Login

russian armor

[may preview] cromwell's size nerf

19 May 2016, 22:19 PM
#1
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

okay, the crush ability need a nerf/removal, but combining it with the size nerf is just too much. First of all, it's a double nerf to remove the crush and nerf its size at the same time.

Most people who are decent with the cromwell can crush infantry with it. Removing the capability to crush, however justified, is already still a huge nerf to the unit.

The cromwell's small size is one of the main reason why it has good scalability into late game, unlike the sherman. The cromwell's small size and speed give it survivability against the multitude of high penetration weapon possessed by the axis. The cromwell can dodge instead of trying to "tank" the axis doom cannon.

Cromwell's better survivability make it a better investment compared to the sherman's better firepower. Removing the cromwell's small size just turn it into a mediocre tank like the sherman.

Even the panzer4's main draw is really its survivability. It has higher armor against the generally weaker allied anti-tank.

in my other thread
( https://www.coh2.org/topic/52976/week-3-may-preview-alternative-to-crush-removal/page/1#post_id535347)

I propose nerfing the cromwell's chassis rotation rate as a nerf to infantry crush. It would also result into a slight nerf to mobility as well.
19 May 2016, 22:35 PM
#2
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1



Cromwell's better survivability make it a better investment compared to the sherman's better firepower. Removing the cromwell's small size just turn it into a mediocre tank like the sherman.


Ask youself why Brits should have best stock medium tank in the game for the cheapest price at the same time? Cromwell is even better then PIV (which is more expensive), and have insane flanking capabilities and insane speed with vet.

Sure we can bring target size back, with cost increase or left it with new target size for same 110 fuel and it still well best medium in the game.

Also "weaker" Allies AT myth is only applyable to US AT gun. Both zis and brits AT gun and hell even zooks, can finish PIV just as quicly as PaK can finish cromwell.
19 May 2016, 22:39 PM
#3
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



Ask youself why Brits should have best stock medium tank in the game for the cheapest price at the same time? Cromwell is even better then PIV (which is more expensive), and have insane flanking capabilities and insane speed with vet.

Sure we can bring target size back, with cost increase or left it with new target size for same 110 fuel and it still well best medium in the game.


the insane crush ability is one of the reason why the cromwell is one of the best medium tank in the game. Nearly anyone who use the cromwell abuse the crush. Nerfing the crush ability is going to be a huge and jusified nerf to the cromwell.
19 May 2016, 22:43 PM
#4
avatar of Svanh

Posts: 181

I ran the numbers in another thread:

I think the crushing change is net good. It'll allow Relic to balance tanks against infantry without having to take into account their mobility and turning rate.

Let's look at the numbers of the other Cromwell nerf:

WeaponAccuracy (N/M/F)
AT gun0.06/0.05/0.04
Ost Panzerschreck0.069/0.052/0.028
OKW Panzerschreck0.05/0.0375/0.025








WeaponSize 18Size 23
AT gun hit chance (N/M/F)100%/90%/72%100%/100%/92%
Expected AT gun shots to kill (N/M/F)4/4.44/5.564/4/4.35

Ost Panzerschreck hit chance (N/M/F)
100%/93.6%/50.04%100%/100%/64.4%
Expected Ost Panzerschreck shots to kill (N/M/F)6/6.41/11.906/6/9.32
OKW Panzerschreck hit chance (N/M/F)90%/67.5%/45%100%/86.25%/57.5%
Expected OKW Panzerschreck shots to kill (N/M/F)6.67/8.89/13.336/6.96/10.43


The effect of the target size change is mostly in the Cromwell's ability to kite and make hit-and-run attacks. It does seem to be a little much given the sizes of comparable tanks (20-22) and that the Centaur is also size 18.

Looking at the stats, I think the OKW Panzerschreck might need an accuracy buff now it's on Sturmpioneers.
20 May 2016, 05:45 AM
#5
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

The Cromwell's size is also historically accurate compared to the Sherman's tall stature, also, I don't think their guns have much of a difference besides the Sherman's round switching capabilities.
20 May 2016, 06:57 AM
#6
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Ask youself why Brits should have best stock medium tank in the game for the cheapest price at the same time?

"Because they have less stock unit options then any other army" sounds like an answer to me.

Cromwell is even better then PIV (which is more expensive), and have insane flanking capabilities and insane speed with vet.

And P4 gets insane armor with vet and ability that allows it to warp away while shrinking its size at the same time(yes, blitz makes you harder to hit as well).

Sure we can bring target size back, with cost increase or left it with new target size for same 110 fuel and it still well best medium in the game.

Or leave it as it is, because while the tank is great in comparison to others, it needs to be in the context of the army its in.
Main and only problem with it was crush and it was addressed.

Also "weaker" Allies AT myth is only applyable to US AT gun. Both zis and brits AT gun and hell even zooks, can finish PIV just as quicly as PaK can finish cromwell.

You do realize that brit 6 pounder is just copy of PaK40 and RoF is also important thing for AT guns and ZiS is last here?

Or should we also address StuG target size and normalize it with SU-85, because there is no reason not to?
20 May 2016, 06:57 AM
#7
avatar of NEVEC

Posts: 708 | Subs: 1

No longer cromwell can kill infantry, gg.
20 May 2016, 07:13 AM
#8
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

The Cromwell's size is also historically accurate compared to the Sherman's tall stature, also, I don't think their guns have much of a difference besides the Sherman's round switching capabilities.


the sherman gun is more accurate on the move and the HE rounds does give the sherman better firepower against infantry.

penetration wise, they are about the same.
20 May 2016, 07:25 AM
#9
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2



the sherman gun is more accurate on the move and the HE rounds does give the sherman better firepower against infantry.

penetration wise, they are about the same.


Oh right, I forgot about the gyroscopes mounted on the USF vehicles, or whatever that was.

But yeah, the size nerf is a tad too much if you ask me.
20 May 2016, 09:11 AM
#10
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

The size just got increased to about the standard of all other mediums. What is so bad about it?

Seems to me that if Brits don´t have every advantage in the game any longer, people are getting upset. A 110 fuel unit that easily beat a 125 fuel Panzer IV and could even challenge Panthers due to mobility and rate of fire with vet was beyond stupid. I feel like this is a well deserved nerf.

Or as Katitof would say: Cromwell is AN option and not THE option now.
20 May 2016, 09:11 AM
#11
avatar of Myself

Posts: 677

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 06:57 AMKatitof

And P4 gets insane armor with vet and ability that allows it to warp away while shrinking its size at the same time(yes, blitz makes you harder to hit as well).

You can't actually use "Blitz" as an argument "war speed" is better than "Blitz".

I also reduced target size in a target that is small to begin with (prepatch)...

21-22 is probably a better size for Cromwell...

PZIV are probably some of the least cost efficient medium tanks currently...Cromwells are more cost efficient...

20 May 2016, 09:43 AM
#12
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 09:11 AMButcher
The size just got increased to about the standard of all other mediums. What is so bad about it?

Seems to me that if Brits don´t have every advantage in the game any longer, people are getting upset. A 110 fuel unit that easily beat a 125 fuel Panzer IV and could even challenge Panthers due to mobility and rate of fire with vet was beyond stupid. I feel like this is a well deserved nerf.

Or as Katitof would say: Cromwell is AN option and not THE option now.


and the panzer 4 have better armor than all the regular medium. Uniquess are there to keep the faction samey. The cromwell's smaller target size is there for a similar purpose.

the panzer 4 also have better coaxial and hull mg than either the sherman or cromwell as well.

stop trying to squish every advantages possess by the the allied medium.

and if the emplacement is really going to take a nerf, then the brits better have decent medium armor. The churchill and comet were already the best armor fielded by the brits during the war, unless relic start digging into experimental tanks.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 09:11 AMMyself

You can't actually use "Blitz" as an argument "war speed" is better than "Blitz".

I also reduced target size in a target that is small to begin with (prepatch)...

21-22 is probably a better size for Cromwell...

PZIV are probably some of the least cost efficient medium tanks currently...Cromwells are more cost efficient...



if cost effectiveness is that much of an issue, just raise the cost on the cromwell. axis shouldn't be the only one with decent tank.
20 May 2016, 09:50 AM
#13
avatar of Myself

Posts: 677


The churchill and comet were already the best armor fielded by the brits during the war, unless relic start digging into experimental tanks.


Churchill was actually a very good tank if it was designed for WWI but pretty lousy for WWII. But that has little impact in the game. I agree with most of the the other points. I simply don't see how people can complain about the PZIV when Crom is actually more cost efficient...
20 May 2016, 10:42 AM
#14
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2016, 06:57 AMKatitof

Or leave it as it is, because while the tank is great in comparison to others, it needs to be in the context of the army its in.
Main and only problem with it was crush and it was addressed.


Make it more expensive then and leave it as it is, fine. There are not a single reson why cromwell should be better then PIV and cost less.

Right now, PIV is rely on vet and armor, Cromwell rely on speed and hit-and-run tactic. Its still good tank and it still would be powerfull. All it would need - support, it wont be able to dodge half of the hits, thats it.
20 May 2016, 11:37 AM
#15
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17



Make it more expensive then and leave it as it is, fine. There are not a single reson why cromwell should be better then PIV and cost less.

Right now, PIV is rely on vet and armor, Cromwell rely on speed and hit-and-run tactic. Its still good tank and it still would be powerfull. All it would need - support, it wont be able to dodge half of the hits, thats it.


I completely agree with you that incentivising people to use supporting units (rather than X unit Y times) is going to help improve the game.

However, considering it's the Brits, which non-doctrinal units do you have in mind that can support the Cromwell? (I can think of the sniper, but OST also has a sniper that is about equal).

If there is no answer to that, which doctrinal units would you propose to make non-doctrinal?
20 May 2016, 11:46 AM
#16
avatar of SturmTigerTrafalgar

Posts: 160


My suggestion: give him crush ability back and decrease size. Just reduce the damn movement speed. Fucking Cromwell has the same speed as the t70 >.<
20 May 2016, 11:57 AM
#17
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885


My suggestion: give him crush ability back and decrease size. Just reduce the damn movement speed. Fucking Cromwell has the same speed as the t70 >.<


Cromwell was a lot faster than t-70 irl :D
20 May 2016, 12:09 PM
#18
avatar of Cultist_kun

Posts: 295 | Subs: 1



I completely agree with you that incentivising people to use supporting units (rather than X unit Y times) is going to help improve the game.

However, considering it's the Brits, which non-doctrinal units do you have in mind that can support the Cromwell? (I can think of the sniper, but OST also has a sniper that is about equal).

If there is no answer to that, which doctrinal units would you propose to make non-doctrinal?


AEC, LMG tommies, AT guns, insane damaging and long range vet 1 vekers. I dont quite understand how you understood the meaning of "support" in my post.

By support I meant combined arms. Right now cromwell's taget size makes it really forging early on, in this case you can pretty much YOLO early enemy tanks even if there are AT gun (with flanking ofcouse), and usually enemy tanks and AT would miss 1-2 shots which is critical considering cromwell's speed. Same with inf AT weaponary.

With new target size you wont be able to just YOLO enemy kill-and-run it, drive over AT inf and go away with it.

You need combined arms to support cromwells push. Thats the case. Main problem with correct cromwell is that it one-tank-army when it hits the field for the firts time.
20 May 2016, 12:45 PM
#19
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17



AEC, LMG tommies, AT guns, insane damaging and long range vet 1 vekers. I dont quite understand how you understood the meaning of "support" in my post.


What I meant with my response is "Teach me how to do combined arms with non-doc Brits".

I would bundle the AEC in the same category as the Cromwell (both cost a similar portion of resources).
- If AEC + Cromwell is supposed to be an answer, then waiting a bit more and getting Cromwell x2 might be a better answer. Now recall that we are trying to argue that Cromwell Spam should not be THE option.
- Now, if you are (legitimately) concerned that Cromwell comes too early, why not propose increasing the Teching costs a bit? (e.g., offset some of the cost to tech grenades -- that few even bother with -- to T3 costs).

Just to make sure we are on the same page. Can you enumerate the support options that OST has available to them:
- By the time the first Cromwell/P4 hits the field.
- By the end of the game, when everything has been researched.

If you are honest with yourself, you will see that nothing can outdo the cost-efficiency (and the options gamut) of OST support. This is the reason why the Cromwell needs to be more cost-efficient than the P4 (it could be nerfed, but the cost-efficiency gap should remain).

The reason I asked about the support options is to point out the gaping hole that the Brits have with respect to indirect fire.
- If your response is "Mortar Pits", are you actually recommending we keep emplacement spam as it is, so that we can hit the Cromwell?

Yes, it's stupid that Cromwell is an one-man army because of this. This is why I am asking you: which doctrinal UKF option would you turn into non-doctrinal to cover the holes?
20 May 2016, 13:00 PM
#20
avatar of Myself

Posts: 677

IMO since in this patch Axis heavy play has become less powerful one should also rebalance medium Tank balance.

That has not only to do with Cromwell but with most allied medium tanks. PZIV imo are the least cost efficient tanks...
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 34
Russian Federation 158
unknown 21
unknown 11
United States 4
Germany 1

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

541 users are online: 541 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49061
Welcome our newest member, Rihedcfrd
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM