


Also axis ATs still losing to eqal allied ATs in 4v4 on 100% basis in a games which are over before 15cp mark, untill they are played on ridcolous maps.


In my point:

A) It depends a lot of which map, and position( like north/south- mix/ unmixed)
B) Acutally in automatch its easier to win with axis (especially with okw- after that brits comes)

C) Ofc thats the point of coh2. Early is axis( kübel, sturmpio and mg42) earlymid to midgame is allies with light vehicle. Mid-endgame allies(kata, calli, kv8, su85, firefly)

AND SUPERLATEGAME: Axis side. It was allready in coh1 the same.

SO if you play allies play a perfect midgame and get 3 vps and you win. Or make enough Manpowerbleed about inf killing. So Axis have to decide to invest their manpower in heavy tanks or inf.

Its not the task for allies to win lategame because of destroying enemies base or vehicle.

So JT is not OP and not UP. It cames late, get shocked very fast and deals nothing vs inf. Ofc you can win games because of JT-ELE. But then you did all fine as axis to survive until that.
14 Apr 2016, 17:00 PM
#68
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

Well panther, that's exactly my point, and i never argued with axis being ez in automatch (especially OKW, they have so much possibilities to influence game flow). But then again, it all comes down to random of maps and players and factions and not to JT.
14 Apr 2016, 17:02 PM
#69
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484

I think the best solution for the Jagd is to increase the pop cap.
14 Apr 2016, 17:07 PM
#70
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36

I think the best solution for the Jagd is to increase the pop cap.


No. Just let the JT like he is atm. Its fine. I can promise you 1 Jadgtpanzer IV and KT are 1000% time better

14 Apr 2016, 17:23 PM
#71
avatar of DAZ187

Posts: 466

have to admit a JT is really a headache :guyokay:
14 Apr 2016, 19:40 PM
#72
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1



No. Just let the JT like he is atm. Its fine. I can promise you 1 Jadgtpanzer IV and KT are 1000% time better



This is partially because the JPIV gets invincibility at vet 1. But even so, JPIV has to expose itself to fire (although on briefly) to deal with opponents tanks, JT does not.

The issue here is not the JT balance in 1v1 and smaller game modes for which I find its drawback sufficient. Even in larger game modes I think it a reasonable unit at some level, but its ability to deal with Allied units in a way that exposes it to little to no counterplay I find troubling. The changes that have been suggested do not in any way affect the performance, other than to give the 17pdr a chance to fire at it, but instead make it more of a luxury item instead of a replaceable TD.
14 Apr 2016, 19:46 PM
#73
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



This is partially because the JPIV gets invincibility at vet 1. But even so, JPIV has to expose itself to fire (although on briefly) to deal with opponents tanks, JT does not.

The issue here is not the JT balance in 1v1 and smaller game modes for which I find its drawback sufficient. Even in larger game modes I think it a reasonable unit at some level, but its ability to deal with Allied units in a way that exposes it to little to no counterplay I find troubling. The changes that have been suggested do not in any way affect the performance, other than to give the 17pdr a chance to fire at it, but instead make it more of a luxury item instead of a replaceable TD.

what do you want ?
14 Apr 2016, 20:51 PM
#74
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



The definitive counterplay.

It can't maneuver very easily when you block it's line of sight with smoke. He's stuck either trying to attack ground or moving around the smoke. The former is inaccurate and the latter is time consuming and likely to put him out of position.

14 Apr 2016, 21:18 PM
#75
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



The definitive counterplay.

It can't maneuver very easily when you block it's line of sight with smoke. He's stuck either trying to attack ground or moving around the smoke. The former is inaccurate and the latter is time consuming and likely to put him out of position.


and look ally tank have smoke on target i use it always when i flank
some people are too lazy
15 Apr 2016, 03:12 AM
#76
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2



You don't seem to be familiar with the HE ability at Vet1. It has a 125 range and it bascially counters it's counter: AT guns.


125 range? i wonder why 125. oh wait. was it from during the WFA beta when ISU and ELE had 100 range? and relic forgot about it?

nah. no way. 125 range must be intentional.
15 Apr 2016, 03:19 AM
#77
avatar of Click

Posts: 139

People are actually complaining about Jagdtiger now?
15 Apr 2016, 08:32 AM
#78
avatar of RiCE

Posts: 284

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Apr 2016, 15:49 PMMittens




While players complementing one another is a normal start, it doesn't take into effect that with the currant abilities the Jag is over preforming due to its engine upgrade (negating its slower speed), long range, HE rounds, and piercing shot. It is effectively an arty unit as it can bypass normal terrain issues other than sitting in the bottom of the hill on steppes and firing up. The unit NEEDS a range reduction at best to match that of other mobile heavy tanks at 70. The 85 range is over kill and should be toned down to allow for more counter play.

The piercing shot as I state earlier needs to be removed, units such as pack 43 should not be able to avoid terrain Collision due to some special rounds they get, simply not fair and not practical for gameplay balance.


Currently the only counter to jag tiger is to effectively "hurl" cheap tank at the unit making it as Imageless bean pointed out "impossible" to effectively trade fairly. OKW will always come out on top with its cost effectiveness.
This doesn't mean the stun is ok, it’s a dumb mechanics that only lasts for 2.5 seconds and only reduces its speed. As others have pointed out a HP reduction is a solid idea as the armor value for it is rather high in comparison to ele even.

TLDR: Match stats with ele (Basically), remove cheese abilities.


I understand your point, but i dont think these abilities would be cheese. I think if their stats would be OP, the tank would be OP in 1v1 or 2v2 aswell. But its not.. and even this thread complain about larger game modes and a scenario where JT is covered by other players.

I dont think a decreased range would open new counter methods. Simply because you could not put up a fight with smaller TDs against an 500+ frontal armor even if you have the same range.

Removing the "penetrating shot" is an option, but again, if it would be OP, it would be OP in smaller maps.

You counter the JT in 3v3 the same way as you do it in 1v1... if there is another player around, you have to push him back first, with your allies. I dont want to get into exact scenarios, but just for the sake of an example:
If there is a JT covered with infantry, mobile arty (Katy or Calliope) and / or plain AI infantry can push them back, then you can roll in and circle jerk the JT. Mark target + bombing is still a strong combo as it is against Ele. Bazooka blob is ALWAYS underestimated. People think it cannot penetrate, it has no accuracy and unable to deal damage. Somehow i have been countering Panthers successfully with bazookas.

These are the methods i use against JT. Non of these are related with sight, piercing shots, etc... Personally i think JTs fuel price should be increased a bit and manpower price decreased a bit, and its HP lowered a bit, because it wears a concrete sarcophagus for frontal armor.

TL;DR:
Increase fuel price, decrease manpower price, decrease HP
Leave the abilities alone ;)
15 Apr 2016, 11:08 AM
#79
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

I think that the main reason I hate playing against such types of units is that it turns games into campfests (pretty much like emplacement spam):
- If the opponent is bad, the allied team NEEDS to have UKF in the roster to push back; but they can win.
- If the opponent is good, it's an autolose for the allied team. However, the game will probably end fast, and there's no need to suffer.
- If the opponent is not good, but decent enough not to throw, the game will turn into a stall, and the allied team will probably, eventually, lose; but only after 20 minutes of pointless struggle.

Now, the reason I'm thinking that talking about a direct nerf to the JT might be too soon, is that we don't know what Relic's plan with the OKW plan is (if any). Any change in the following areas will severely impact OKW's ability to support the JT:
- Something involving Volks with schrecks
- Forward retreat points
- Post-revamp, all the OKW super-heavies; Sturmtiger, Command Panther etc (i.e., apart from KT) are underpriced. Hopefully, Relic will realise this and come up with a more thorough solution.

Also, the JP4 needs a bugfix (aka Relic should just copy-paste what Miragefla did it his mod).

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Apr 2016, 16:38 PMJadame!

If allies surviving hard midgame with amount of advantages they have, they should have done lots of mistakes and should pay for it.


1. Having different power levels at different stages in the game is a design choice, and it's not necessarily bad. Having all factions have equal opportunities at all stages in the game might make the game fair, but it might also make the game stall and make it boring. (if everyone is equal, people will not risk making offensive plays).

2. However, it's one thing giving factions advantages at different stages in the game, and it's an entirely different thing giving some faction a definitive end-game advantage (when they win the game once they attain that advantage). Ideally all factions should converge to the same power-level by minute X. That way all factions have equal opportunities to screw up and lose their advantage.

3. If one faction is destined to have the end-game advantage, why don't the vast majority of these doctrines of that faction behave the same way?

The final question is the most crucial one. Having a commander that (1) performs significantly better than the other commanders and (2) takes significantly less effort to use than other commanders/abilities (e.g., using the Command Panther requires at least SOME degree of micro) means that you have, pretty much, an auto-pick commander. This makes the game a bit predictable for both sides.
15 Apr 2016, 11:22 AM
#80
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

^ under priced what ? They up the the price of everything apart for ST
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

989 users are online: 1 member and 988 guests
Brick Top
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50007
Welcome our newest member, Helzer96
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM