Login

russian armor

SU-85; The Thread

PAGES (24)down
22 Jul 2013, 22:19 PM
#101
avatar of Funkeh

Posts: 77

The first instance was incredibly, incredibly lucky and gimmicky (I play 4/5 games as Soviets, and my SU-85s never snipe so consistently), the second was questionable (maybe it killed it too quickly, but maybe it is the pak's flaw rather than the su-85), but the last is silly, of course there was a possibility that it could have died, being focused by 2 tanks like that.
22 Jul 2013, 22:54 PM
#102
avatar of ace4sure

Posts: 102

ok, let me get your argument: That the PAK constantly gets hit by a SU85 is the flaw of the PAk itself, not the SU85s? Seriously?!?

Didn't I write something about reasoning?

Butmaybe you don't understand what the numbers I wrote down actually mean.

The SU85, like all tanks, shoots at the crew of team weapons. Therefore it has a very very low accuracy (2,5%) at max range not even counting in cover. This ends up that almost all shoots fired are calculated misses which are fired within the scatter values towards the target. Because of the very narrow scatter angle and the low max scatter of the SU85s gun it hits constantly nevertheless.

Regards
ace
22 Jul 2013, 23:10 PM
#103
avatar of Golradaer

Posts: 114

Normally i don't quote myself, cause I think that's simply stupid.
I just want to remind you what I was talking about specificly, underlined with facts right from the game data, and what I am refering to.

So here we go:
http://www.twitch.tv/ace4sure/c/2617304
http://www.twitch.tv/ace4sure/c/2617313
http://www.twitch.tv/ace4sure/c/2617331

First video: Both Pak crews were at 50% HP and only two men left when they engage the SU-85. How is that a good example? If you had used a full HP and full crew Pak, the SU-85 would have died.

Second video: If you hadn't been moving the Pak constantly, it would have destroyed the SU-85.

Third video: It took 5 direct hits before being destroyed, and it took out one of the SU-85s. I don't see the problem here, one AT gun for one SU-85 is a fair trade. Because he prioritized killing your Pak instead of retreating, the other one got a damaged engine and could easily be destroyed by anything -- one Scout Car with the autocannon upgrade would do it, or the Ostwind that you were building right at that moment. One dead Pak 40 gets you two SU-85 kills. Imagine if that situation had been two Panzer IVs against one ZiS -- what do you think would happen? No, the gun itself wouldn't be destroyed, but the crew would die with the same effect and they can use Attack-Ground to finish off the gun. And both Panzer IVs would still be alive when the ZiS is destroyed. Why should a single Pak 40 be able to engage two Soviet tanks by itself? Now, unlike with the Panzer IVs, in that situation your infantry are going to be safe and able to capture sectors, while the Soviets would be forced from the field until they can build more AT weapons.

It might seem odd for so many direct hits to occur, but I didn't see anything wrong with any of those situations from an actual balance perspective. And it's easy to pick out a few examples of crazy shit happening; far more often I see Pak 40s successfully destroying SU-85s if the Soviet player(s) don't react quickly enough in withdrawing them.

I agree that the StuG should have equivalent range to the SU-85. The Panther definitely should not.

I'm not sure what skill level of games you guys are playing, but I see Panzergrenadiers with Panzerschrecks all of the time among good teams. What you do is move two or three squads of mixed Grenadiers/PGrens forward and force the SU-85s away. If there are Maxims/Snipers, use Mortars/Panzerwerfers/flank (with infantry) to counter.

I play almost entirely Soviets right now because it's way too easy to win with Germans. And I can tell you, I don't want to be forced to build several SU-85s every game, but until other options for Soviets open up, I will have to. I don't build them because they're a fantastic unit, I do it because they're the ONLY counter to German tanks that actually works.

Now, the scatter is lower, yes, and I assume that was done to allow it to kill infantry occasionally. If the scatter is increased from 5 to 7.5, like the AT guns, its AoE should be increased to compensate.

Again, the SU-85 is a tank destroyer, meaning it's basically an AT gun in vehicle form. It's horrid against infantry and cost-effective against tanks if controlled properly. If you want to flank it, damage its engine with a Panzerfaust before you rush in your tanks.
23 Jul 2013, 03:22 AM
#104
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

PZIV damage reduce from 160(identical to tiger/panther/IS-2) to 120.

SU-85 reload increase from 4sec to 5.5 sec

Panther fuel reduce from 165 to 155, frontal armor increase from 275 to 300.

Panther main gun slightly buff AI ability (panther now is obsolete)


but where's the buff to IS-2 and T-34 seires?
23 Jul 2013, 06:23 AM
#105
avatar of Maydream

Posts: 37

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jul 2013, 13:45 PMNullist
Its an artificial environment governed by mathematical values.

Yes, games theory and balance IS a scientific process, in terms of compiling data, processing it, analysing it and applying the results to a hypothesis.

Go away. 2 posts, and both of them shit.


oh, mkay, mr smarty pants. Then this is indeed out of my league. Keep ur outstanding intellegence solving the utterly important issues of SU's rotation speed. I cant point out how significant this is to the scientific progress and humanity in general.
23 Jul 2013, 07:21 AM
#106
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
@Ace: Thanks for all your effort and work. You are a real credit and boon to the community.

I nominate Ace for a staff position on the CoH2.org team for his continuing extremely high grade, objective and factual work. He's like having a community inhouse Dev doing this for free!
23 Jul 2013, 07:55 AM
#107
avatar of ak™

Posts: 10

I will come out and post a few of my thoughts regarding the SU-85.

As stated before, without the SU-85 the Allies do not have reliable anti tank weapons. You can only use a ZiS for so long until Axis armor rolls you. The same is true with PaK. One does not simply rely on ATGs for their main anti armor purposes.

With that said, there are ways to HARD counter SU-85s. I personally rely on two PGren squads with shreks as my primary ground anti SU-85 force - and given my play style involving the jaeger infantry doctrine with an infantry heavy force I usually can use the charge ability to chase down / and shrek SU-85s by baiting them into engaging my main armored force.

What occasionally stresses me out are the lucky half squad wipes a pair of SU-85s might score on occasion. The situation then turns into a casualty heavy bloodbath (because I press with my armor) in which the outcome determines the winner of the game, and very frequently it will be in the SU-85s favor - unfortunately (unless I am the one commanding the SU-85s of course).

Sometimes I really do feel when playing against the SU-85 that they're overpowered. But I don't think it's because of their damage or armor. It's because of (guess who said it) how fast they turn while being flanked, even when they are engine damaged via fast or other methods.

So assuming close ranged combat, a fausted SU-85 will turn fast enough to defeat an AT naded PzIV / Panther - and I don't think this should entirely be the case if your tank that's engaging the SU was fresh when it moved in for the flank. (this is also assuming you don't have vet I on your panzers yet... in which case you have no excuse for not being able to flank and finish a SU-85, even if you're AT naded).

Again, if you use strafe to render enemy conscripts / guards useless this issue doesn't exist because no one is there to AT nade you or button you - but I'm making these conclusions excluding broken mechanics of the game.
23 Jul 2013, 08:05 AM
#108
avatar of Nullist

Posts: 2425

Permanently Banned
Engine Damage negates the speed boost of Blitzkrieg.
23 Jul 2013, 10:21 AM
#109
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

What also matters is the lack of identity for StuG and to some extent the Panther. Germans simply cant fire back with non doctrinal units. I think the StuG could mostly stay as it is, but with slightly more splash and range increase to the SU-85s range. Thus it will still lose to the dedicated tank destroyer in a 1vs1. But StuGs could fire back at it when it is shooting and popping out in the Fog of war. Thus you can´t totally avoid being shot at with your SU-85s. Two StuGs might even take it out.

The Panther is only good because it is fast and can take more beating than a Panzer IV. Yet I fail to see its role. Shouldn´t the Panther be dedicated anti tank also? It is meh at best versus infantry and comes at a high cost. Yet it sucks versus Su-85s.

AK^tm is right, your best bet beating SUs is to totally avoid tanks. I usually avoid T-3 and T-4 as soon as I see Su-85s on the field and/or see the bulletins pushing Su-85s on the loading screen. This way I can spend more on infantry and gain the map control. But having to avoid all tanks as Germans is surely not how this game is meant to be played, is it?
23 Jul 2013, 13:03 PM
#110
avatar of Mauser

Posts: 255

The sniper on hold fire could work, but the su85 still outranges everything you have short of an elefant.

Stats page is down so I am not sure if the pak has the same range as su-85? Regardless, paks miss a lot and su will beat paks 1 on 1 as seen previously.

I agree the core problem here is that russians need other alternatives to german armour. Thing is it is boring to always play in slug fests with su's. People want to win games. And the obvious most effective style of play as russians is to get su85's. I take my hat off to russians who actually use t34's. But lets face it if you have an obvious superior and affordable unit most people will buy it.

The Su-85 gives the russians the option of camping and locking down an area which the germans simply can't do in the same way. I mean lets say i want to "lock down" kolodny centre as germans. I get stugs/p4s and hull them down or just let them overlook the centre. Su-85 can just roll up and attack from max range all day. It will shoot at my stugs without me even seeing them or being able to fire back. I might consider getting a pak43, but it is doctrinal, stationary(vulnerable) and comes late. same goes for elefant and it comes even later anyways. Most games are decided long before any of these counters come out.

Now i'm not saying I dont use flanking/combined arms/smoke cover tactics. Its actually my only option against su-85's. It's just that If i want to follow the defensive, locking down strat i simply cant do it cos it just wont work. Forcing one faction to be more creative with flanks etc is not quite cricket imho. And don't say: use mass infantry or some bullshit like that, cos the russians can easily counter gren/pgren spam AND get su85's.

Relic themselves said the game is "rock paper scissors". If SU-85 is russian's scissors, then what is the german rock? The Elefant isn't really a rock cos it comes at a totally different stage of the game thus being irrelevant to the discussion. Germans have to use alot of small rocks to try and smash the giant scissor.

If the russian just keeps his su-85 supported like i keep my tanks supported I can't advance against him. They just get a maxim/snipers or use incindiary and there goes my infantry.(Not to mention SU-85 snipes infantry and MORE importantly they make infantry lie down when hit so they can't get closer. And i'm not even going to elaborate on reverse speeds and scatter ratios which obviously needs to be adressed.

Company of heroes is and always has been focused somewhat about getting tanks. Sure you had ranger strats, but this was the exeption, not the rule. You always had another choice and was never "forced" to get rangers.

Now the other counters - schreks and fausts. Fine, this can work if well executed, but the problem is you have to advance with infantry first before the su's wreck your tanks. Sure you can try flank but it is very hard on most maps. The su85 just gives the russians a way to just sit and camp and it does not encourage fun, combined arms play.

I saw Stephen countering an SU-85 with riegel mines and mortars, which works wonders, but you still need a doctrine for it and you have to be lucky that he drives over it. I honestly think this is the best counter currently, but a russian player with su-85 solved all his armor problems and doesn't need to worry about fancy mine tactics cos of his range/LOS. This ties into what I said about german players being forced to be extra creative versus a normal non-doctrinal easy-to-use su-85.

Neither faction should be forced to revert to any one specific unit in all games. You cant force germans to always get pgrens, and you cant force russians to always get su85. (When I say "force" i mean you give them an obvious best unit choice in 95% of games). And what german strat forces russians to use smoke (ever)?

(And SU85 outranging everything short of elefant is laughable historically as pointed out earlier.)

TL;DR Obvious "best unit in 95% of games" shouldn't exist.
raw
23 Jul 2013, 13:44 PM
#111
avatar of raw

Posts: 644

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jul 2013, 13:03 PMMauser

The Su-85 gives the russians the option of camping and locking down an area which the germans simply can't do in the same way.


Huh? Of course they can. It's just german armor is ment to be a spearhead, whereas the SU-85 is a defensive unit. Saying that germans can't lock down areas is complete nonsense. They're much better at it.
The problem of the SU-85 is that it is too good and has to be, or soviets couldn't effectively deal with armor at all.

Maybe it was a bad idea to put a tank destroyer as a non-doctrinal standard unit...

The Panther is only good because it is fast and can take more beating than a Panzer IV. Yet I fail to see its role. Shouldn´t the Panther be dedicated anti tank also? It is meh at best versus infantry and comes at a high cost. Yet it sucks versus Su-85s.


The panther is pretty redundant with the PzIV at the moment, I don't get it either. Should be able to crack SU-85 defenses IMO but for that it's just too slow and expensive.
23 Jul 2013, 14:35 PM
#112
avatar of Mauser

Posts: 255

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jul 2013, 13:44 PMraw


Huh? Of course they can. It's just german armor is ment to be a spearhead, whereas the SU-85 is a defensive unit. Saying that germans can't lock down areas is complete nonsense. They're much better at it.
The problem of the SU-85 is that it is too good and has to be, or soviets couldn't effectively deal with armor at all.



Stug is also meant to be a defensive unit, but you can't use it the same way as an su-85 unless you have a spotter for it. I would much rather pay more fuel/munitions for a stug that has more range/LOS. They can increase the stug's cost and leave its dmg/armor.

Alternatively they can give it a cone visibility unlock at vet1 and make its range equal the su85(if its cost remains the same). Making the LOS ability only come at vet 1 will mean the stug will have to work towards vet 1 and should have it by the time the su-85 comes out.

This would fix the balance wrt su-85 cos germans would also have that strategy choice(and stugs might actually get built for a change).
23 Jul 2013, 15:59 PM
#113
avatar of Z3r07
Donator 11

Posts: 1006


First video: Both Pak crews were at 50% HP and only two men left when they engage the SU-85. How is that a good example? If you had used a full HP and full crew Pak, the SU-85 would have died.


One of his pak crews was at 100% 4 men until the su-85 took half of them out.

The other at 2 man 50% health is a 2 star vet, should expect better performance.


That being said, I've had not experience this before to that degree.


23 Jul 2013, 16:06 PM
#114
avatar of Golradaer

Posts: 114

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jul 2013, 15:59 PMZ3r07

One of his pak crews was at 100% 4 men until the su-85 took half of them out.


No, a Soviet Howitzer was firing at the road while the Paks moved up and took out two crewmen.
24 Jul 2013, 00:25 AM
#115
avatar of akula

Posts: 589

-both the PAK and Zis need a buff
-t34 needs a buff
-su85 needs a nerf
-stug and panther need a buff
24 Jul 2013, 00:33 AM
#116
avatar of UGBEAR

Posts: 954

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jul 2013, 00:25 AMakula
-both the PAK and Zis need a buff
-t34 needs a buff
-su85 needs a nerf
-stug and panther need a buff



Brown Bear & IS-2 both need to be looked at, so far, PZIV just too good compare to Panther & BrownBear.
24 Jul 2013, 00:40 AM
#117
avatar of akula

Posts: 589

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jul 2013, 00:33 AMUGBEAR



Brown Bear & IS-2 both need to be looked at, so far, PZIV just too good compare to Panther & BrownBear.


Agree on the IS-2, and the Tiger could use a look too.
whats the Brown Bear?
24 Jul 2013, 00:45 AM
#118
avatar of Orkfaeller

Posts: 99

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jul 2013, 00:33 AMUGBEAR



Brown Bear & IS-2 both need to be looked at, so far, PZIV just too good compare to Panther & BrownBear.


A... Brown Bear ... ?
24 Jul 2013, 00:47 AM
#119
avatar of akula

Posts: 589

Brummbar I assume
24 Jul 2013, 00:50 AM
#120
avatar of Orkfaeller

Posts: 99

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jul 2013, 00:47 AMakula
Brummbar I assume


Aaaahh... yeah, that doesnt translate to Brown Bear, more to something like

Grumpy Bear or Growling Bear^^
PAGES (24)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

962 users are online: 962 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM